2010 Mazda 3 Exhaust and Intake
- Thread starter CorkSport
- Start date
Little Beavis
Member
- :
- 2001 MP3-T (#911)
You didn't see any torque management issues? When I dyno'd my new daily driver (3 GT, 6sp) we found great results on the first dyno and then after that, the ecu stepped in, closed the throttle down and restricted output.
I agree 100% that the engine is underrated. I dyno'd on a Mustang and got 151 whp in 4th gear. A SRI netted 15 whp before the ecu stepped in and cut it down to near stock levels on all subsequent dynos. No CEL, just robbed of power. It really took the wind out of my sails at that point. Though I will say the first dyno sounded and felt awesome.
Was your test on a manual or automatic? Did you notice anything like this?
I agree 100% that the engine is underrated. I dyno'd on a Mustang and got 151 whp in 4th gear. A SRI netted 15 whp before the ecu stepped in and cut it down to near stock levels on all subsequent dynos. No CEL, just robbed of power. It really took the wind out of my sails at that point. Though I will say the first dyno sounded and felt awesome.
Was your test on a manual or automatic? Did you notice anything like this?
Last edited:
If that's the case, then an ECU flash would take care of it. The ECU would still learn, but it would expect different input values than stock, so the learning would be minor by comparison. Correct?
Little Beavis
Member
- :
- 2001 MP3-T (#911)
You could flash if someone has the capability to flash it. COBB is supposed to be working on it, but they might just stop after the Mazdaspeed 3 again. I know of another company trying to work through it, but torque management can be a nasty thing to work around.
As for bolt on mods, the engine responded BEAUTIFULLY to them at first, big gains on an engine that is already under-rated. I had a s*** grin on my face after the first post mod dyno pull. . .and then it all went down hill. As I stated, mine was on a fully loaded (not that it should matter) GT, 6sp. I'm curious what they tested (looks like a GT). Also how many pulls they did after the mods.
I'm tempted to dyno again to log as much as I can via my AutoTap, but the results won't be any different, I can hear the difference between what it does now and what it did before the computer stepped in and ruined my day.
- :
- All Mazdas!
Actually we did see the ECU being very active in all of our Dyno pulls. We did a minimum of three pulls per baseline and/or modification and the main thing I saw that was radically different between some of the pulls was the air fuel ratio. While we did not monitor actual throttle angle on all of the pulls, I doubt that the drop in power that you may have seen was due to the throttle shutting as much as it was due to the ECU editing fuel and/or timing.
What we specifically saw on stock was the first pull was really jagged (smoothing shut off in all reviews of the files), stock ECU runs really lean (~14:1) until about 4500RPM and then drops markedly to ~10:1. Subsequent runs go rich sooner, dropping into the high 11's in the ~2500RPM range. This smooths the midrange power numbers and they go up and are less choppy. The numbers on the three stock baseline pulls (2.5L, 6speed) are 161.46, 163.90, 164.23. That is the peak power.
Comparing this behavior directly to the same car with Short Ram Intake and Dual 60mm exhaust system, the three pulls do indeed go down in power from the first to last - but the overall amount of decrease is less than 1hp. In addition to this, the radical fluctuation of the air fuel ratio during wide open throttle (WOT) runs is not remotely as reactionary as it was during the first three baseline pulls. The best of these pulls (second when looking at torque and hp) is 171/171.
I think what we may be seeing while dyno testing these cars is that the ECU is having to adapt to a WOT at load condition that it has not experienced in the past and we're just seeing the learning - sometimes it shoots one direction (rich vs. lean) and has to lean out to hit its assumed target, other times it shoots the other direction (lean instead of rich) and has to richen the mixture to hit the target. The results are not always negative relative to power building. Best to Worst, Worst to Best and Best to Best, the modified cars built more power. Days later on the butt dyno, the car was just as good if not better than it was when we had rolled it off the dyno after we did the pulls testing the intake and exhaust in tandem.
That being said, I do not have any doubt that having some access to tune the parameters set in the ECU would improve greatly the potential to build power in these cars with the aforementioned modifications. I know that with the MS3's, they need to be run for an extended period of time after a new induction system has been added prior to tuning the ECU so they may calibrate the MAF, then tuning can be done. I think we may very well be seeing similar behavior in our test results (and yours).
Jason Griffith
Product Development Engineer
Corksport Mazda Performance
What we specifically saw on stock was the first pull was really jagged (smoothing shut off in all reviews of the files), stock ECU runs really lean (~14:1) until about 4500RPM and then drops markedly to ~10:1. Subsequent runs go rich sooner, dropping into the high 11's in the ~2500RPM range. This smooths the midrange power numbers and they go up and are less choppy. The numbers on the three stock baseline pulls (2.5L, 6speed) are 161.46, 163.90, 164.23. That is the peak power.
Comparing this behavior directly to the same car with Short Ram Intake and Dual 60mm exhaust system, the three pulls do indeed go down in power from the first to last - but the overall amount of decrease is less than 1hp. In addition to this, the radical fluctuation of the air fuel ratio during wide open throttle (WOT) runs is not remotely as reactionary as it was during the first three baseline pulls. The best of these pulls (second when looking at torque and hp) is 171/171.
I think what we may be seeing while dyno testing these cars is that the ECU is having to adapt to a WOT at load condition that it has not experienced in the past and we're just seeing the learning - sometimes it shoots one direction (rich vs. lean) and has to lean out to hit its assumed target, other times it shoots the other direction (lean instead of rich) and has to richen the mixture to hit the target. The results are not always negative relative to power building. Best to Worst, Worst to Best and Best to Best, the modified cars built more power. Days later on the butt dyno, the car was just as good if not better than it was when we had rolled it off the dyno after we did the pulls testing the intake and exhaust in tandem.
That being said, I do not have any doubt that having some access to tune the parameters set in the ECU would improve greatly the potential to build power in these cars with the aforementioned modifications. I know that with the MS3's, they need to be run for an extended period of time after a new induction system has been added prior to tuning the ECU so they may calibrate the MAF, then tuning can be done. I think we may very well be seeing similar behavior in our test results (and yours).
Jason Griffith
Product Development Engineer
Corksport Mazda Performance
speedster00
Member
- :
- 2010 Mazda 3 S
Thanks Jason.....Good info. When do you think the intake will be ready to ship? I can beta test if you like 
Awesome. It's definately on my list. Any suspension parts in the works? I'm 90% sure the 04-09 RSB fits, but what about the FSB? Springs?
Last edited:
binaryeyes
Member
If that's accurate, the price is definately right.
