Fsze
- Thread starter jobeausejour
- Start date
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
I don't even know if the JDM computers translate to "obd-II' or 'obd-i' in the first place...
All US based 3rd generation proteges/323's don't even use a Mazda ECU...its built by Ford...and Mazda had a long history of simply not putting up with multiple US government changes on emissions system...after all, that was what ultimately stopped the FD RX-7's from crossing the pond almost entirely (that, and the price, which few were willing to spend)...its very likely there are further unknown differences between the US and JDM setups...
So, from my end, its mostly speculation...i've never physically held an FS-ZE ecu...nor have i ever seen the harness, or its pin layout...lastly, i've never witnessed...on any level...a FS-ZE based service manual...and i'm unaware of any US based guys that have...
If it was as simple as the JDM system just being 'odb-i'...i'm sure the 2nd gen probe guys would've made more progress with the FS-ZE...but you'll often see probes with either a FS-ZE or KL-ZE that had to parallel both the US and JDM ecu's...despite both being obd-i on '95 or earlier models...
So my post a few months ago may have been more 'doom and gloom' than it should've been...it can 100% be done with a standalone computer paralled with a US based ecu for cluster/accessory control...no question...but the simple truth is the ecu is pretty much the key difference with the ze...its mechanical changes give it a higher power band, but you need the 500 to 1000 extra revs to take advantage of it...hacking in a US ecu to run the engine will get the car moving around, but it won't allow you to take advantage of any thing the ZE offers...
All US based 3rd generation proteges/323's don't even use a Mazda ECU...its built by Ford...and Mazda had a long history of simply not putting up with multiple US government changes on emissions system...after all, that was what ultimately stopped the FD RX-7's from crossing the pond almost entirely (that, and the price, which few were willing to spend)...its very likely there are further unknown differences between the US and JDM setups...
So, from my end, its mostly speculation...i've never physically held an FS-ZE ecu...nor have i ever seen the harness, or its pin layout...lastly, i've never witnessed...on any level...a FS-ZE based service manual...and i'm unaware of any US based guys that have...
If it was as simple as the JDM system just being 'odb-i'...i'm sure the 2nd gen probe guys would've made more progress with the FS-ZE...but you'll often see probes with either a FS-ZE or KL-ZE that had to parallel both the US and JDM ecu's...despite both being obd-i on '95 or earlier models...
So my post a few months ago may have been more 'doom and gloom' than it should've been...it can 100% be done with a standalone computer paralled with a US based ecu for cluster/accessory control...no question...but the simple truth is the ecu is pretty much the key difference with the ze...its mechanical changes give it a higher power band, but you need the 500 to 1000 extra revs to take advantage of it...hacking in a US ecu to run the engine will get the car moving around, but it won't allow you to take advantage of any thing the ZE offers...
There might not have been much or any gain in peak power by I would imagine that the low- and mid-range power would have increased.
There are a couple of spare engines lying around at a mates place - I'll see if I can scavenge a JDM crank trigger wheel from one.
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
thats kind of the problem...the ZE is rated lower max torque wise than the DE...so for the most part...it isn't better in any way if not coupled with the proper computer...The aussie computers seem to do much better with the ZE than the US market ecu's do, so there are some unknowns in that area (and why a lot more Australian owners have had good results with that engine)...But trying to get a ZE running right with a US based EEC-V computer has proven multiple times through dynos...to have less torque at lower rpm, and only gain 5-10 or so whp over a DE...depending on mods (that mostly coming from the compression increase)
If you have a standalone...a ZE can be more powerful than a DE in every rpm...but the DE's are still cam'd very well for lower rpm grunt...if you use even a factory JDM ZE computer, and get it wired right with a full fS-ZE engine...you'll still lose some torque at lower revs...
I promise i've gone over this for years...Its simply cheaper, more effective, and will give better results...to just go with rebuilding a DE to whatever geometry you want...the ZE's real differences are still very conservative...slightly higher compression, with slightly more aggressive cams...and a VTCS'less intake manifold (i know there are marginal VICS differences, but they won't matter really)...the cost of getting a ZE properly tuned and running is probably cheaper than just a DE with custom rods and pistons, and getting lucky with some twiggy's/integrals (I FINALLY HAS EM NOW!!!!)...you need the standalone anyway...
Last edited:
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
No difference at all between what? standalone vs. piggybacks?
I haven't seen a piggy back system that gives complete control over ignition, fuel, and most importantly...rev limit...on a US based eec v...some of them handle some adjustments properly...usually with fuel...but they still don't give good control over closed to open loop switching...and i've seen plenty of guys even with voltage clamps and this and that...that still run way too lean in closed loop...something that won't go over all that well with a higher compression FS-ZE...
Its simply a cost assessment imo...To run a ZE in a US car, you'd pretty much need to start with a MP3 computer at the very least...they have better fuel maps for open loop, and have a proper cold start protocol for an engine not utilizing VTCS...I'm not familiar with all the different piggy back options, so if i'm incorrect i'm all ears...but i never heard of one that was 'perfect'...and most success people had, were again, related to fuel management with no real differences made to ignition or redline...
considering you can find a pre-loaded Microtech for around $800, even cheaper if you find a used one...with plenty of base map data to start with...its only marginally more expensive than an mp3 computer (flashed from Spicyorange) and a piggy-back...
its a different requirement than forced induction...those guys really only need fuel control...the stock ignition mapping is already retarded enough to handle a good bit of boost...and they have zero need for an increased redline...far from the case with NA, where naturally aspirated hp is derived from torque output at high speed...and taking a ZE to US redlines...is not going to net much of anything...
Ahh cool. Thats what I was thinking. I could call the motor shop now and tell them to hold off on everything except installing the 10.4 over sized pistons and get this done cheap and quick. But I think I will maybe net 3-4 horse power (as I already have a flashed mp3 ecu). Not nearly enough to get by that BMW. So I think I will be ebaying the ecu, harness and getting a stand alone and taking the next season off to be able to afford that. That and all the other stuff I want to get done to the internals.
Also, what is easier to find; twiggys or the msf exhaust cam?
Also, what is easier to find; twiggys or the msf exhaust cam?
tweety2300
Member
- :
- 2001 mazda protege mp3
Twiggys are next to impossible, find intergrals
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
hate to admit it, but i just got a set of NA twiggys and FocusMSP cam gears a week ago...100% unused...if you keep your eyes open on the Fs sections, they pop up from time to time...
But like tweety said, just call megacycle through the links on the integral cams pages...a few guys purchased through there after they bought the integral specs...and had no problems dealing with them...not quite as cheap as some used equipment, but still very easy compared to completely custom stuff...
so iracemine...the real Mazdaspeed exhaust cam is extremely hard to find...but CS sells a mimic'd exhaust cam for like $180 shipped...which is an exhaust cam specifically spec'd for use with a header...and i've been very happy with mine for years...Twiggy's are another significant jump from both JDM cams, but really won't make serious difference until full rev limit control is in place...if you have little intention of custom bottom end geometry; jdm cams with gears and an mp3 computer can do pretty well with factory rev limits...
But like tweety said, just call megacycle through the links on the integral cams pages...a few guys purchased through there after they bought the integral specs...and had no problems dealing with them...not quite as cheap as some used equipment, but still very easy compared to completely custom stuff...
so iracemine...the real Mazdaspeed exhaust cam is extremely hard to find...but CS sells a mimic'd exhaust cam for like $180 shipped...which is an exhaust cam specifically spec'd for use with a header...and i've been very happy with mine for years...Twiggy's are another significant jump from both JDM cams, but really won't make serious difference until full rev limit control is in place...if you have little intention of custom bottom end geometry; jdm cams with gears and an mp3 computer can do pretty well with factory rev limits...
Funny, so do I
In regards to Installshields post on piggybacks another limitation that you will find is that all that of the piggybacks that I can think of that work for our cars wont allow you to advance timing.
Given the amount of money I've spent on acquiring gear for my current build I probably should have grabbed a set of longer rods (SR20, K1 whatever) and gone for a bit more compression, better breathing and higher rpm
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
For my 'old' engine I increased the rods a little under 8mm iirc, bringing the rod ratio up above 1.52 i think...and used the stock 2.0L crank...all my research at the time was centered around racing piston design, with VERY small crowns and an extremely tight ring grouping...I'm pretty sure that is literally the max you can increase the rod length with that crank and factory deck height...and i was also just under 13:1 compression...It should be noted that i'm fairly confident that engine wouldn't last that long...small crowns like that put up with little abuse when it comes to mixture and timing...so it was probably about as unstable as a stock bottom end with a good bit of boost...
All that work for only about 7900 rpm...I really wish i would've started with just a 1.8L crank and 2.0L block...as even with stock 2.0L 5.235" rods...I would've decreased piston acceleration AND MPS...instead of just acceleration...and not have been required to run such high compression (i had no room on the piston faces to run less)...the whole thing would've been much less peaky, and a whole lot easier...
live and learn though...In retrospect, that 1.8L crank is the key part that could make an 'FS/P' a truly great NA engine...and capable of some pretty crazy rpm... mathematically you can get the rod ratio up over 1.7 with high compression, which is Honda F20 territory...making 9,000+ rpm attainable...and with the right valves and cams, 250+ whp...back when i was doing this in school, i simply assumed that crank wouldn't fit...so far, that doesn't seem to be the case...although i'm still looking into it...
All that work for only about 7900 rpm...I really wish i would've started with just a 1.8L crank and 2.0L block...as even with stock 2.0L 5.235" rods...I would've decreased piston acceleration AND MPS...instead of just acceleration...and not have been required to run such high compression (i had no room on the piston faces to run less)...the whole thing would've been much less peaky, and a whole lot easier...
live and learn though...In retrospect, that 1.8L crank is the key part that could make an 'FS/P' a truly great NA engine...and capable of some pretty crazy rpm... mathematically you can get the rod ratio up over 1.7 with high compression, which is Honda F20 territory...making 9,000+ rpm attainable...and with the right valves and cams, 250+ whp...back when i was doing this in school, i simply assumed that crank wouldn't fit...so far, that doesn't seem to be the case...although i'm still looking into it...
tweety2300
Member
- :
- 2001 mazda protege mp3
But at 250 whp how would the stock rods hold up NA? I know boosted its pushing it pretty far but not sure about NA. If this is true then I may find one when I rebuild the protege. Granted I won't be pushing it that far but if I could make say 180 whp NA and be reliable I would def spend the extra money for it
He's not going to be using stock rods. 1.8 rods yield a rod ratio of around 1.52 which is similiar to b16 or b18 rod ratio
Oh also install shield I know a 2 litre crank works in a 1.8 block so based on this should mean that it'll work the other way round. Ill need to find the thread again though to double check if the crank was swapped though or just rod and piston
Oh also install shield I know a 2 litre crank works in a 1.8 block so based on this should mean that it'll work the other way round. Ill need to find the thread again though to double check if the crank was swapped though or just rod and piston
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
Tweety, if you use a 1.8L crank in the 2.0L block...the only difference is less stroke...the FS crank gives 92mm of stroke...the 1.8L is 86 iirc (maybe 85, don't have it in front of me)...
So the geometry of the bottom end is completely altered...so its sort of unknown what hp number will break it...As far as the stock FS rods with this setup; its sort of irrelevant if the stock rods would hold up to 250whp or so simply because you'd have to run some insanely funny looking pistons to make any compression...the 1.8L engines didn't use the 2.0L blocks (It wasn't the same block simply with different rods, pistons, and a short stroke crank)...so using the 1.8L crank in a 2.0L block has two great advantages for NA...
You decrease stroke...so therefor decrease Mean Piston Speed at any given rpm...you also automatically increase the rod ratio, which correlates to piston acceleration (arguably the variable of the two that really matters)...but, you also have the advantage of a short stroke crank with a large deck height...very hard to come by, and what makes certain Honda engines so great for NA...with the big deck height, you have many options on longer rod lengths...the longer the rods, the even higher that rod ratio can be increased...and if all these numbers i'm looking at end up being correct; mechanically safe to 10,000 rpm isn't all that unreasonable...it would just be very hard to street tune that with a fixed head...
So that isn't some of our goals...I'm just now trying to find rods from other engines that have the same big end size, but are 10+ mm longer, which would be a ton cheaper than custom...as far as 180whp...guarantee that is a possibility NA with a 1.8L crank, but its still unknown what cams would be needed...and which rods and pistons...integrals and twiggy's could handle it i'm sure, but not sure about easier to find ZE stuff...
So the geometry of the bottom end is completely altered...so its sort of unknown what hp number will break it...As far as the stock FS rods with this setup; its sort of irrelevant if the stock rods would hold up to 250whp or so simply because you'd have to run some insanely funny looking pistons to make any compression...the 1.8L engines didn't use the 2.0L blocks (It wasn't the same block simply with different rods, pistons, and a short stroke crank)...so using the 1.8L crank in a 2.0L block has two great advantages for NA...
You decrease stroke...so therefor decrease Mean Piston Speed at any given rpm...you also automatically increase the rod ratio, which correlates to piston acceleration (arguably the variable of the two that really matters)...but, you also have the advantage of a short stroke crank with a large deck height...very hard to come by, and what makes certain Honda engines so great for NA...with the big deck height, you have many options on longer rod lengths...the longer the rods, the even higher that rod ratio can be increased...and if all these numbers i'm looking at end up being correct; mechanically safe to 10,000 rpm isn't all that unreasonable...it would just be very hard to street tune that with a fixed head...
So that isn't some of our goals...I'm just now trying to find rods from other engines that have the same big end size, but are 10+ mm longer, which would be a ton cheaper than custom...as far as 180whp...guarantee that is a possibility NA with a 1.8L crank, but its still unknown what cams would be needed...and which rods and pistons...integrals and twiggy's could handle it i'm sure, but not sure about easier to find ZE stuff...
