NA Tech Race to 100whp per 1000cc's
- Thread starter LordWorm
- Start date
carifresco
Member
- :
- Mazda Protege ES 1999
Planing to send my cams to crower for the regrind
carifresco
Member
- :
- Mazda Protege ES 1999
Intagral stg 3
big cams like that on a FP (or FS for that matter) on what is a rather mild build.....
you sure?
Make sure you have some adjustable cam gears to dial the outrageous overlap back and make them more useful for your application.
carifresco
Member
- :
- Mazda Protege ES 1999
Why mild build?
Im planing to change my pistons
the block is fully balance an .20ob
The head is p&p @80 cut
5 angle job Ect
EMS
an I got camgears
I thu the twiggys were bigger than the integrals
Im planing to change my pistons
the block is fully balance an .20ob
The head is p&p @80 cut
5 angle job Ect
EMS
an I got camgears
I thu the twiggys were bigger than the integrals
Because its a mild build? you're going to pistons that are "standard" in japanese 2L, you're going to a slight overbore, you're doing a bit of head work....
If there *were* off the shelf cams available, i'd say buy them for simplicities sake...but you're going after a custom grind so better to get something more in keeping with the build you are doing.
Your build is pretty simillar to jimmy's, and CulRidr's 2L builds - they yield around 160 to 170whp, and are quite mild (but still pretty tough compared to stock)
For "racey" cams, you'd be looking at a "racey" build (long rods made of exotic materials, custom pistons with compression exceeding 12:1, welded and reshaped combustion chambers, crank lightening and knife edging, some sort of crank evac solution - probably in the way of a dry sump....etc etc etc) simillar to what installshield did.
If there *were* off the shelf cams available, i'd say buy them for simplicities sake...but you're going after a custom grind so better to get something more in keeping with the build you are doing.
Your build is pretty simillar to jimmy's, and CulRidr's 2L builds - they yield around 160 to 170whp, and are quite mild (but still pretty tough compared to stock)
For "racey" cams, you'd be looking at a "racey" build (long rods made of exotic materials, custom pistons with compression exceeding 12:1, welded and reshaped combustion chambers, crank lightening and knife edging, some sort of crank evac solution - probably in the way of a dry sump....etc etc etc) simillar to what installshield did.
carifresco
Member
- :
- Mazda Protege ES 1999
The FP Engine have longer rods than the FS no problem with that
and my head is fully made, an I changin my pistons very soon
Are the integral are bigger than Twiggys?
In the other way I just want to hit 160-170WHP
and my head is fully made, an I changin my pistons very soon
Are the integral are bigger than Twiggys?
In the other way I just want to hit 160-170WHP
the FP engine's rod ratio is APPALLINGLY bad... (as is the FS..).
No the integrals are not better than the twiggys to the best of my knowledge. I've never seen a back to back dyno, but anecdotally the twiggys have a higher ramp rate and are more aggressive allround as a result (even though lift and duration on the exhaust side is not quoted as being as high as the integrals).
For 170whp? .... cams are the least of your worries. To get an FP pushing out that sort of power you are going to need a pretty wild build... what RPM you looking at taking it to? what sort of intake manifold are you fabricating for the job? what headers are you using?
No the integrals are not better than the twiggys to the best of my knowledge. I've never seen a back to back dyno, but anecdotally the twiggys have a higher ramp rate and are more aggressive allround as a result (even though lift and duration on the exhaust side is not quoted as being as high as the integrals).
For 170whp? .... cams are the least of your worries. To get an FP pushing out that sort of power you are going to need a pretty wild build... what RPM you looking at taking it to? what sort of intake manifold are you fabricating for the job? what headers are you using?
carifresco
Member
- :
- Mazda Protege ES 1999
Im running MS2
carifresco
Member
- :
- Mazda Protege ES 1999
The rod ratio of the FP is 1.51 compare to the FS 1.46
So 8k is no problem the car have eibach valve springs
The IM is the 626 an I getin custom SE-R long header
So 8k is no problem the car have eibach valve springs
The IM is the 626 an I getin custom SE-R long header
carifresco
Member
- :
- Mazda Protege ES 1999
I have a thread of my build
i dont think the rod ratio is as good as you think it is...the basic assumption is to take FS rod lengths (known) and FP stroke to work it out.... *but* i have a suspicion from previous research (a long long time ago.... so i could be way off base here) that the FP uses much shorter rods.... in fact it is possible that its rod ratio may in fact be worse than the FS....
again i'm going a long way back in my memory - so i could be wrong on the details. 1.51 isn't that great a rod ratio either...
Either way, I hope you're upgrading your rods before going to astronomical RPM...
626 manifold wont be enough.
8k RPM probably wont quite be enough
and for gods sake, don't put a megasquirt in it......go pony up the cash for a decent ECU.
On the subject of cams.. i think you might be better off with something a little milder than twiggys or integral stage 3's. I have twiggys in my car and whilst i absolutely love them, the idle and low RPM cruise is very tiresome.. its very hard to lock a decent tune under vac down (which will be made even more difficult if you persist with the MS2), and the cold start is pretty bad.
I'd be taking your goals (revised down a little if you are only planning on doing what you have stated, because your build is very simillar to people who barely made 160hp on the 2L motor..and they had anther 200cc to play with) to a cam place and asking for the mildest cam which they believe will achieve the goal.
Last edited:
I can't imagine how bad the idle and cold start would be on the Integral Stage 3s. I've got the Stage 2s (I'm the only person I know of so far that's dyno'd NA Stage 2s) and they're already pretty bad at idle and we had a hell of a time tuning for a stable idle.
A Stage 2 set, in stock position, starts developing power at 5000 rpm and seems to peak somewhere around 7000-8000 rpm. Wouldn't know, since I can't rev that high. The Stage 3s are bound to be just as peaky and lots worse at low rpms.
I hit about 148 whp, but that's without a cat and a piggyback computer. 152 whp when we remove the muffler (it's quick-detach, but my car is already hella noisy with it on). I'm supposing with FS-ZE rods, I could push maybe 155-160 whp, but that's all she wrote. For 170, you'll want 8000 rpms with FS-ZE internals or better, these cams and basically a straight through exhaust. With an FP-DE... you'll want the same stuff plus about 9000 rpms...
-
Damnit... Integral went out of business? I was thinking of ordering a set of Stage Is to try a mix-and-match build...
A Stage 2 set, in stock position, starts developing power at 5000 rpm and seems to peak somewhere around 7000-8000 rpm. Wouldn't know, since I can't rev that high. The Stage 3s are bound to be just as peaky and lots worse at low rpms.
I hit about 148 whp, but that's without a cat and a piggyback computer. 152 whp when we remove the muffler (it's quick-detach, but my car is already hella noisy with it on). I'm supposing with FS-ZE rods, I could push maybe 155-160 whp, but that's all she wrote. For 170, you'll want 8000 rpms with FS-ZE internals or better, these cams and basically a straight through exhaust. With an FP-DE... you'll want the same stuff plus about 9000 rpms...
-
Damnit... Integral went out of business? I was thinking of ordering a set of Stage Is to try a mix-and-match build...
Last edited:
carifresco
Member
- :
- Mazda Protege ES 1999
Dint the fs rods the same of the fz?
