More for less with no Explosions?
May-8th-2006, 12:32 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 42
More for less with no Explosions?
I'm pretty sure I've asked this question before and that is how much can the 2002 protege 5 engine handle before having to significally modify the engine structure. I look on here every so often and see people turbo'ing or supercharging their cars, but from what I've heard is that my engine rods will only handle 220 hp and 220 ft-lbs of torque. How true is this?
Along with the answer of that. How much could I get with a simple EPROM to 93 octane on my N/A engine? Because if the above is true concerning the internals on the engine. I want to give my car some more spunk without forced induction that would very realistically blow up my daily driver.
Any answers will be much appreciated.
Along with the answer of that. How much could I get with a simple EPROM to 93 octane on my N/A engine? Because if the above is true concerning the internals on the engine. I want to give my car some more spunk without forced induction that would very realistically blow up my daily driver.
Any answers will be much appreciated.
May-8th-2006, 01:15 PM
#2
Moderator/ Pocket Tuner
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,150
220lb-ft IS about as high as you want to go on stock rods and stay reliable....that is absolutely true...Don't believe me...go on msprotege.com and do a search on the zoom-zoom boom club...all kinds of guys blowing their engines, and it's almost ALWAYS a broken or bent rod
you will NOT be able to just EPROM a mazda ecu. Do a search on this...it's been discussed to death....
you will NOT be able to just EPROM a mazda ecu. Do a search on this...it's been discussed to death....
May-9th-2006, 12:29 AM
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 42
I saw a couple of topics on using a unichip instead of the eprom but no good information. I also don't plan on spending $3,000 to get an engine that I can start to build with this car from when im not planning on going over 200HP or 200ft-lbs of torque or forced induction.
What is then, the best, quickest, most stable way to take the engine and make it do 200HP? Without a Super Charger or Turbo. Cause if I go that route I'll want to be at 500-600HP.
What is then, the best, quickest, most stable way to take the engine and make it do 200HP? Without a Super Charger or Turbo. Cause if I go that route I'll want to be at 500-600HP.
May-9th-2006, 01:28 AM
#6
The man behind the mask
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 11,572
I think you don't really know what you're getting into or asking..... spend some time in the community before you start making wild claims.
There are NO 500-600whp proteges....closest I've EVER seen is a 380whp car with about $10K in upgrades.
If you want an NA engine with about 180-200whp and GA emissions is not a concern for you then let me know. I'm slowly working on a NA package and I'm not too far away from you in B'ham.
There are NO 500-600whp proteges....closest I've EVER seen is a 380whp car with about $10K in upgrades.
If you want an NA engine with about 180-200whp and GA emissions is not a concern for you then let me know. I'm slowly working on a NA package and I'm not too far away from you in B'ham.
May-9th-2006, 09:14 AM
#8
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 42
Not sure of what claims i've made other than what I saw was that someone was using a unichip and a dyno to max out his engine. Nothing on eprom. Did see a lot about people blowing their engines and some guy that put a mitsu 4g63 ecu in his car. O.O
I am also very sure that I could hit 500-600HP in this engine if built properly. I'd probably get the reinforced engine but with 100mm rods instead of the 83mm by changing the crankshaft flatten out the cylindar heads for better combustion and stoke it. Maybe moving to a 2.3 or 2.4L with bigger injectors. Throw a T25 or something in it with a front mount air to water cooling system reduce weight and lost efficiency putting me at probably 7K worth of work. But I believe It could be done.
Though that is not the route I really wish to go with this engine. As stated before. I would simply like to hit 200HP and stay N/A with the least amount of money spent. Im anxious to see what you have worked out for the N/A engine Rod
I am also very sure that I could hit 500-600HP in this engine if built properly. I'd probably get the reinforced engine but with 100mm rods instead of the 83mm by changing the crankshaft flatten out the cylindar heads for better combustion and stoke it. Maybe moving to a 2.3 or 2.4L with bigger injectors. Throw a T25 or something in it with a front mount air to water cooling system reduce weight and lost efficiency putting me at probably 7K worth of work. But I believe It could be done.
Though that is not the route I really wish to go with this engine. As stated before. I would simply like to hit 200HP and stay N/A with the least amount of money spent. Im anxious to see what you have worked out for the N/A engine Rod
May-9th-2006, 09:54 AM
#9
Moderator/ Pocket Tuner
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,150
Originally Posted by straydoginc
Not sure of what claims i've made other than what I saw was that someone was using a unichip and a dyno to max out his engine. Nothing on eprom. Did see a lot about people blowing their engines and some guy that put a mitsu 4g63 ecu in his car. O.O
I am also very sure that I could hit 500-600HP in this engine if built properly. I'd probably get the reinforced engine but with 100mm rods instead of the 83mm by changing the crankshaft flatten out the cylindar heads for better combustion and stoke it. Maybe moving to a 2.3 or 2.4L with bigger injectors. Throw a T25 or something in it with a front mount air to water cooling system reduce weight and lost efficiency putting me at probably 7K worth of work. But I believe It could be done.
Though that is not the route I really wish to go with this engine. As stated before. I would simply like to hit 200HP and stay N/A with the least amount of money spent. Im anxious to see what you have worked out for the N/A engine Rod
I am also very sure that I could hit 500-600HP in this engine if built properly. I'd probably get the reinforced engine but with 100mm rods instead of the 83mm by changing the crankshaft flatten out the cylindar heads for better combustion and stoke it. Maybe moving to a 2.3 or 2.4L with bigger injectors. Throw a T25 or something in it with a front mount air to water cooling system reduce weight and lost efficiency putting me at probably 7K worth of work. But I believe It could be done.
Though that is not the route I really wish to go with this engine. As stated before. I would simply like to hit 200HP and stay N/A with the least amount of money spent. Im anxious to see what you have worked out for the N/A engine Rod
Right now on a BETTER turbo than a T25, with WAY more money invested than 7k, people are BARELY hitting 350+ hp, and this is with a fully built bottom end, IHI VF22 pushing like 25-30psi, BIG FMIC, totally aftermarket engine management, big 440cc injectors, welded LSD
BTW, hitting 200hp NA is NOT so simple...I havent seen ANYONE do it yet, except maybe Tripoint, and they were going thru motors like crazy in SCCA
May-9th-2006, 10:51 AM
#10
The man behind the mask
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 11,572
Yeah, Mike is right. The T25 is out of it's efficiency range at 16psi and a T3 will run out of huff about 21-23psi. My built 2.5L turbo ford with T3 @ 23psi made juist a hair over 300whp.
Not to get OT in this thread or not but the NA package I was working on is nothing more than a head swap and sold low-tech hotrodding. Think ITB's with full fuel and timing control and no ECU interference.
Not to get OT in this thread or not but the NA package I was working on is nothing more than a head swap and sold low-tech hotrodding. Think ITB's with full fuel and timing control and no ECU interference.
May-9th-2006, 11:29 AM
#11
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 42
Yeah, Mike is right. The T25 is out of it's efficiency range at 16psi and a T3 will run out of huff about 21-23psi. My built 2.5L turbo ford with T3 @ 23psi made juist a hair over 300whp.
Not to get OT in this thread or not but the NA package I was working on is nothing more than a head swap and sold low-tech hotrodding. Think ITB's with full fuel and timing control and no ECU interference.
Not to get OT in this thread or not but the NA package I was working on is nothing more than a head swap and sold low-tech hotrodding. Think ITB's with full fuel and timing control and no ECU interference.
Where can i get detailed information on the block makup?
May-9th-2006, 11:59 AM
#12
Moderator/ Pocket Tuner
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,150
what do you mean by block makeup ???
what specific info are you looking for ??? bore, stroke ?? cam profile ?? crank material ??
the material of the block is just cast iron as far as I know.....
what specific info are you looking for ??? bore, stroke ?? cam profile ?? crank material ??
the material of the block is just cast iron as far as I know.....
May-9th-2006, 02:12 PM
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 42
Yup. Everything on the engine. The makeup, the sizes all of it. From what I've read is that a 93 626 carries the same engine. Theres an import from Japan that does 170HP (Which still is very little) And that there are very little parts available for it.
What were they thinking in making such a non customizable engine? From everything else I knew about Mazda engines I always thought they were de-tuned from the factory and could handle a 100HP / ft-lb torque increase with no problems by adjusting a thing or two.
I did find a rather nice artical on the mazda3 concering the intake manifold and how it was similar to the Integra GSR with the respect that you could program the ECU for air / fuel ratios to give it a little less torque and a good amount of HP.
But there seems to be a front mount cat that is causeing some of my HP issues I guess. So I think in all it leaves me to see if I can change a part or two out. Switch the intake manifold setting, alter the ECU to handle one Cat and pass emissions and move to a 93 octane.
Wonder if that would get me to a good HP amount without forced induction.
What were they thinking in making such a non customizable engine? From everything else I knew about Mazda engines I always thought they were de-tuned from the factory and could handle a 100HP / ft-lb torque increase with no problems by adjusting a thing or two.
I did find a rather nice artical on the mazda3 concering the intake manifold and how it was similar to the Integra GSR with the respect that you could program the ECU for air / fuel ratios to give it a little less torque and a good amount of HP.
But there seems to be a front mount cat that is causeing some of my HP issues I guess. So I think in all it leaves me to see if I can change a part or two out. Switch the intake manifold setting, alter the ECU to handle one Cat and pass emissions and move to a 93 octane.
Wonder if that would get me to a good HP amount without forced induction.
May-9th-2006, 03:05 PM
#14
Moderator/ Pocket Tuner
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,150
Type
FS-DE
Displacement
1991cc
Cylinders
4
Valvetrain
DOHC 16 valve, direct shim over tappet actuation, timing belt
Horsepower
130hp @ 6000r/min (SAE net)
[MP3: 140hp @ 6000r/min (SAE net)]
Torque
135lbs/ft @ 4000r/min (SAE net)
[MP3: 142lbs/ft @ 4500r/min (SAE net)]
Bore & Stroke
83mm x 92mm
Compression Ratio
9.1:1
Induction Type
Natural
Redline
6500r/min
Alternator output
12V 80A
Ignition type
distributor-less coil pack
Fuel system
Multipoint EFI
Fuel injector rate
285ml/min
Manual Transmission type
G15M-R
Valve Timing
Intake cam duration
230° @ 0.003"
Intake cam opening
2° BTDC
Intake cam closing
48° ABDC
Intake cam lobe height
43.700mm (1.7205")
Intake cam base circle
35.052mm (1.380")
Intake valve lift
8.6487mm (0.3405")
Exhaust cam duration
230° @ 0.003"
Exhaust cam opening
48° BBDC
Exhaust cam closing
2° ATDC
Exhaust cam lobe height
43.225mm (1.7018")
Exhaust cam base circle
35.052mm (1.380")
Exhaust valve lift
8.1737mm (0.3218")
Valve overlap
4°
FS-DE
Displacement
1991cc
Cylinders
4
Valvetrain
DOHC 16 valve, direct shim over tappet actuation, timing belt
Horsepower
130hp @ 6000r/min (SAE net)
[MP3: 140hp @ 6000r/min (SAE net)]
Torque
135lbs/ft @ 4000r/min (SAE net)
[MP3: 142lbs/ft @ 4500r/min (SAE net)]
Bore & Stroke
83mm x 92mm
Compression Ratio
9.1:1
Induction Type
Natural
Redline
6500r/min
Alternator output
12V 80A
Ignition type
distributor-less coil pack
Fuel system
Multipoint EFI
Fuel injector rate
285ml/min
Manual Transmission type
G15M-R
Valve Timing
Intake cam duration
230° @ 0.003"
Intake cam opening
2° BTDC
Intake cam closing
48° ABDC
Intake cam lobe height
43.700mm (1.7205")
Intake cam base circle
35.052mm (1.380")
Intake valve lift
8.6487mm (0.3405")
Exhaust cam duration
230° @ 0.003"
Exhaust cam opening
48° BBDC
Exhaust cam closing
2° ATDC
Exhaust cam lobe height
43.225mm (1.7018")
Exhaust cam base circle
35.052mm (1.380")
Exhaust valve lift
8.1737mm (0.3218")
Valve overlap
4°