MAZDASPEED 3 CAI Gains Comparison Depot

[Speedy3]

Place all your before and after Cold Air Intake comparisons, including output results from wheel dynos, g-meters, SW Dynos, and whatever else you can come up with. The goal here is to compare CAIs price vs performance. Include any environmental data you have from the test.

No discussions in this thread please. Revert to one of the other threads on the brand of CAI to discuss results.

[Speedy3]

MAZDASPEED 3 Stock vs MAZDASPEED Cold Air Intake - 3rd Gear
MAZDASPEED CAI Cost $325.00

Dynojet Research Dynos were run on 2 different days. Dyno with MAZDASPEED CAI was run on 3-5-07 and Dyno with stock airbox was run on 3-6-07. Yes, I had to take off the MS CAI and re-install the stock hardware! Actually, I'm still stuck with the stock HW cause I don't have time to change it.

Dynojet Research Dyno on MAZDASPEED 3 in Stock Configuration

Ambient Temp=64 deg. F
Atmospheric Pressure=29.80 in-Hg
Humidity=50%
Correction Factor=SAE 0.98
2 Large Cooling Fans placed 5 ft. from front of car
Hood Closed
Runs in 3rd gear only
Runs started at about 2k RPM and stopped at about 6250 RPM.


Dynojet Research Dyno on MAZDASPEED 3 with MAZDASPEED CAI

Ambient Temp=63 deg. F
Atmospheric Pressure=29.90 in-Hg
Humidity=53%
Correction Factor=SAE 0.97
2 Large Cooling Fans placed 5 ft. from front of car
Hood Closed
Runs in 3rd gear only
Runs started at about 2k RPM and stopped at about 6250 RPM.


Results:

10.14% HP (24.2 HP)
10.28% Torque (24.8 ft-lbs)

[flyrevs]

Why 3rd gear instead of 4th?
Nice gains by the way!

[MS3TR]

Nice gains man, I will be going this saturday to see what my numbers are. I'll be sure post the results in here.











07 MS3 - True Red - Turboxs Hybrid BOV - Turboxs Race Pipe - MazdaSpeed CAI
RIP: 03 LS 350z - Injen Super SES - MSR 088's

[SwampAss]

mine


It's legit. My friend will back my story.

[Rotus8]

mine


It's legit. My friend will back my story.
Was that with the wing extended or retracted?

[flyrevs]

mine


It's legit. My friend will back my story. What kind of dyno was that done on? SwampDyne? (rofl2)

[bradicus18]

mine


It's legit. My friend will back my story.

Look at all that low end torque!!!

[C'ville]

Now how would the wing make any difference in the dyno result


Was that with the wing extended or retracted?
































J/K(crazy)

[meha11]

thats AP (ass power) not HP. LOL.

[Speedy3]

mine


It's legit. My friend will back my story.

Although very impressive and creditable looking, there are no y-axis lables so its eliminated. (wink)

[tsunami]

dear lord guys... (granted that is some funny shit) lets at least try to keep this thread on the topic of posting legit CAI info on the MS3... may wipe this up later if it causes trouble...

[ZoomRedZoomGT]

dear lord guys... (granted that is some funny shit) lets at least try to keep this thread on the topic of posting legit CAI info on the MS3... may wipe this up later if it causes trouble...


Man...I thought that was the best part of the thread. (gtfo)

[mattleegee]

I hope gains like this can be repeated over and over

thanks meng!

[justa4banger]

Why are you guys pulling in 3rd? or even 4th?Gear ratios (http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/11724/2007-mazdaspeed-3-specs-page4.html)

According to this spec sheet, 5th gear is the closest to 1:1 meaning that is the gear you should be using. this explains why my dyno numbers were alot lower than everyone elses. I guess in the end it doesn't matter as long as you use the same gear every time to test stuff. the numbers are just inflated.

[justa4banger]

Wait i just saw something on my own web link. why does it say 5-6 th have a different final drive than 1-4th?
Hmm anyone know?

[Rotus8]

Wait i just saw something on my own web link. why does it say 5-6 th have a different final drive than 1-4th?
Hmm anyone know?
OMG! You got the two speed rear end option!

[WagonMan]

Wait i just saw something on my own web link. why does it say 5-6 th have a different final drive than 1-4th?
Hmm anyone know?I thought this tranny had something funny that made the final drive for 1-4 different from 5-6.

[$inCitySpeed3]

Why are you guys pulling in 3rd? or even 4th?Gear ratios (http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/11724/2007-mazdaspeed-3-specs-page4.html)

According to this spec sheet, 5th gear is the closest to 1:1 meaning that is the gear you should be using. this explains why my dyno numbers were alot lower than everyone elses. I guess in the end it doesn't matter as long as you use the same gear every time to test stuff. the numbers are just inflated.no, you are right, when i owned my dyno(dynojet 224) you ALWAYS do it in the 1:1 that way you measure true horsepower, not gear power....All the kids would want it done in third cause there is a 5-20hp difference... Good to know that 5th is teh closest to 1:1....

[shark77]

Final-drive ratio: gears 1–4, 3.94:1; gears 5–6, 3.35:1

None of these equate anywhere near 1:1. 6th gear(the closest to a 1:1 ratio) has a torque multiplier of 0.85*3.35 = 1:2.85. Meaning that the engine turns 2.85 rotations for every 1 rotation the drive wheels turn.

Since dynojet's measure drum acceleraton and engine rpm (from ignition firing), mathmatically it should compute the same horsepower regardless of gear. With one exception... That being friction. Since the higher the torque multiplier, higher the friction coefficient. The example below demonstrates the frictional losses on a turbcharged VW R32 running through its first 5 gears. 1st and 2nd gear are quite low due to turbo spool-up, but you can see my point in gears 3,4, and 5. Where each one shows progressively more power. This is due to less friction from less torque mulitiplication.

http://www.eiptuning.com/eip/images/dyno_sheets/r32_turbo/s4/s4_fwd_multi_gear_01_800.jpg

Dynojet's work based on the time it takes to move the drum (fixed known inertia), and ignition firing to determine engine RPM. From that, software determines the torque multiplication at the wheels, and converts it into nice readable graphs.

While these measurements are taken from the wheel, it is important to remember that the actual torque at the wheels is much higher than what the graph states. Since its job is to factor out the gear amplification.

Example, say a MS3 dynojet graph shows a peak torque value of 280ft/lbs while being dyno'd in 4th gear. At the wheel, the actual torque meeting the drum is roughly 1290ft/lbs. This is down converted for the graph because the computer knows how many engine rotations were made during the time it accelerated the drum to record that amount.

Then based on that corrected torque number, the simple (torque*RPM)/5252 = Horsepower formula can be applied and plotted.

[camrycev6]

Here are my results MS CAI numbers. I don't have any stock numbers to compare it too, but there is pleny of stock data out there.

Max Power = 257.4
Max Torque = 271.9

@ 4.65 RPMS, A/F = 11.3

[Antoine]

Here are my results MS CAI numbers. I don't have any stock numbers to compare it too, but there is pleny of stock data out there.

Max Power = 257.4
Max Torque = 271.9

@ 4.65 RPMS, A/F = 11.3

Wow...That's just with the MS CAI? At the wheels right?

[camrycev6]

Yes sir....just the MS CAI, at the wheels....

[CTGrey02]

Can we see the graph.. particularly the one with the A/F bars if you have it.

[camrycev6]

Can we see the graph.. particularly the one with the A/F bars if you have it.

I do have it...but just in hard copy right now. The shop was supposed to send me the files today so I can use the Dynojet website. (BTW...I am not sure how that works, I have never done that before.) As soon as I get them, I will post them.

[CTGrey02]

You need to download Runviewer. My friend Jon setup this how-to... http://www.bristoldyno.com/info/database.htm

[camrycev6]

You need to download Runviewer. My friend Jon setup this how-to... http://www.bristoldyno.com/info/database.htm

Thanks. I just called the place where I had the dyno. They said they would be sending me the files shortly. That was an hour ago. I am going to give them a little while longer.

[MS3TR]

I have this posted in its own thread and figured I should also place in this Group Dyno Thread. (cheers2)

Well, finally got on the dyno, it was a lot of fun. Final results were 230WHP and 270TQ. I knew before hand the nose dive after 5600 rpms and that this thing runs pig rich. Seeing the graphs first hand makes it very apparent that with a good tune this thing will make a lots more power just by leaning it out. Check out the heat soak issue after my initial first run (top lines are HP, lower lines are TQ), definitely need a larger TMIC or FMIT setup in the future. The guys at Hot Rod Imports really spent time explaining everything they were doing and I learned a lot. I hope to be back soon.

This was done on a Dyno Dynamics machine. The Dyno Dynamics dyno reads lower than the Mustang dyno, it reads WAY lower than a Dyno Jet. It also reads WAY lower than a Dynapack. The important factor is that this dyno is very accurate. Going with the other dyno's would have printed much higher readings but I would rather have accuracy than bragging rights.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y214/computersupport/dynoc.jpg
BOOST GRAPH
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y214/computersupport/boostlevelsc.jpg
I pieced this video together of a few runs, graphs and a test drive at the end. I will record a few more videos once I receive the Turboxs CBE and downpipe, probably take another hit at the dyno as well (lol2)


Here is the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7oE2DM1-sQ

07 MS3 - True Red - Turboxs Race Pipe - MazdaSpeed CAI - 230WHP/270TQ
RIP: 03 LS 350z - Injen Super SES - MSR 088's

[Speedy3]

If you guys have them available or can have them done, we really want to see the before dynos too on each car to compare the gains. Please post before dynos if you have them, if not, thanks for the data anyways. What I was really trying to show on this thread is the gains of the MS CAI. Because every machine and environmental parameters are different for everyone, final dynos will vary too much to get a good estimate of the gains of the MS CAI.

Lets keep the data rolling in regardless of whether you have the before and after data!

Also, if you can get A/F ratio test results in the dyno runs, please do. I know it costs considerably more money to have it done, so I don't blame you for not. (i didn't want to spend an extra $150 to have it done!)

[CTGrey02]

it's like 10 bucks more to have it done where I go. All they do is put a sniffer in the pipe or in the O2 bung. With SAE Correction running, all the dyno's should be similar. Thats the whole reason dyno's are used for benchmarking. Just for giggles though I'll do a before when mines broken in.

[camrycev6]

If you guys have them available or can have them done, we really want to see the before dynos too on each car to compare the gains. Please post before dynos if you have them, if not, thanks for the data anyways. What I was really trying to show on this thread is the gains of the MS CAI. Because every machine and environmental parameters are different for everyone, final dynos will vary too much to get a good estimate of the gains of the MS CAI.

Lets keep the data rolling in regardless of whether you have the before and after data!

Also, if you can get A/F ratio test results in the dyno runs, please do. I know it costs considerably more money to have it done, so I don't blame you for not. (i didn't want to spend an extra $150 to have it done!)

I will have my A/F data to share shortly. (I still am waiting on the damn file to be emailed to me.) They didn't charge me extra for it either. $100 for 3 pulls. (Most other guys wanted about $200.) Other places wanted $75 for 3 pulls, but there was no A/F data with that.

[CTGrey02]

yeah, it's 50 for 3 pulls here + 10 for A/F. We're lucky out here I guess.

[camrycev6]

I laughed at the guys that wanted $200. That is just ridiculously high.

[Speedy3]

it's like 10 bucks more to have it done where I go. All they do is put a sniffer in the pipe or in the O2 bung. With SAE Correction running, all the dyno's should be similar. Thats the whole reason dyno's are used for benchmarking. Just for giggles though I'll do a before when mines broken in.

Thanks!

[camrycev6]

I saw the whole setup myself and was there for the actual runs. Man...does she spit out a lot of exhaust! Way more than my S/C G35. From what I read here on other threads, the rich mix / turbo combo makes that fairly common. I have never owned a turbo 4-cyl before. Maybe it is normal for all of them.

[camrycev6]

I finally have all my data.... Let me try to post these... If you want the raw files (I have three runs) or other forms of data, just let me know!

[maestro]

I finally have all my data.... Let me try to post these... If you want the raw files (I have three runs) or other forms of data, just let me know!

Are these stock or with an MS CAI that is in your sig?

[Speedy3]

I finally have all my data.... Let me try to post these... If you want the raw files (I have three runs) or other forms of data, just let me know!

Can you post before charts too and label them or specify in the thread accordingly? Thanks again! Great data!

[camrycev6]

Maestro, these are with the MS CAI installed.

Speedy, unfortunately, as I mentioned in a previous thread, I did not have time to get my car dyno'ed when it was still stock. I realize I cannot give percentage gains over my original configuration (stock), but at least I have some final numbers to provide. I have all the humidity, temperature, etc., data, so we can certainly get an idea of the environmentals when comparing to another stock pull. I have the software and can plot just about anything you guys would like. Just let me know....like the A/F mix. Notice it goes below 10 (off the graph) I have no idea how low it actually went... interesting.

[CTGrey02]

You were also using SAE correction so those environmental stats shouldn't matter. That thing is still rediculously rich. I was just at the dyno yesterday helping a friend with a supercharged 05 V6 stang and his A/f was almost a perfect 11.5 (still pretty rich but generally regarded as safe) across the entire RPM range. These cars really need a better tune.

[maestro]

Maestro, these are with the MS CAI installed.

Speedy, unfortunately, as I mentioned in a previous thread, I did not have time to get my car dyno'ed when it was still stock. I realize I cannot give percentage gains over my original configuration (stock), but at least I have some final numbers to provide. I have all the humidity, temperature, etc., data, so we can certainly get an idea of the environmentals when comparing to another stock pull. I have the software and can plot just about anything you guys would like. Just let me know....like the A/F mix. Notice it goes below 10 (off the graph) I have no idea how low it actually went... interesting.

That's what I thought, just needed to be sure. Thanks

[dread]

The A/F ratio is all over the place. I can't believe how lean it is in the lower rpms and how rich it is up high. Thanks for the graphs.

[CTGrey02]

The A/F ratio is all over the place. I can't believe how lean it is in the lower rpms and how rich it is up high. Thanks for the graphs.

It always is. Doesn't matter which car you use, if your using a tail pipe sniffer it's going to look similar at lower RPM. Putting the O2 Sensor in the O2 bung up front will read a slightly richer A/F down in the lower RPM range but across the rest of the tune it's it's going to look identical. Conclusion there - not worth the trouble to place it in the bung on most cars.

http://www.bristoldyno.com/tech/airfuel.htm

http://www.bristoldyno.com/uploads/o2sensor.jpg

I was there for those dyno runs. That was a supercharged 02 GT with weak injectors, probably 370 hp at the wheels if I remember correctly.

[jflash]

i guess i should have looked for this thread first.

http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3067317#post3067317


http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y5/jflash_zx3/speed3/afterdyno.jpg

[camrycev6]

jflash,

I am confused by your signature file. Are you saying your stock dyno numbers are 272hp and 287tq? That is more at the wheels than the car does stock at the crank. What gives?

[shark77]

Dynapack = at the hub

[chaos4]

Here are my dyno results. Also on a Dyno Dynamics machine. I hope the size is not too large for this post. Note only mod is MS3 CAI.

[BlackJack]

Here are my dyno results. Also on a Dyno Dynamics machine. I hope the size is not too large for this post. Note only mod is MS3 CAI.

Interpretation of the Dyno? It can't be 239.0 max HP as I'm seeing another line going up to ~280HP or is that the TQ?

[SwampAss]

judging by the fact it intersects @ 5250..I'll wager torque

[jflash]

jflash,

I am confused by your signature file. Are you saying your stock dyno numbers are 272hp and 287tq? That is more at the wheels than the car does stock at the crank. What gives?

they take off the front wheels and attach the dyno to the hubs. i know the dyno sheet says flywheel but it is at the hubs. i thought it was adding hp to guess the flywheel hp but the dyno guy said its not.

i know to most these numbers seem high or fudged. the dyno guys were floored by the results.

in a comparison, when i did my stock dyno they were finishing up a WRX. it had upgraded turbo,injectors,ecu tuning,full tbe and intake. it put down 271 on the same dyno.

[shark77]

I was a little bored this afternoon, so I scoured the net for as many dyno's on the MS3 as I could find. From those I decided to use just dynojet dyno's to do a little statistical analysis. I analyzed those that were stock and those that only had a CAI. Here is what I found...

I used data from the point the car first made 200ft/lbs and when it dropped below 200ft/lbs. I also compiled data on the max horsepower and the RPM in occurred at.

Stock

Average peak horsepower was 242whp @ 5600rpm

Average Crossed 200ft/lbs at 2800rpm and then at 5700rpm

CAI

Average peak horsepower was 260whp @ 5600rpm

Average Crossed 200ft/lbs at 2800rpm and then at 6100rpm

[Boother]

jflash,

I am confused by your signature file. Are you saying your stock dyno numbers are 272hp and 287tq? That is more at the wheels than the car does stock at the crank. What gives?

Because of the spike at the end of the run, which was likely a hiccup with the throttleplate. It is NOT an accurate run, and the dyno operator should have done another run to "backup" the numbers with repeatable ones.

The exact same thing happened on his intake run, but at the lower rpm. It goes to show how peak numbers really do not give a good indication of actual output.

[jflash]

ok. so lets see your dynos. what type of dyno do you operate? mabye i should have used the butt dyno like everyone else.

here are all the stock dynos. the exact same thing happened on all 3 runs.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y5/jflash_zx3/speed3/mazdaspeed3dyno.jpg

[Ferdball]

Are you ready for a dissapointing run? This is with a Mazdaspeed CAI.

[RPI-Speed3]

You were also using SAE correction so those environmental stats shouldn't matter. That thing is still rediculously rich. I was just at the dyno yesterday helping a friend with a supercharged 05 V6 stang and his A/f was almost a perfect 11.5 (still pretty rich but generally regarded as safe) across the entire RPM range. These cars really need a better tune.

Unfortunately this is seeming to become a pattern with Mazda factory tunes as of late. They did the same thing with the RX-8. Stock tunes above 7000 rpms go off the bottom of the charts. The first tune I did on my RX-8 I had to lean it out over 13% just to get the values on the scale (software didn't read an AFR below 10:1). Now, on the RX-8 one of the reasons they did this was due to the new CAT laws (which also attributed to why MNAO had to restate the HP numbers for the RX-8). I believe starting in 2003/2004 the government mandated CATs needed to last somewhere near 120k miles where before it was around 80k. By making it run rich up high, the unburnt fuel got dumped out the exhaust ports to cool the CAT substrate (not unusual to see exhaust temps of over 2000 degrees on an RX-8, track days up near 2500 degrees). In some cars, leaning out the AFR netted 30-40 rwhp, and this is on an NA engine.

I'm wondering in Mazda's testing if they found the exhaust temps produced by the 2.3 DISI Turbo motor were on the higher end and would wear the CAT sooner than normal. The rich tune is why people are going to see large gains on CAIs. Any increased airflow will lead to a leaner mixture, which any leaner mix on this car will produce sizable gains.

[maczter]

Are you ready for a dissapointing run? This is with a Mazdaspeed CAI.

Looks about right to me.

I'd also like to know for dyno results submitted in this thread (past and future) if the hood was opened or closed during the dyno runs and which gear the runs were done in. I went to a dyno day this weekend and one of the other guys with a Mazdaspeed 3 dynoed his car on the Dyno Dynamics dyno and it showed right around 200 HP at the wheels with the hood open. We were puzzled but I didn't think about the hood open or close thing until after his car was off the dyno. He was also using 5th gear.

When I get around to putting mine on the dyno, I'll be sure and do some runs with the hood closed and some with the hood open to see how much difference it makes, though I suspect it made a big difference in his runs since the hood was open and the only fan running was a small one blowing on the radiator.

[bustanut]

did u guys reinstall the tire shroud right inbetween the wheel and the intake? ive had mine off since the install, just wondering because a lot of the pictures ive seen have been without it.....

[blue2turbo]

Other then power/torque, how much of an MPG difference does this intake make? Does anyone have that information from their experience?

[camrycev6]

I have been running consistenly between 24-24.5 MPG. I run about 60% / 40% HWY / CTY driving...

[jhowey]

It helps with fuel mileage some, I am still only averaging 21.7 mpg i have 1800 miles on mine but my miles are 90 city/traffic, and 10% open freeway. Plus I drive hard almost all the time

[jflash]

the longer you drive the more the mpg goes up. at first it was around 20. now its up to 24(3000 miles). i drive it harder now then when i first got it.

[camrycev6]

Well it would have to stop going up at some point.... there is no way it is a linear progression. (Log. maybe...)

Mine was always around 24 BTW. I have been checking the MPG before and after the CAI and nothing really changed in the 2300 miles on the car...

[bast525]

just over 1000 mi on mine and I'm averagine like 18 mpg. I know it does tend to go up after the motor breaks in... my SRT was getting like 18ish at first but was getting about 22-23 by the time I traded it in with 16k miles on it.

MS CAI going in this weekend SUHWEEEEEEEEEEEEET!!!!

I hope I get as good results as you guys are... I should really be able to notice the difference right?

[Ferdball]

just over 1000 mi on mine and I'm averagine like 18 mpg. I know it does tend to go up after the motor breaks in... my SRT was getting like 18ish at first but was getting about 22-23 by the time I traded it in with 16k miles on it.

MS CAI going in this weekend SUHWEEEEEEEEEEEEET!!!!

I hope I get as good results as you guys are... I should really be able to notice the difference right?
Yup. I did, right after install. Don't forget that you'll hear the turbo and bov a lot more. I thought I had a hose loose.

[maczter]

Here are my dyno results. Also on a Dyno Dynamics machine. I hope the size is not too large for this post. Note only mod is MS3 CAI.

What gear was this dyno run done in and was the hood open or closed?

[Speedy3]

....I'd also like to know for dyno results submitted in this thread (past and future) if the hood was opened or closed during the dyno runs and which gear the runs were done in. .....

I made it a point when doing my before and after dynos, to do half with the hood open and half with the hood closed. My runs were in 3rd gear, because that is my favorite gear in this car! I just installed brand new plugs. 2 large fans were blowing on the front of the car about 5 feet away. I will post all of them as soon as I get home and get a chance to arrange the graphs. Specific environmental parameters are at the bottom.

I was surprised by the difference in output with the hood closed vs open. I had much higher gains with the hood closed with the MS CAI installed, but very little difference in the stock config.. Here are the peak numbers (btw, most of this data is in the first post in this thread minus the hood open data):

Stock
Hood Open:
HP: 237.49 (@5575),T: 238.60 (@4469)
Hood Closed:
HP: 239.01 (@5575), T: 241.25 (@4325)

Hood Open vs Closed Improvements
0.6% HP gain, 1.1% T gain

With MS CAI
Hood Open:
HP: 248.35 (@5525), T: 259.81 (@4375)
Hood Closed:
HP: 263.23 (@5525), T: 266.06 (@4700)

Hood Open vs Closed Improvements
6.0% HP gain, 2.4% T gain

Overall Gains
Hood Open:
HP: 4.6%, T: 8.9%

Hood Closed:
HP: 10.14%, T: 10.28%

Environmental Parameters

Dynojet Research Dyno on MAZDASPEED 3 in Stock Configuration

Ambient Temp=64 deg. F
Atmospheric Pressure=29.80 in-Hg
Humidity=50%
Correction Factor=SAE 0.98
2 Large Cooling Fans placed 5 ft. from front of car
Hood Open for 2 runs, Closed for 2 runs
Runs in 3rd gear only
Runs started at about 2k RPM and stopped at about 6250 RPM.


Dynojet Research Dyno on MAZDASPEED 3 with MAZDASPEED CAI

Ambient Temp=63 deg. F
Atmospheric Pressure=29.90 in-Hg
Humidity=53%
Correction Factor=SAE 0.97
2 Large Cooling Fans placed 5 ft. from front of car
Hood Open for 2 runs, Closed for 2 runs
Runs in 3rd gear only
Runs started at about 2k RPM and stopped at about 6250 RPM.

[dread]

This car should be dyno'd in fifth because that is closest to a 1:1 ratio. Most people dyno in 4th, and avoid third because it is electronically limited.

[camrycev6]

Third is not electronically limited from what I read. Only 1st and 2nd are.

[desperado-c]

Third is not electronically limited from what I read. Only 1st and 2nd are.

My boost gauge says otherwise. In 3rd I don't get more than 14 psi after the initial spike even on the steepest hills. Also, there's throttle reduction in gears 1-4 per testing done by AMS and CPE, IIRC.

Speedy, why 3rd anyway? It's a 6 speed.

[gsrtype1]

thanks for the dyno thread 3 GEAR EXACTLY, you don't get full power till 3rd, Automobile magazine came up with 216hp but they averaged the gears, 1st and 2nd you only getiing 72% to 89 percent power!

[camrycev6]

Again, I don't know about what the boost guages are saying, but multiple magazines and the dealers all say the same thing. 1st / 2nd are limited, but not third.

[bast525]

hmmm I seem to remember Automobile mag saying 3rd was limited as well to like 92%

At any rate, with EVERY turbo car I've owned (MS3 being my fourth), you will see more boost in higher gears. Even on older turbo cars that use NO computer controlled boost. Even on the SRT when I took the computer out of the loop by installing a manual boost controller

Higher gear = higher load = more boost

I have seen this on every turbocharged car I've owned. On average, the cars would all boost .5-1 more psi of boost in each higher gear.

SRT-4 with manual boost controller for example... would only peak 13psi in first gear, but in 5th it would peak 17-18psi. Again, with absolutely NO computer control. Just boost line from the turbo, run through the MBC, directly to the wastegate actuator.

[jflash]

that could explain why my stock dyno was quite a bit higher than the others here. my runs were in 5th. its closest to 1:1.

[desperado-c]

hmmm I seem to remember Automobile mag saying 3rd was limited as well to like 92%

At any rate, with EVERY turbo car I've owned (MS3 being my fourth), you will see more boost in higher gears. Even on older turbo cars that use NO computer controlled boost. Even on the SRT when I took the computer out of the loop by installing a manual boost controller

Higher gear = higher load = more boost

I have seen this on every turbocharged car I've owned. On average, the cars would all boost .5-1 more psi of boost in each higher gear.

SRT-4 with manual boost controller for example... would only peak 13psi in first gear, but in 5th it would peak 17-18psi. Again, with absolutely NO computer control. Just boost line from the turbo, run through the MBC, directly to the wastegate actuator.

Definitely load-based. That's why I ran it up some really steep hills in 3rd, to see whether under the higher engine load it would run up to the 5th/6th gear max of approx. 16 psi on the flats. Totally unscientific, but it doesn't seem to want to settle on anything higher than 14 psi in 3rd. 4th also seems lower than 16 psi, but it's harder to find a steep hill I can run in 4th for any length of time.

[maczter]

Interesting.

So now we know that keeping the hood closed (as long as fans are going) does, in fact, produce more power (as suspected).

I guess now we just need to figure out which gear is truly closest to 1:1. 5th or 6th?

[jflash]

5th is 1.09:1
6th is .85:1

the dyno operator told me he wouldnt be able to do a 6th gear run as it would cut out before redline.

[maczter]

5th is 1.09:1
6th is .85:1

the dyno operator told me he wouldnt be able to do a 6th gear run as it would cut out before redline.


good point. thanks!

[camrycev6]

hmmm I seem to remember Automobile mag saying 3rd was limited as well to like 92%

At any rate, with EVERY turbo car I've owned (MS3 being my fourth), you will see more boost in higher gears. Even on older turbo cars that use NO computer controlled boost. Even on the SRT when I took the computer out of the loop by installing a manual boost controller

Higher gear = higher load = more boost

I have seen this on every turbocharged car I've owned. On average, the cars would all boost .5-1 more psi of boost in each higher gear.

SRT-4 with manual boost controller for example... would only peak 13psi in first gear, but in 5th it would peak 17-18psi. Again, with absolutely NO computer control. Just boost line from the turbo, run through the MBC, directly to the wastegate actuator.

Motortrend, Nov 2006 - "....Launching the Mazda, on the other hand, required a low-RPM dop of around 1000 rpm and, because the torque-management system cuts torque under full throttle in first and second gears, short-shifting at 6000."

Automobile, Nov 2006 - "In first, you're allowed 72 to 79 percent of the maximum torque (depending on steering angle. In second, your allowed 77 to 92 percent. The full load comes through in third through sixth gears."

I think this takes care of this one. 1st and 2nd limited torque...3rd and up you have it all.

[bast525]

Motortrend, Nov 2006 - "....Launching the Mazda, on the other hand, required a low-RPM dop of around 1000 rpm and, because the torque-management system cuts torque under full throttle in first and second gears, short-shifting at 6000."

Automobile, Nov 2006 - "In first, you're allowed 72 to 79 percent of the maximum torque (depending on steering angle. In second, your allowed 77 to 92 percent. The full load comes through in third through sixth gears."

I think this takes care of this one. 1st and 2nd limited torque...3rd and up you have it all.

I wasn't arguing it, just said I thought I remember that. I do remember reading SOMEWHERE (maybe SCC?) about limiting in third as well. But that wasn't my point. My point was in reply to someone saying they saw less boost in 3rd than in 4th and up. And I was saying, this is normal. I've seen this on ALL turbocharged cars, whether they had a computer controlling the boost levels, or a simple ball-and-spring valve set manually with no computer control. I ALWAYS see higher boost in higher gears.

[Speedy3]

Interesting.

So now we know that keeping the hood closed (as long as fans are going) does, in fact, produce more power (as suspected).

I guess now we just need to figure out which gear is truly closest to 1:1. 5th or 6th?

None. I used OBDII data and Auterra DynoScan SW to determine the gear ratios for each gear between the crankshaft and the tires. Here are the results:

1st Gear: 14.384
2nd Gear:9.060
3rd Gear: 6.173
4th Gear: 4.731
5th Gear: 3.730
6th Gear: 2.930

This is as accurate as you can get, based my tires. More tire wear, the lower the number. My tires had about 4K miles on them when I measured this.

[Rotus8]

None. I used OBDII data and Auterra DynoScan SW to determine the gear ratios for each gear between the crankshaft and the tires. Here are the results:

1st Gear: 14.384
2nd Gear:9.060
3rd Gear: 6.173
4th Gear: 4.731
5th Gear: 3.730
6th Gear: 2.930

This is as accurate as you can get, based my tires. More tire wear, the lower the number. My tires had about 4K miles on them when I measured this.
Tires have nothing to do with it. The gear ratio is the relationship of the engine RPM to the wheel speed as measured by the ABS sensors. I don't know which wheel is used, or if there is some averaging going on. The most correct would be the average of the driving wheels. The OBDII knows nothing about actual road speed.

[camrycev6]

I wasn't arguing it, just said I thought I remember that. I do remember reading SOMEWHERE (maybe SCC?) about limiting in third as well. But that wasn't my point. My point was in reply to someone saying they saw less boost in 3rd than in 4th and up. And I was saying, this is normal. I've seen this on ALL turbocharged cars, whether they had a computer controlling the boost levels, or a simple ball-and-spring valve set manually with no computer control. I ALWAYS see higher boost in higher gears.
__________________
'07 Mazdaspeed 3, red, MS CAI only mod for now

SOLD: '05 Dodge SRT-4 (yes, a Neon), red, lightly modded

SRT-4 interiors are teh slow :P

Second toy: '07 Civic Si coupe (wife's car), red (the funny thing is I really don't like red....), stock (for now).

I know Bast. Sorry if I came across harsh...wasn't trying too.

[bast525]

Trust me I much rather prefer if 3rd gear is NOT limited... definately better for all of us :D

[camrycev6]

True...true... I let my friend (he is a DC cop) drive it for the first time last night. He has taken several professional driving courses, so I know he could really handle the car. I told him to open it up and have some fun. He was grinning from ear to ear....he loved the car.

[jflash]

i think this came up on the other forum. im pretty sure GT1 had scanning software that showed some limiting in 3rd.

[chuci]

Was that with the wing extended or retracted?
it was with the neon turned on and the NOs sticker on the bumper...

[Speedy3]

Tires have nothing to do with it. The gear ratio is the relationship of the engine RPM to the wheel speed as measured by the ABS sensors. I don't know which wheel is used, or if there is some averaging going on. The most correct would be the average of the driving wheels. The OBDII knows nothing about actual road speed.

Ah, Rotus, Rotus....As the tires wear, the numbers will change. Smaller circumference, faster they turn with the same engine RPM. Come on buddy, I know SW Engineering curriculum doesn't include dynamics, but you should have caught this!

This brings up a question I wanted to ask, but I don't want to sabotage this thread.

Does the ECU use the front tires, rear tires, all tires or the drive train to measure the speed that is reported on the OBDII?

(drinks)

[Rotus8]

Ah, Rotus, Rotus....As the tires wear, the numbers will change. Smaller circumference, faster they turn with the same engine RPM. Come on buddy, I know SW Engineering curriculum doesn't include dynamics, but you should have caught this!
No, no, no. The engine turns the tranny and each gear has a fixed ratio to the output shaft. The output shaft of the trans has a fixed ratio to the axles. The axles are connected to the ABS wheel speed sensors. Done. No tires involved. The OBDII has no idea of the road speed which will be affected by the tires.
This brings up a question I wanted to ask, but I don't want to sabotage this thread.

Does the ECU use the front tires, rear tires, all tires or the drive train to measure the speed that is reported on the OBDII?

(drinks)
Good question about what the ECU uses; I was thinking about this myself earlier. Only the software geek who wrote it knows for sure. I would hope it is the average of the fronts. I can imagine an experiment with a couple of jack stands...

[maczter]

Hmmm...looks like I'm going to have to try and get some official numbers from Mazda. There are way too many widely differing ratios being thrown around.

They obviously can't all be right. :)

[Rotus8]

From the service Manual
Gear Ratio Final Drive Combined
1 3.538 3.941 13.943
2 2.238 3.941 8.820
3 1.535 3.941 6.049
4 1.171 3.941 4.615
5 1.085 3.350 3.635
6 0.853 3.350 2.876
R 3.831 3.350 12.834

And yes, due to the construction of the transmission, the final drive ratio is different between 1-4 and 5,6,R.

There is no room for variability here; these are gears, you count the teeth and divide.

[maczter]

From the service Manual
Gear Ratio Final Drive Combined
1 3.538 3.941 13.943
2 2.238 3.941 8.820
3 1.535 3.941 6.049
4 1.171 3.941 4.615
5 1.085 3.350 3.635
6 0.853 3.350 2.876
R 3.831 3.350 12.834

And yes, due to the construction of the transmission, the final drive ratio is different between 1-4 and 5,6,R.

There is no room for variability here; these are gears, you count the teeth and divide.

works for me.

actually, speedy3's derived numbers weren't too far off the real numbers. good info to have and might explain why my friend's MS3 dynoed only 200 HP at the wheels. i believe since they didn't know gear ratios, they just input it as 1:1 and used 5th gear. :P

1st Gear: 14.384
2nd Gear:9.060
3rd Gear: 6.173
4th Gear: 4.731
5th Gear: 3.730
6th Gear: 2.930

[Speedy3]

No, no, no. The engine turns the tranny and each gear has a fixed ratio to the output shaft. The output shaft of the trans has a fixed ratio to the axles. The axles are connected to the ABS wheel speed sensors. Done. No tires involved. The OBDII has no idea of the road speed which will be affected by the tires....

I did take Dynamics.....But I stand corrected. (hand) You Rock! (yippy)

Good question about what the ECU uses; I was thinking about this myself earlier. Only the software geek who wrote it knows for sure. I would hope it is the average of the fronts. I can imagine an experiment with a couple of jack stands...

If it is just off the front, then the dyno feature of Auterra Dyno-scan is not going to be accurate with all the wheel spin we get, especially with the acceleration test.

[desperado-c]

Motortrend, Nov 2006 - "....Launching the Mazda, on the other hand, required a low-RPM dop of around 1000 rpm and, because the torque-management system cuts torque under full throttle in first and second gears, short-shifting at 6000."

Automobile, Nov 2006 - "In first, you're allowed 72 to 79 percent of the maximum torque (depending on steering angle. In second, your allowed 77 to 92 percent. The full load comes through in third through sixth gears."

I think this takes care of this one. 1st and 2nd limited torque...3rd and up you have it all.

Sure, if you believe every word printed by the mags is the gospel and written in stone. Also, that may refer only to boost being limited by the waste gate. The MS3 also limits power and boost by reducing throttle angle. This definitely takes place in 3rd and probably takes place in 4th as well. Check out the AMS thread on Mazda Three Forums MS section for documentation. CPE has also documented this and will only release their piggy back with a 2nd gen board that can control it as an additional factor.

Someone else (a Mazda dealer tech, I think) pointed out that limiting throttle angle is a good way to limit power because it keeps the turbo spooled up. Nevertheless it is a limit on power. So you're not getting 100% in 3rd-4th. Definitely not all the time. The limitations may simply depend on wheel angle to counter torque steer, but they are definitely there.

[camrycev6]

I was basing my power quotes on a straight line. If you are not turning at the time, you get 100% of your power in third.

And no, I don't believe everything I read, but I could also quote two more magazines that say the same thing. If you don't believe ANYTHING you read, nor trust multiple respected sources, then you could never trust anything but personal experience. Since I have neither the time nor equipment to test this myself, I am going to have to go with what multiple experts have stated. I will take my chances.

[desperado-c]

I was basing my power quotes on a straight line. If you are not turning at the time, you get 100% of your power in third.

.... Since I have neither the time nor equipment to test this myself, I am going to have to go with what multiple experts have stated. I will take my chances.

Sure, rely on the magazine writers if you wish. But, since most of us have neither the time nor the equipment to test things ourselves, here's some data and commentary provided by AMS regarding throttle angle and boost anomalies they noticed during their tests:

http://media.ams-evo8.com/pictures/uploader/images/36648Test3baselinesTP.JPG

If you take a look at what is going on above you can see a very erratic red line. If you take a look at the key on the left hand side you will see that this red line corresponds to the throttle position angle. Notice, this is not the throttle position from inside the car, this is the actual throttle valve position, as controlled by the ecu. For this entire run, the throttle pedal inside the car is being held to the floor. The yellow line indicates boost pressure and the green the RPM range. At what appears to be about 2000 RPM the throttle valve closes rapidly to about 50% holds there until full boost, which is just after 3200 RPM. ....

.... As can be clearly seen, throttle angle is tapering off and the line directly above it, boost pressure, is following suit. .... The boost pressure would most likely drop in the higher RPMs anyways, but it would also most likely follow the trend in-between the RPM ranges of 3200 and 5000 RPMS, dropping to something slightly over 12 or 13 psi most likely. A stock Speed3 drops the boost pressure all the way to 5lbs by the end of the run! ....

Presumably this data was obtained during a 4th gear run on the dyno (ie., with the wheels straight). So who ya gonna believe, the car mag writers (who are probably just regurgitating what Mazda has told them) or your lying eyes?

[chaos4]

What gear was this dyno run done in and was the hood open or closed?
3rd gear, hood open, fan blowing at 50mph direct at grill.(friday)

[camrycev6]

Sure, rely on the magazine writers if you wish. But, since most of us have neither the time nor the equipment to test things ourselves, here's some data and commentary provided by AMS regarding throttle angle and boost anomalies they noticed during their tests:

http://media.ams-evo8.com/pictures/uploader/images/36648Test3baselinesTP.JPG

If you take a look at what is going on above you can see a very erratic red line. If you take a look at the key on the left hand side you will see that this red line corresponds to the throttle position angle. Notice, this is not the throttle position from inside the car, this is the actual throttle valve position, as controlled by the ecu. For this entire run, the throttle pedal inside the car is being held to the floor. The yellow line indicates boost pressure and the green the RPM range. At what appears to be about 2000 RPM the throttle valve closes rapidly to about 50% holds there until full boost, which is just after 3200 RPM. ....

.... As can be clearly seen, throttle angle is tapering off and the line directly above it, boost pressure, is following suit. .... The boost pressure would most likely drop in the higher RPMs anyways, but it would also most likely follow the trend in-between the RPM ranges of 3200 and 5000 RPMS, dropping to something slightly over 12 or 13 psi most likely. A stock Speed3 drops the boost pressure all the way to 5lbs by the end of the run! ....

Presumably this data was obtained during a 4th gear run on the dyno (ie., with the wheels straight). So who ya gonna believe, the car mag writers (who are probably just regurgitating what Mazda has told them) or your lying eyes?

I appreciate the data. I will have to take some time to consider it. I do want to point out that boost pressure is not the only factor to determine overall power. You have to consider the A/F mix, rotational velocities, etc. I could have lower boost pressure is some cases and still make more power. So just saying that boost pressure was lowered doesn't necessarily make the conclusion obvious. Speaking of that, I wasn't sure of your conclusion based on the data.

Are you saying that the car constantly modifies the available power in all gears? Why wouldn't you have all of your available power in 4th? (Assuming you aren't turning or the wheels are slipping...aka traction control kicks in...)

[smoknspeed3]

Ok, ok, I'm pretty good with mods and understanding most stuff related to cars but for the love of god! Speak English! What is the bottom line with the CAI? Good investment? Not worth the money? I built up my previous car with everything except FI. And to get more then 5 whp was a good gain. 20 hp average is damn good for $300. Also why doesn't Mazda just reflash the damn ECU if it runs so rich? The SVT Focus had a factory reflash that solved a ton of problems. I just bought my MS3 and I can tell the suker runs rich as hell the damn tail pipe is black after 100 miles.

[camrycev6]

The CAIs for the MS3 are worth it. There are several dynos on here if you do a search. I went up about 25 HP when I added my MS CAI. (And yes...I did a dyno.)

[smoknspeed3]

The CAIs for the MS3 are worth it. There are several dynos on here if you do a search. I went up about 25 HP when I added my MS CAI. (And yes...I did a dyno.)


Did a search, man I have read so many dynos on this my eyes hurt. LOL The only reason I asked is there seemed to be a a lot of arguing and no real wrap up post saying this is the real results.

[TorqSpeed5252]

Final-drive ratio: gears 1–4, 3.94:1; gears 5–6, 3.35:1

None of these equate anywhere near 1:1. 6th gear(the closest to a 1:1 ratio) has a torque multiplier of 0.85*3.35 = 1:2.85. Meaning that the engine turns 2.85 rotations for every 1 rotation the drive wheels turn.

Since dynojet's measure drum acceleraton and engine rpm (from ignition firing), mathmatically it should compute the same horsepower regardless of gear. With one exception... That being friction. Since the higher the torque multiplier, higher the friction coefficient. The example below demonstrates the frictional losses on a turbcharged VW R32 running through its first 5 gears. 1st and 2nd gear are quite low due to turbo spool-up, but you can see my point in gears 3,4, and 5. Where each one shows progressively more power. This is due to less friction from less torque mulitiplication.

http://www.eiptuning.com/eip/images/dyno_sheets/r32_turbo/s4/s4_fwd_multi_gear_01_800.jpg

Dynojet's work based on the time it takes to move the drum (fixed known inertia), and ignition firing to determine engine RPM. From that, software determines the torque multiplication at the wheels, and converts it into nice readable graphs.

While these measurements are taken from the wheel, it is important to remember that the actual torque at the wheels is much higher than what the graph states. Since its job is to factor out the gear amplification.

Example, say a MS3 dynojet graph shows a peak torque value of 280ft/lbs while being dyno'd in 4th gear. At the wheel, the actual torque meeting the drum is roughly 1290ft/lbs. This is down converted for the graph because the computer knows how many engine rotations were made during the time it accelerated the drum to record that amount.

Then based on that corrected torque number, the simple (torque*RPM)/5252 = Horsepower formula can be applied and plotted.

I love that formula!!!

[Jesse MS3GT]

Red is stock.
Green has a CPE CAI(me).
Blue has a MS CAI and Turbo XS race pipe.

[staples187]

I must have missed something, what is the best gear to run a dyno in for these cars?

[camrycev6]

3rd and up.... 1st and 2nd are electronically limited...

[jflash]

5th

[Infantrylowlife]

Ok i went to the track yesterday for the first time with the CAI and i ran the same F**king times i was pissed I did like 6 passes and just wouldnt change. I Can feel a small power gain but may be resulting in wheel spin cuz i could not hook good at all i ran a 9.21 stock and 9.23 with CAI(bang)

[Ferdball]

Ok i went to the track yesterday for the first time with the CAI and i ran the same F**king times i was pissed I did like 6 passes and just wouldnt change. I Can feel a small power gain but may be resulting in wheel spin cuz i could not hook good at all i ran a 9.21 stock and 9.23 with CAI(bang)

Is that an 1/8 mile time?

[redspeed]

Do you have any air leaks? I know the cai definitely works. I got a custom cai and went from 15.52 (4k feet elev.) to 15.07 1/4 mile.

[bast525]

Unfortunately, I never got a baseline, but here is my dyno with the MS CAI:

http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/11/web/635000-635999/635763_52_full.jpg

250 whp/281 ftlbs.

For comparison, on this same dyno, a stock Dodge Neon SRT-4 puts down around 225 whp (no one's dynoe a stock MS there, but SRT's are very similiar in power), and a stock '05-07 Mustang GT puts down about 255-260.

So... I'd have to guess the CAI is doing something :D

250 whp = roughly 285 crank hp (12% drivetrain loss, conservative)... so at least 20 hp over what Mazda rated.

I'd say... best $300, warranty friendly mod ever!

[aciurczak]

The only reason that a gear ratio of 1:1 is recommended is that many transmissions used to have a gear that was exactly 1:1. It was often 4th gear. For that gear there would be a direct connection from the input to the output shaft within the transmission, so there was as little transmission drag/friction loss as possible.

Since none of our gear choices are exactly 1:1, the friction losses would be roughly the same no matter what gear you use. So you might as well use the highest gear possible without redlining the dyno, allowing the engine to hold the boost at its maximum for the longest time. Seems like that gear would be 5th, as long as the dyno allows the car to get to redline in 5th.

[laloosh]

Ok i went to the track yesterday for the first time with the CAI and i ran the same F**king times i was pissed I did like 6 passes and just wouldnt change. I Can feel a small power gain but may be resulting in wheel spin cuz i could not hook good at all i ran a 9.21 stock and 9.23 with CAI(bang)


yea im having a hard time believing these 20whp gains throughout the powerband as well. However my et went from 14.2 to a 13.9 BUT my trap speed stayed the same if not got a little lower. My best stock trap was 101.66 my best trap wiht a cai and hollowed out cat is a 100.40. in my opinion a 250whp 3300lb car should be trapping higher than 100 mph

[shark77]

The only reason that a gear ratio of 1:1 is recommended is that many transmissions used to have a gear that was exactly 1:1. It was often 4th gear. For that gear there would be a direct connection from the input to the output shaft within the transmission, so there was as little transmission drag/friction loss as possible.

Since none of our gear choices are exactly 1:1, the friction losses would be roughly the same no matter what gear you use. So you might as well use the highest gear possible without redlining the dyno, allowing the engine to hold the boost at its maximum for the longest time. Seems like that gear would be 5th, as long as the dyno allows the car to get to redline in 5th.

I agree 100%.

[dkswim]

i like mine you can feel it in second beacuse i might need to get myself a tranny mount so im not hopping soo much

[LENNY127]

heres a thought, or 2 maybe first off mph will always tell you added horsepower in our cars on our horsepower level 10 hp should equal about 1mph more so 20 or 30 hp should equate to 2 to 3 mph more at the end of the track, (i know that tirespin sometimes f's that up but it's a good rule of thumb), so your 1/8 mile times should be not as important as your trap speed but on the 1/8 mile on bad traction cars is even harder to catch so good luck.
second i have verified through actual runs in the 1/4 mile that my car after adding a ms cai picked up 3/10 ths consistently yet my mph changed from 98-99mph to 99 to 100mph , so my guess is 15hp is more likely to be the actual number,and furthermore I believe the cai is most beneficial in not so much total horsepower generated but it gets it done quicker , thats my eductaed guess

[Ben Nast]

yea im having a hard time believing these 20whp gains throughout the powerband as well. However my et went from 14.2 to a 13.9 BUT my trap speed stayed the same if not got a little lower. My best stock trap was 101.66 my best trap wiht a cai and hollowed out cat is a 100.40. in my opinion a 250whp 3300lb car should be trapping higher than 100 mph

I agreee, with 250whp 3300lb you should trap higher, but with the boost and traction limitations in first and second isnt helping things.

[camrycev6]

15 hp? 20 hp? 25 hp? Who cares? Every one of those is worth a $300 warranty worry-free upgrade!