Xede Installed on my Speed6 yesterday

[StephanieT]

I think you're underestimating a stock MS6 whp. I've seen consistent 220's from stock. So that would make the stock MS6 (220 whp and 14psi) make a 7.67 "efficiency". No where close to below 7.0 (like you quoted).

Before you go off an a tangent, I said "average". Not every one. Even if the car has a 7.67 Eff. # it still needs help if you want it to last longer.

emt is running a 8.17 "efficiency". And anything under 8.0 you said the "car needs help". Just doesn't add up to me.

I think in most people's minds 8.17 is greater than 8.0??? When you are working on this small a scale, every little part will make a difference, whether it be good or bad. And 8.17 is headed in a MUCH better direction than it was previously.
Stephanie

 

[david097]

Ken,

Would it be possible to clarify his exhaust setup a bit more? He said he has a turbo back, but from what you said it sounds more like he has a catback exhaust. Does he have a full downpipe like the atp or cpe? or is it a test pipe like the one turboxs makes along with a catback? or did he just hollow out the second cat?

If you could name off all the parts on his car, or give us the details of how it is setup better I think that would help everyone out a lot.

If it's just a cat back exhaust or a testpipe and catback exhaust then I agree with you in that he probably only gained 10 horse power if it was just a catback, or maybe close to 20 if it was a catback and test pipe.

I think the real gains from exhaust upgrades in these cars, just like WRX's and STI's come from replacing the whole downpipe with a new one. Getting rid of that first cat right by the turbo and getting 3 inche pipe all the way down im sure helps way more then any catback or test pipe could.

 

[MUSOM]

I agree. I think you can expect more gains from a 3'' downpipe only (stock exhaust) than from a new 3'' exhaust system (stock downpipe). It's all about physics ya know. pressure, force, and area is where it's at.(doh)

 

[jcgemt2003]

Ken,

Would it be possible to clarify his exhaust setup a bit more? He said he has a turbo back, but from what you said it sounds more like he has a catback exhaust. Does he have a full downpipe like the atp or cpe? or is it a test pipe like the one turboxs makes along with a catback? or did he just hollow out the second cat?

If you could name off all the parts on his car, or give us the details of how it is setup better I think that would help everyone out a lot.

If it's just a cat back exhaust or a testpipe and catback exhaust then I agree with you in that he probably only gained 10 horse power if it was just a catback, or maybe close to 20 if it was a catback and test pipe.

I think the real gains from exhaust upgrades in these cars, just like WRX's and STI's come from replacing the whole downpipe with a new one. Getting rid of that first cat right by the turbo and getting 3 inche pipe all the way down im sure helps way more then any catback or test pipe could.

the stock cat right after the turbo is the only thing on my exhaust thats not
3"...my downpipe and everything else is. I have an CPE CAI and thats all.

 

[MUSOM]

So I sit here studying venous pressure gradients and its affect on cardiac output, I've come to the realization that your "efficiency ratio" is invalid. Let me explain.......

You say that the goal of the efficiency ratio is to increase whp without increasing boost. The equation is set up correctly to isolate the unknown. The problem, however, is that you can increase boost without affecting the workload of the turbo. The turbo is operating more efficiently, but without increased work. In physics terms, this is a more efficient closed system.

For example, I can install a FMIC on a stock MS6. This would increase whp in more than one way. First, it would increase air force and velocity (larger ducts with less resistance), secondly, the air would be cooler, and third, the FMIC will (according to sources) have a 2-3 psi DECREASED pressure drop. On average, the factory turbo is working at around 19-20 psi, but because of the pressure drop from the top mount intercooler (2-3 psi) and exhaust restrictions (1-2psi?) the turbo only puts out around 14-15 psi. So with the FMIC, the turbo will then put out around 16-17 psi vs 14-15 stock. So I have increased the efficiency of the system by approximately 10-15%. However, according to your "efficiency ratio", the only increase in efficiency would come from the increased cooler air from the FMIC, because boost is controlled for via atmospheric pressure.

It's a little thing called disinhibition, when you remove a factor that has a negative affect. I would be more than happy to explain this in terms of right atrial pressure change and crossbridge recycling via ATP phosphorylation of myosin heavy chains if you'd like? Just let me know.(dunno)

Before you go off an a tangent, I said "average". Not every one. Even if the car has a 7.67 Eff. # it still needs help if you want it to last longer.


I think in most people's minds 8.17 is greater than 8.0??? When you are working on this small a scale, every little part will make a difference, whether it be good or bad. And 8.17 is headed in a MUCH better direction than it was previously.
Stephanie

 

[Captain KRM P5]

the stock cat right after the turbo is the only thing on my exhaust thats not
3"...my downpipe and everything else is. I have an CPE CAI and thats all.

Ken,

Would it be possible to clarify his exhaust setup a bit more? He said he has a turbo back, but from what you said it sounds more like he has a catback exhaust. Does he have a full downpipe like the atp or cpe? or is it a test pipe like the one turboxs makes along with a catback? or did he just hollow out the second cat?

If you could name off all the parts on his car, or give us the details of how it is setup better I think that would help everyone out a lot.

If it's just a cat back exhaust or a testpipe and catback exhaust then I agree with you in that he probably only gained 10 horse power if it was just a catback, or maybe close to 20 if it was a catback and test pipe.

I think the real gains from exhaust upgrades in these cars, just like WRX's and STI's come from replacing the whole downpipe with a new one. Getting rid of that first cat right by the turbo and getting 3 inche pipe all the way down im sure helps way more then any catback or test pipe could.

lets get some definitions clarified as i think this is causing some confusion;

turbo back exhaust - an exhaust system starting at the turbocharger housing and going to the back of the vehicle. this car does not have that.

downpipe - section of exhaust going from the turbo to the midsection. this part of the vehicle including the emissions gear/sensors. this downpipe is stock.

from the downpipe back the system is 3 inch setup with a glasspack. intake system is CP-E. the car is otherwise unmodified.

 

[david097]

Thanks ken,

Since the stock downpipe is still in place then I would agree with them that he probably at most gained 20 horse power. Which if his car dynoed stock at lets say 215 then the exhaust mods would probably put him at about 235. So there estimates of around 30-40 horse power gained are most likely very close to being correct

Also the second cat is gone correct?

 

[Captain KRM P5]

http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123664974

intake + exhaust = 13.8 second quarter mile
intake + exhaust + XEDE = 13.1 second quarter mile

no, its not a baseline dyno and yes one will still be gotten, but saying now that the unit isn't adding some real power on its own would be nothing short of foolish. shaving 7/10 of a second off a 1/4 mile time is hard enough. shaving it off in the 12 and 13 second range is exponentially harder.

 

[MUSOM]

13.1 is impressive. have a slip? video?

 

[MUSOM]

nevermind me. didn't see the link

13.1 is impressive. have a slip? video?

 

[Rainman]

Great work guys!

R

 

[DSMConvert]

Musom - take a look at the stock turbo threads and you'll see 19psi is well outside the efficiency zone... So if you're going to make quotes on efficiency formulas don't contradict yourself by claiming you're going to run 19psi on the stock turbo. Secondly I'm not sure you are correctly using the terms air force(which I've actually never heard used in the context you are using it) and velocity, b/c if you increase ducting diameter you will decrease boost pressure thus directly affecting velocity... to illustrate my point this is why you place your thumb over the end of the hose to squirt. You decrease duct diameter thus increasing pressure and finally directly increase the velocity of the exiting water. However I do agree with the main point you are trying to make...the eff rating of the ms6 has much room for improvement and with a high quality fmic setup(same size ducting and a <=1psi pressure drop) you could indeed increase the eff while technically not increasing the workload required by the turbo.

On the xeded results claims...while I'll trust that Ken will provide a baseline dyno for comparo purposes, I will back the results as I have personally done the research independent of his testing. The stock ms6 ecu maps make the msp ecu look like a tuner god. I would have no problem putting money down that a good retune of the stock ecu alone would net 15+whp and I wouldn't be suprised if someone was able to squeeze out 20-30whp.

 

[jcgemt2003]

Musom - take a look at the stock turbo threads and you'll see 19psi is well outside the efficiency zone... So if you're going to make quotes on efficiency formulas don't contradict yourself by claiming you're going to run 19psi on the stock turbo. Secondly I'm not sure you are correctly using the terms air force(which I've actually never heard used in the context you are using it) and velocity, b/c if you increase ducting diameter you will decrease boost pressure thus directly affecting velocity... to illustrate my point this is why you place your thumb over the end of the hose to squirt. You decrease duct diameter thus increasing pressure and finally directly increase the velocity of the exiting water. However I do agree with the main point you are trying to make...the eff rating of the ms6 has much room for improvement and with a high quality fmic setup(same size ducting and a <=1psi pressure drop) you could indeed increase the eff while technically not increasing the workload required by the turbo.

On the xeded results claims...while I'll trust that Ken will provide a baseline dyno for comparo purposes, I will back the results as I have personally done the research independent of his testing. The stock ms6 ecu maps make the msp ecu look like a tuner god. I would have no problem putting money down that a good retune of the stock ecu alone would net 15+whp and I wouldn't be suprised if someone was able to squeeze out 20-30whp.

Dude did you see the track results?

 

[Karma_hunden]

yo jcgemt2003, did you flatshifted? at what rpm did you launched?

 

[jcgemt2003]

yo jcgemt2003, did you flatshifted? at what rpm did you launched?

Launched at about 5k and shifted around 5800rpms

 

[MS6S2K]

So what about someone like me, who doesn't want to modify the intake and exhaust. I'm looking for a future plug and play ecu tuner, to give the car some more pop then it has now. The 1/4 mile comparison saying the Xede will take 6-7ths off your 1/4 mile time is also saying it adds 40-50whp on it's own essentially. What is a realistic and safe gain by just installing and running this, with no other mods? NO catback, no CAI, NOTHING. Just plug it in and go. Opinions are welcomed, as obviously there are no facts on this, because a totally bone stock Speed 6 has not been tested baseline dyno, and then with just the Xede installed. Thanks!!

 

[chuyler1]

I've been waiting for a stock before/after dyno also...and I am waiting to see whether this will be plug-and-play too.

 

[Captain KRM P5]

I've been waiting for a stock before/after dyno also...and I am waiting to see whether this will be plug-and-play too.

we're told the harnesses are a definete at this point, just a matter of details. i'm not going to throw out firm dates and empty promises to disappoint people. all i can say to this effect is "it will happen when it happens"

which, regardless, people will still post and ask when its going to be plug and play

 

[chuyler1]

No rush from me...I'm waiting patiently since I won't have the cash for a while anyway. I just like to see progress instead of bickering about dyno/track results.

 

[Captain KRM P5]

agreed. personally i feel the unit more than proved itself thus far. claim one was that the unit did not work - disproven. claim two was that the unit would not make power over stock - disproven. claim three was that the unit would not be able to add fuel - disproven.

whatever more information people would like me to supply, please let me know. i intend to for the sake of the community.