twilightprotege
Member
- :
- 2001 323 Astina SP20 (P5)
i love having OBD-I 
Fs-fe!!??
- Thread starter akhilleus
- Start date
flat_black
Member
The Japanese ECU isn't a plug-and-play ordeal; They both have totally different connectors; The Japanese one has a connector similar to the Miata's ECU, and the American one has an EEC-V Ford style connector, so you can't simply swap them that easily. Also, certain senders are different between the Japanese model and the US model, such as the TPS and the MAF, but they only vary slightly. Just enough to be a pain in the ass, so you can't just splice in the new ECU, either.
The FS-DE DOES put out about 130bhp... At the crank, measured with a water brake, like Jamie said in his post; 130bhp. If you missed the bhp and whp designations, then it would be pretty easy to get confused. =)
The FS-DE DOES put out about 130bhp... At the crank, measured with a water brake, like Jamie said in his post; 130bhp. If you missed the bhp and whp designations, then it would be pretty easy to get confused. =)
There was only one Probe guy that was verified that he had the swap. He never dynoed the car and had the engine taken out because he could never get it tuned right. Others on Probetalk have said or thought they had an fsze installed only to be proven that they had just a fsde installed. There is one guy on Probetalk right now that has the vics intake manifold from a protege on his probe. The biggest problems with this swap into a probe/mx6 is that the fsze uses coil-pack ingition, different intake manifold, and higher comp psitons throws the ecu off a bit. Not a big deal to get around the coil packs. Just a matter of installing the exh cam from the 93-97 fs engine to get the drive gear for the disy. In order to get the manifold to work you would have to get msd rpm triggers to open the butterflies. The only way to truely now when in the rpm to open up the butterflies would be to dyno tune the car. Otherwise it would be just a guess. Since I have owned an fs powered car since 97, I have done alot of reading. The differences in the de and the ze is the piston's, intake cam, intake manifold(for the probe/mx6), and the ingition system(again for the probe/mx6). I have never seen how the little increased compression, the more aggressive intake cam, intake mani, and the coil-packs net a 40 hp difference. It has never added up to me. Now I will always think the cam is a good investment. The stock de cams were designed for low end torque and good gas milage because thats what American's love or so they say. The jspec intake cam is mild upgrade but it will give good numbers and driving will be very different as power delivery will be later in the rpm but it will maintain the power for longer in the rpm. Cams can make or brake you. Take a look at how many vehicles are out there that share the same power plants with small changes and one of the changes being the cams. If were serious about making power out of the any fs engine I would look into getting a set of custom re-grind cams and a set of cam gears. Then I would take it to the dyno and have it dyno tuned. This would be a hell of alot cheap than getting the fsze and would probably net better whp numbers. Just a thought.....Installshield 2 said:
Last edited:
Roywhitep5
Member
- :
- 2007 350z
motor swaps are just not for the protege. we must accept this and move on 
flat_black
Member
Hehee... I know blown means supercharged, but it seemed like that was awfully low-powered of an engine to be F/I. For that matter, I didn't see any superchargers on it, at least not in that picture. I think it's N/A, just an FS-DE, only typoed.
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
first of all...the FS-ZE IS NOT rated at 170bhp...thats a corksport typo...its rated in basically what is known as DIN Bhp or "PS" (fairly similar)...so basically it is about 163 SAE bhp or so...to keep numbers accurate, the stock FS-DE would be rated closer to 140 PS...Titanium said:
all in all the ZE is factory claimed to make about 30 more bhp than the DE...thats all...I don't know anything about the OBD-I engine controllers, especially the J-spec varients...the slight physical mods to the engine will yeild very little on their own...but if the timing and fuel requirements are more aggressive, the ZE could be substantially stronger in stock form the than mild DE..
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
Based on what?...No one has ever gone through and measured exactly how much kinetic engergy leaving the crank is converted into thermal energy...The FS has a large diameter and heavy stock flywheel, a large clutch, close mesh gearing, and heavy axles...all of which point to a larger parisitic loss form the engine to the wheels...making 100whp from 130bhp gives a stock drivetrain loss of about 23%...on the higher end of the average of nearly every FWD car anyway...your right that it may not be quite 130bhp exactly...but I am almost certain the G series boxes have more of a loss on the stock engine than 15%...Gen1GT said:
I hate drivetrain loss percentages though...they are misleading...don't even get me started on that mess...
One thing I am certain about though...is that its meaningless anyway...the numbers do not matter...its just before and after comparisons that count...
Last edited:
Mazda went through a few years of overrating their cars. It's a fact, and the FS-DE was a victim of that. First was the 2001 Miata, which was rated at 155. When magazines and tuners were dynoing at 115-120whp, and the cars weren't as fast as they should be, Mazda took notice and blamed it on emissions regulations. They then down-rated the power to 142hp, and gave people refunds and free maintenance.
Then came the RX8, which was rated at 250hp in pre-production models. They then down-rated it to 247hp in early production models. When people started getting dyno numbers in the 180hp region and started complaining, Mazda again apologized and gave out $500 credits and free maintenance.
The FS-DE powered Proteges drivetrain is not as inefficient to the tune of 23%. No FWD drivetrain is. The 90-94 BP powered Proteges were rated at 125hp and dyno between 107(the lowest I've seen) and 112(what mine baselined at) with the beefier G25M-R tranny. Proof positive is the fact that Mazda got their head on straight and didn't overrate the MSP. It is rated at 170hp and dynos at 150-155whp with the exact same G15M-R tranny that's in the non-turbo cars. Does a turbo automatically make the G15M-R tranny 10% more efficient? Occam's Razor leads me to believe that the FS-DE was a victim of Mazda's Overrated-Horsepower-Gate scandal. Hopefully, it's the last of that trend.....
and Jamie, 130 is 30% more than 100. (uhm) crazy college kids......
Then came the RX8, which was rated at 250hp in pre-production models. They then down-rated it to 247hp in early production models. When people started getting dyno numbers in the 180hp region and started complaining, Mazda again apologized and gave out $500 credits and free maintenance.
The FS-DE powered Proteges drivetrain is not as inefficient to the tune of 23%. No FWD drivetrain is. The 90-94 BP powered Proteges were rated at 125hp and dyno between 107(the lowest I've seen) and 112(what mine baselined at) with the beefier G25M-R tranny. Proof positive is the fact that Mazda got their head on straight and didn't overrate the MSP. It is rated at 170hp and dynos at 150-155whp with the exact same G15M-R tranny that's in the non-turbo cars. Does a turbo automatically make the G15M-R tranny 10% more efficient? Occam's Razor leads me to believe that the FS-DE was a victim of Mazda's Overrated-Horsepower-Gate scandal. Hopefully, it's the last of that trend.....
and Jamie, 130 is 30% more than 100. (uhm) crazy college kids......
People, alot of this power nonsense is just marketing..Its all crank HP..For instance. A PDA dyno measures it. Me and kooldino were fooling around with and back in the day my car did like 155hp @ the crank. People seem to not realize this. As for that motor, thats a 626 motor. I had the same thing in my 93 626..Those specs are basically what my motor has now in the DX. Also, just as a back up contingency in case I'm wrong..F is next to the letter D..could just be a typo.
mp5jeff said:130 - 30%(drivetrain loss) would = around 90 though i believe...
our cars have only about 18% drivetrain loss..it might even be lower than that.
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
Josh...23% of 130 is 30...about...30% of 130 is 39...IF the stock FS-DE bhp rating is accurate (and your points are well noted...it most likely is not)...there is a stock drivetrain loss of about 23% of the bhp rating to the wheels...crazy college kids?...a 30% drivetrain loss would put whp numbers around 90...
But again...I am stressing that its irrelevant...when I first started dyno'ing my MP3 engine, with no internal mods and the stock cams...I was making about 132bhp on a very quick and mild tune...conservative in every aspect and dead rich at WOT...that is why I felt the stock rating was somewhat accurate...that even had the stock exhaust manifold bolted on with the primary cat and secondary cat installed...the before and after numbers were all I cared about though...and in the end it is making about 90 more bhp...
this is kind of good news anyway...I was figuring on losing about 30bhp to the wheels once the new engine went in...giving me about 190whp...it now appears, as long as my bhp numbers are correct, that it could be right on 200whp...nice...
But again...I am stressing that its irrelevant...when I first started dyno'ing my MP3 engine, with no internal mods and the stock cams...I was making about 132bhp on a very quick and mild tune...conservative in every aspect and dead rich at WOT...that is why I felt the stock rating was somewhat accurate...that even had the stock exhaust manifold bolted on with the primary cat and secondary cat installed...the before and after numbers were all I cared about though...and in the end it is making about 90 more bhp...
this is kind of good news anyway...I was figuring on losing about 30bhp to the wheels once the new engine went in...giving me about 190whp...it now appears, as long as my bhp numbers are correct, that it could be right on 200whp...nice...
New Posts and Comments
- Article
