MSPro Article in New Sport Compact Car Mag...

[70]

If the MSP ran 9psi it would be more than 170hp, period.

I'm proud of the MSP...just seems a little slow. What did the mp3 get, a 68 in the slalom?

Do you think the extra 2mph came from the LSD?

Volumetric efficiency has a lot to do with it. It is also putting down more than 150 to the ground in SCC (I thought)...It's rated at 160 SAE net?? Come on, the tranny is the same as the regular Protege. A tranny which has traditionally shown a 20% loss. Mazda isn't telling the truth of the SAE net horsepower.

Believe me or not, I believe Edwin (the guy who told me)...

 

[Dexter]

Volumetric efficiency has a lot to do with it. It is also putting down more than 150 to the ground in SCC (I thought)...It's rated at 160 SAE net?? Come on, the tranny is the same as the regular Protege. A tranny which has traditionally shown a 20% loss. Mazda isn't telling the truth of the SAE net horsepower.

Believe me or not, I believe Edwin (the guy who told me)...

the torque is rated at 160 SAE

 

[djPhobic]

it's not running 9psi....it's running 6.9 or something of that sort between 6 and 7......calloway said that the engine could handle 9 without having to beef up the internals anymore....but anything more than that would kill the engine

 

[PA_MP3_Man]

"By limiting boost to a maximum of 6.9 psi, Callaway and Mazda were able to avoid making changes to the engine's internals, although a new catalytic converter was required."

Got that from car and driver at this link:
[link]site :http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/2002/september/200209_roadtest_protege.xml[/link]

Don't know if that'll work. Still getting used to these vb commands. Still can't get the itallicised "previously posted by" ahead of quotes. Anyone help me out there.

 

[70]

it's not running 9psi....it's running 6.9 or something of that sort between 6 and 7......calloway said that the engine could handle 9 without having to beef up the internals anymore....but anything more than that would kill the engine

Tech manual says otherwise...I'm working on getting clarification of this matter.

 

[Dexter]

please post a scan or pic of the page that says 9 psi

 

[70]

please post a scan or pic of the page that says 9 psi

I will certainly try, but think about this...

It was supposed to be set at 6.9 psi. I thought that until I got the Edwin smack on the other board. He is saying that it is running 9 spi.

It could very well be at 200 hp at the crank. Remember the tranny on the Protege/MP3 loses about 20%. The MSP is running the same tranny plus LSD, so figure maybe a little more loss.

I think Mazda is pulling a VW move here. SCC put down 150 something to the ground, right?? I seriously doubt that Mazda figured out how to get down to ~9% loss in that tranny by adding LSD...

If SCC got 155 whp, that would put the tranny at 23% loss with a 200 SAE net at the crank. That sounds reasonable to me. Volumetric efficiency isn't in this turbo kit. The intercooler isn't that great people. At 6.9 psi, you would not be seeing those kinds of whp numbers.

Look at the FM Protege kit for an idea of what an efficient intercooler should look like. And then look at the numbers that FM protege kit makes on 6 psi. Seriosuly, the MSP isn't the best turbo kit around.

 

[colin949]

7 psi at the most, 9 never stock. theres no way its 9

 

[djPhobic]

yeah...but the LSD isn't the only upgrade.....remember they upgraded the driveshafts too....and maybe more....who knows....so it could be that they did get it down to 9%loss.........remember.....callaway designed the turbo.....they've been around the block and i'm sure they did their research......remember the whole 1000 other mods in the ads you see.........all those are besides the stereo/bodykit etc.....who knows what else they could've done.....right now it's speculative....until we get our cars....we won't know.....even the ones that SCC got weren't a finished product

 

[70]

yeah...but the LSD isn't the only upgrade.....remember they upgraded the driveshafts too....and maybe more....who knows....so it could be that they did get it down to 9%loss.........remember.....callaway designed the turbo.....they've been around the block and i'm sure they did their research......remember the whole 1000 other mods in the ads you see.........all those are besides the stereo/bodykit etc.....who knows what else they could've done.....right now it's speculative....until we get our cars....we won't know.....even the ones that SCC got weren't a finished product

Look at what you just typed...20% loss in the stock Protege and MP3 from the tranny. Adding things will not improve the transmission's efficiency. And it certainly won't go from 20% to 9%.

And I do know what they did with the transmission. It is the stock Protege tranny with an LSD. The larger driveshafts don't change much, but if it did, it wouldn't improve the efficiency in the tranny. That would mean more weight for the tranny to spin to make the wheels go round. More weight to spin, less power to the ground.

If it is at 6.9 psi you would not even get the numbers that SCC got.

I know Calloway has been around for awhile. However, the intercooler isn't efficient in the slightest. Look at the FM Protege kit to get an idea of what efficient intercooler design is. VOLUMECTRIC EFFICIENCY is why they have to run it at 9 psi...

 

[djPhobic]

you don't happen to know what makes this particular transmission so inefficient do you?....just wondering if it's in the design or parts used....if there's a way to improve upon it ourselves or if it would be easier/cheaper to get a new transmission....(i'm guessing the latter)...just curious though b/c i'm not too familiar with this particular tranny....any info would be appreciated

 

[colin949]

its not 9 psi get over it, its not, every thing we have read up tell now says 6.9 psi, if they had it at 9 psi it would be too much of a liablity issue, and it would be much faster, look at spoolins mp3 or stous they keep theres around 8 and they have the fastest mp3s on this board. If the mazdaspeed was at 9psi it would have at least 180 to 200 crank hp.

 

[Neuticle]

As for a boost controller, why? The MSP is running 9 psi stock. You turn that up, your going burn up that little turbo.

the red and blacktop s13 SR20DET's both ran Garrett T25's. neither of which used ball bearings... belive me, there are nissan guys squeezing anywhere from 10-20 PSI out of them all day. most guys with FMIC/Injectors/tuning/fuelpump run about 250 crank HP on the T25's. they have good low end balls, then fall on their face after ~5.5k when the turbo is pushed quite a bit out of it's efficiency range. granted the calloway sourced Garrett turbo probably has a different A/R then the stock nissan T25... but dont think just because it's a small turbo that you cant run big PSI, it's the internals your going to have to worry about in my opinion.

If SCC got 155 whp, that would put the tranny at 23% loss with a 200 SAE net at the crank. That sounds reasonable to me. Volumetric efficiency isn't in this turbo kit. The intercooler isn't that great people. At 6.9 psi, you would not be seeing those kinds of whp numbers.

using another sr20det example. and yes the AR is going to be different on the MSP T25... but the SR20det was rated at 205hp crank @ stock boost. which is 7.5psi. food for thought.

Look at the FM Protege kit for an idea of what an efficient intercooler should look like. And then look at the numbers that FM protege kit makes on 6 psi

dont blame that entirely on IC efficiency, blame that on the use of a typical, small OEM turbo.

look at spoolins mp3 or stous they keep theres around 8 and they have the fastest mp3s on this board.

All 8 PSI's are not created equal. different turbo's will flow different volumes of air at equal PSI depending on the specifics of the turbo. ie - a t25 is going to flow alot less at 8 psi then a T66 will. you cant compare HP numbers at a specific PSI unless both cars are running the same turbo.

 

[slug420]

calloway engineered the turbo.....meaning to me they made it work efficiently on the stock protege engine.....they didnt design the intercooler, they were probably told they had to use that one by mazda, since mazda already has em in the warehouses.....that or they were the only realchioce due to mazdausa budget restrcitions for the new turbo system. furthermore, if you have been to calloway in CT, you will agree with me that they dont make the turbos or valves, or tubes, or pipings or anything there. the place is tiny, mostly cubicles.....im guessing they did the engineering, and then mazda found some low bidders for the manufacturing

 

[70]

its not 9 psi get over it, its not, every thing we have read up tell now says 6.9 psi, if they had it at 9 psi it would be too much of a liablity issue, and it would be much faster, look at spoolins mp3 or stous they keep theres around 8 and they have the fastest mp3s on this board. If the mazdaspeed was at 9psi it would have at least 180 to 200 crank hp.

Yep, you know everything...You get over it that the car is running something more than you think.

And my math showed that it could be running at 200! For crying out loud read what I typed. Do you honeslty think that Mazda can a 9% loss out the tranny? Are you that naive?

 

[70]

you don't happen to know what makes this particular transmission so inefficient do you?....just wondering if it's in the design or parts used....if there's a way to improve upon it ourselves or if it would be easier/cheaper to get a new transmission....(i'm guessing the latter)...just curious though b/c i'm not too familiar with this particular tranny....any info would be appreciated

Unfortunately there is nothing you can do to improve the tranny. FWD cars typically lose ~20% in the drivetrain. Rear drive cars ~23% or so and 4wd cars typically are in the ~25% range.

The tranny hasn't had any development on it since it was built.

 

[PA_MP3_Man]

What was wrong with the documented proof I had from Car and Driver? Why is this debate still going on? If you guys still aren't convinced, the only way to know for sure is to test someones MSP when they get it. How you test boost, I don't know but somebody has to.

 

[70]

What was wrong with the documented proof I had from Car and Driver? Why is this debate still going on? If you guys still aren't convinced, the only way to know for sure is to test someones MSP when they get it. How you test boost, I don't know but somebody has to.

Car and Driver is going reprint the same press release everyone else got. If the press release says 6.9 psi then that is what they will put.

They won't print something the manufacturer didn't tell them.

 

[Neuticle]

FWD cars typically lose ~20% in the drivetrainp

that's pretty high. most estimates i've seen (all of which are estimates until you yank the engine) have been more in the 12-15 for FWD. and 17-20 for RWD

 

[70]

that's pretty high. most estimates i've seen (all of which are estimates until you yank the engine) have been more in the 12-15 for FWD. and 17-20 for RWD

I'm not going to argue this point neither. I've heard more like 17-20% for fwd, but who cares. The point is the tranny in the Protege is an avergae of 20% drivetrain loss. Pure and simple. Adding an LSD isn't going to make it better.