Keith Tanner wrote: Yup, I've spoken to a number of folks who have MZR-powered RX8s.
Oh great, does that mean I now have to take the sellers who advertise "4 cylinder" RX8s as genuine?
Keith Tanner wrote: Yup, I've spoken to a number of folks who have MZR-powered RX8s.
Oh great, does that mean I now have to take the sellers who advertise "4 cylinder" RX8s as genuine?
something something rotary suck comment something something no they don't thread.
pres589 wrote:alfadriver wrote: ... And this pre-dated the Lincoln Miata by about 5 years.The what??
This swap.
Written up by someone in Miata.net- http://www.miata.net/news/v6.html
My department built this car back in 2001- thinking if it could convince someone to build a Lincoln off of the Miata chassis.
Before that was an idea to put a 3.0l Duratec V6 into the last RX7- but I don't think that car was ever finished. That was 1995 or so, as we started working on the Aston Martin V12.
Brett_Murphy wrote: To me, an MZR powered RX-8 would be fun only if you added boost.
Doesn't the 2.5L block just swap right under the 2.0L head? that combo makes pretty decent power too...
Brett_Murphy wrote: To me, an MZR powered RX-8 would be fun only if you added boost.
The same is true for an MZR-powered Miata... :)
What I heard about the MZR was that the version found in the Ranger, with nothing more than a good header, ITBs, methanol, 12:1 compression, and good rods that aren't made of compressed cheese, you wind up with 250hp from 5500 to 8000rpm, airflow limited by the wimpy stock cams. Change the cams for ones with mountains instead of molehills and you get over 300hp and the head is still untouched and you're only running 12:1.
Boost is the easy button. It's crude. Power through natural aspiration is not as clumsy or random as boost, an elegant power for a civilized engine.
In reply to Knurled:
Not to make anyone too wild about the Ranger's Duratec- but that engine has pretty mild cams in it to start with. I don't see that breathing 250hp even with a turbo.
Add any car's cams is a great start to that engine.
I'm a HUGE fan of the duratec/mzr engine. Much, much better engine than the ztec that it replaced- in many aspects.
I had a turbo Mondeo that was fun to play with, and the Panama prototypes were really entertaining.
While I personally can't see putting one of them into a RX chassis, I think a Ranger starter for a Locost would be perfect.
alfadriver wrote: In reply to Knurled: Not to make anyone too wild about the Ranger's Duratec- but that engine has pretty mild cams in it to start with. I don't see that breathing 250hp even with a turbo. Add any car's cams is a great start to that engine. I'm a HUGE fan of the duratec/mzr engine. Much, much better engine than the ztec that it replaced- in many aspects. I had a turbo Mondeo that was fun to play with, and the Panama prototypes were really entertaining. While I *personally* can't see putting one of them into a RX chassis, I think a Ranger starter for a Locost would be perfect.
The thing is, Knurled is correct. And i don't think i don't think i've ever seen the 2.5 MZR ever make so little as 250hp under forced induction.
In reply to Swank Force One:
Such a simple swap from ANY other engine. Sure that the builders are not getting cam from a Focus or Fusion?
Especially going through ALL of the other mods- like the rods and pistons. The ranger cams have the same ramps, but lower duration and overall lift than the car cams.
If someone is going through the trouble of new rods and pistons, as well as a turbocharger, cams have to be in the mix.
So what I'm gathering from this thread is a turbo MZR would be a great transplant into an RX8 with a blown motor.
alfadriver wrote: In reply to Swank Force One: Such a simple swap from ANY other engine. Sure that the builders are not getting cam from a Focus or Fusion? Especially going through ALL of the other mods- like the rods and pistons. The ranger cams have the same ramps, but lower duration and overall lift than the car cams. If someone is going through the trouble of new rods and pistons, as well as a turbocharger, cams have to be in the mix.
Why do you need rods and pistons to make a measly 250hp? I'm so lost haha.
Knurled wrote: What I heard about the MZR was that the version found in the Ranger, with nothing more than a good header, ITBs, methanol, 12:1 compression, and good rods that aren't made of compressed cheese, you wind up with 250hp from 5500 to 8000rpm, airflow limited by the wimpy stock cams. Change the cams for ones with mountains instead of molehills and you get over 300hp and the head is still untouched and you're only running 12:1. Boost is the easy button. It's crude. Power through natural aspiration is not as clumsy or random as boost, an elegant power for a civilized engine.
That's what I'm talking about.
Why would someone go through the trouble of all of that, and use the original Ranger cams.
alfadriver wrote: In reply to Swank Force One: Such a simple swap from ANY other engine. Sure that the builders are not getting cam from a Focus or Fusion? Especially going through ALL of the other mods- like the rods and pistons. The ranger cams have the same ramps, but lower duration and overall lift than the car cams. If someone is going through the trouble of new rods and pistons, as well as a turbocharger, cams have to be in the mix.
My info was when the engine was new and the Ranger was the easiest/only place to find it. Outfit out of somewhere in the Midwest was developing them for circle track racing. I don't know why they started with stock cams either, but I'd suspect that the GOOD intake manifold and the air-densifying properties of methanol allowed for a hefty power bump compared to what you'd get with an OE manifold and gasoline.
You'll need to log in to post.
