Darksun280
Member
- :
- MS3
if your prod date is really 4/08 i doubt you got any flash at all.
PG Pump Installed
- Thread starter laloosh
- Start date
if your prod date is really 4/08 i doubt you got any flash at all.
AutoXRacer
Member
That would suck...
Supposedly you can't just replace the solenoid. Mazda sells it as part of the pump. You'd have to get the solenoid from Hitachi directly...good luck with that though...
Supposedly you can't just replace the solenoid. Mazda sells it as part of the pump. You'd have to get the solenoid from Hitachi directly...good luck with that though...
If you have one of Jon's pumps you should be good to go there are plenty of ppl who have had his pump before the TSB was out reporting no trouble.... Im sure Jon will chime in soon
- :
- 2002 BJFW, 2007 BK3P, 1979 SA22C, 2005 BK3P
any pumps we have sold include new parts. i checked with mazda today and the pumps were revised before we started selling upgraded ones.
AutoXRacer
Member
So just to confirm, all the pumps made by Mrlilguy will be the updated (new solenoid equipped) pumps...?
What about the people that send back cores that came out of early 2007 models? I'm sure those old pumps have gotten mixed in with the new ones.
What about the people that send back cores that came out of early 2007 models? I'm sure those old pumps have gotten mixed in with the new ones.
- :
- 2002 BJFW, 2007 BK3P, 1979 SA22C, 2005 BK3P
every pump we have sold and jon has produced for us included the newest revision of the pump. i checked my receipts all the way back to when we began and the part numbers of the revised pumps and confirmed that.
as for the cores, we've actually gotten very few of those back since we started doing this and used less than five to build new pumps out of the 25+ in the field right now. we'll replace any pump that doesn't perform to expectations if need be.
- :
- 2002 BJFW, 2007 BK3P, 1979 SA22C, 2005 BK3P
the pump is torn down, internal collar/piston/shaft assembly is removed and replaced with larger bore and better flowing components, rebuilt, tested and primed before being sent back out.
mrlilguy157
Member
- :
- 07 mazdaspeed 3
This should answer a bunch of questions. Sorry about the length. Also, this is an old post which I've put up in several places.
Regardless of the solenoid, old or new, the upgraded pumps by myself or PG or Cp-E, all will perform flawlessly with no issues or problems in with the TSB mentions.
I completely understand you now... Yes, the cores are used and re-used over and over. The internals are what changes from the pumps. There is a new piston and bore assembly which allows for higher flow and pressures. Check out www.mrlilguyCDFPs.com to understand everything.
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p302/_w...PFlowChart1.gif
to the pump stuff - all names aside, Autotech APR mrlilguy or CP-E, lets talk about the designs.
The APR design: a thicker piston from top to bottom, which allows for more volume of fuel to enter the pressure chamber of the pump per stroke. What you get is higher pressures throughout and more volume pressurized. Their new internals are pictured here:
As you can see, the APR internal upgrade utilizes new seals, a drilled retainer nut, a new piston, a stiffer spring, and new bore, all while maintaining the same factory Hitachi retainer.
I have no pumps with me right now, so I cannot work out the math, but will do so once I return to Dallas. That way you guys can understand the new volume displacement by the upgraded pumps, which will also show that the upgrade kit that I utilize outflows the APR design, which is used by CP-E.
Moving onwards...
The other guys, Autotech, have a different design, noted as 'plunger style'. This allows for the stock retainer to be used, as well as the stock seals. When APR decided to go with a complete thicker diameter piston, they HAD to drill the retainer nut to allow the new piston to fit through, which also requires the use of new seals. Both designs are acceptable - both do the job, both seal the compression/pressurization chamber from the head of the motor (where possible fuel/oil dilution could occur). The plunger style, once again, allows for the stock seals and retainer to be used. Also, the stock spring is used. Although many have presented controversy about this, the mass difference in the Autotech design, is minimal, further proven in this post.
Here is a picture of the plunger design, as well as the new retainer.
Looking closely, you can see that the bottom end of the pistons diameter is larger than the top end - which defines 'plunger style'.
Look again, here, at my amateur photography and out of focus pictures:
Clearly, the larger end of the piston is shown. This, just like APR's design with a larger diameter full length piston, has a larger diameter part of the piston where it matters, just longer than the stroke of the actual piston as the tri-lobe of the intake camshaft forces the piston in and out out the pump, to create pressure.
As to the debate with the increased mass of the new piston (in either design) as well as the spring force, I will quote myself from another thread, in which I also added more details for futher clarification:
The mass difference between my piston and the stock piston is about a gram, if not less. I don't have a scale next to me at the moment, but I'll be sure to measure and take some picssssss. Also, the car's RPM isn't really increasing. Redline is still near 7k rpms. My buddy JC has a monster of a 2.0t GTi and drives it up to 8k, using this pump, and no side effects have presented themselves
Yes indeed it did, for the whole piston in the APR pumps is larger diameter and larger mass, from beginning to the end. Therefore, APR found it necessary (and I agree) to include a new, stiffer spring for the increase movement in mass. After weighing in, the new retainer and piston assembly weighs approx. a whopping 1.25g heavier.
A stiffer spring is suggested for a significant increase in mass.
edit: Pics found.
^^^^that is the stocker and the retainer^^^^^^^
that is the piston we use, without the retainer. the retainer weighed in near 4.25grams (no scale is perfect). btw - the cloth weighs 7g
As shown, the increased mass for the plunger style, is almost negligible (1.25grams), where as the APR design - larger diameter piston has increased mass from top to bottom - has an increased mass throughout, resulting in probably 4 or 5grams heavier. This, although doesn't sound like a lot of weight, is moving at 3strokes per revolution of the intake cam, which is a lot of mass to be thrown around at such high speeds.
Also, a new design has surfaced from VF-Engineering. They make good stuff, but have rough customer service as I used to directly deal with them.
Here's a picture:
Notice that even though half of the piston is the increased diameter, they still retain the stock spring, and use an aftermarket retainer.
There is another company that is in the production phase of their kit. They have a pump from me, and perhaps they'll show something new and impressive. Honestly, I have no concern in switching manufacturers for any reason. All of the pumps designs have been proven to work.
Another point of comparison is here:
The contact point on the cam follower unit, with the new pump upgrade. APR decided to use the factory Hitachi pump retainer unit, great idea, thats nice.
The contact area with the Autotech upgrades to the cam follower unit is the same, as shown in the picture. Notice that the very center circle of the retainer which is pictured 'closer' to you, is the only point of contact on the cam follower unit:
I hope this all makes some sense and shows you that both pump upgrades will do the job, and both are extremely effective solutions. The only difference which can actually be proven to create a different end result, is the larger diameter of the piston, which Autotech surpasses APR, but only by the smallest margin. Both companies did their homework on the design, and both companies have hundreds upgrades performing flawlessly for over hundreds of thousands of miles.
Regardless of the solenoid, old or new, the upgraded pumps by myself or PG or Cp-E, all will perform flawlessly with no issues or problems in with the TSB mentions.
speedie6 said:
I completely understand you now... Yes, the cores are used and re-used over and over. The internals are what changes from the pumps. There is a new piston and bore assembly which allows for higher flow and pressures. Check out www.mrlilguyCDFPs.com to understand everything.
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p302/_w...PFlowChart1.gif
to the pump stuff - all names aside, Autotech APR mrlilguy or CP-E, lets talk about the designs.
The APR design: a thicker piston from top to bottom, which allows for more volume of fuel to enter the pressure chamber of the pump per stroke. What you get is higher pressures throughout and more volume pressurized. Their new internals are pictured here:
As you can see, the APR internal upgrade utilizes new seals, a drilled retainer nut, a new piston, a stiffer spring, and new bore, all while maintaining the same factory Hitachi retainer.
I have no pumps with me right now, so I cannot work out the math, but will do so once I return to Dallas. That way you guys can understand the new volume displacement by the upgraded pumps, which will also show that the upgrade kit that I utilize outflows the APR design, which is used by CP-E.
Moving onwards...
The other guys, Autotech, have a different design, noted as 'plunger style'. This allows for the stock retainer to be used, as well as the stock seals. When APR decided to go with a complete thicker diameter piston, they HAD to drill the retainer nut to allow the new piston to fit through, which also requires the use of new seals. Both designs are acceptable - both do the job, both seal the compression/pressurization chamber from the head of the motor (where possible fuel/oil dilution could occur). The plunger style, once again, allows for the stock seals and retainer to be used. Also, the stock spring is used. Although many have presented controversy about this, the mass difference in the Autotech design, is minimal, further proven in this post.
Here is a picture of the plunger design, as well as the new retainer.
Looking closely, you can see that the bottom end of the pistons diameter is larger than the top end - which defines 'plunger style'.
Look again, here, at my amateur photography and out of focus pictures:
Clearly, the larger end of the piston is shown. This, just like APR's design with a larger diameter full length piston, has a larger diameter part of the piston where it matters, just longer than the stroke of the actual piston as the tri-lobe of the intake camshaft forces the piston in and out out the pump, to create pressure.
As to the debate with the increased mass of the new piston (in either design) as well as the spring force, I will quote myself from another thread, in which I also added more details for futher clarification:
****************
The mass difference between my piston and the stock piston is about a gram, if not less. I don't have a scale next to me at the moment, but I'll be sure to measure and take some picssssss. Also, the car's RPM isn't really increasing. Redline is still near 7k rpms. My buddy JC has a monster of a 2.0t GTi and drives it up to 8k, using this pump, and no side effects have presented themselves
Direct from Brian@Autotech (AutotechRD) said:
Yes indeed it did, for the whole piston in the APR pumps is larger diameter and larger mass, from beginning to the end. Therefore, APR found it necessary (and I agree) to include a new, stiffer spring for the increase movement in mass. After weighing in, the new retainer and piston assembly weighs approx. a whopping 1.25g heavier.
A stiffer spring is suggested for a significant increase in mass.
edit: Pics found.
^^^^that is the stocker and the retainer^^^^^^^
that is the piston we use, without the retainer. the retainer weighed in near 4.25grams (no scale is perfect). btw - the cloth weighs 7g
****************
As shown, the increased mass for the plunger style, is almost negligible (1.25grams), where as the APR design - larger diameter piston has increased mass from top to bottom - has an increased mass throughout, resulting in probably 4 or 5grams heavier. This, although doesn't sound like a lot of weight, is moving at 3strokes per revolution of the intake cam, which is a lot of mass to be thrown around at such high speeds.
Also, a new design has surfaced from VF-Engineering. They make good stuff, but have rough customer service as I used to directly deal with them.
Here's a picture:
Notice that even though half of the piston is the increased diameter, they still retain the stock spring, and use an aftermarket retainer.
There is another company that is in the production phase of their kit. They have a pump from me, and perhaps they'll show something new and impressive. Honestly, I have no concern in switching manufacturers for any reason. All of the pumps designs have been proven to work.
Another point of comparison is here:
The contact point on the cam follower unit, with the new pump upgrade. APR decided to use the factory Hitachi pump retainer unit, great idea, thats nice.
The contact area with the Autotech upgrades to the cam follower unit is the same, as shown in the picture. Notice that the very center circle of the retainer which is pictured 'closer' to you, is the only point of contact on the cam follower unit:
I hope this all makes some sense and shows you that both pump upgrades will do the job, and both are extremely effective solutions. The only difference which can actually be proven to create a different end result, is the larger diameter of the piston, which Autotech surpasses APR, but only by the smallest margin. Both companies did their homework on the design, and both companies have hundreds upgrades performing flawlessly for over hundreds of thousands of miles.
Last edited:
