PORTING (making sense of it all)

[HaywardRotary]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_WgB9uzz9E
I should say 1000ft now for the top fuelers.
Here is an example of the speed still and look at how short a time it takes to get to 328mph!

[re japi]

Allthough i cant understand everything, this is awesome to read.

Just because of professional tuners/builders share opinions, ideas and their knolidge, this rotary community can benefit it.

My opinion is that it really doesent matter who is right or wrong. We (amateurs) can really learn something about this text. And im happy about that

[marco]

Sorry, not impressed with the Life racing ECUs.

Mir

Why is that? Currently looking at getting one (well more likely a syvecs version)

R.e. power/ compression ratio, as far as I can see Rice is making the point that higher compression will make more power compared to lower compression if all other variables are kept the same, and even if timing and fuelling is optimised. Intuitively this seems to make sense. However your absolute limit of power will be down to fuel, as the compression (which will be adabatic) will result in temperatures to cause pre ignition/knock. Carl is countering that whilst the power at a set boost will be less, the lower compression allows higher boost to be run before you reach that pre ignition temp in the chamber (again makes sense because you can compress the air in the turbo, then cool it through the intercooler before compressing it in the cylinder/rotor). The downside is that lower compression necessarily means less expansion (in the power stroke) so can\'t take as much work out of the combusting fuel compared to higher compression. Hence th poor fuel economy seen for lower compression motors. I guess the question is which is better overall, running higher compression rotors and less boost, or lower compression rotors and more boost. My gut feeling is higher compression is the more \'correct\' method, but lower compression rotors would give a greater safety factor and probably better for real world applications (accounts for dodgy fuel, small errors in mapping etc).
Carl, Rice, have I understood your points correctly?

[PGiljevic]

Marco, that is the essence of what both of us have been frothing about :Talking1

But I was more interested in porting  :mmmm This topic alone generates much excitement where people literally want to stab each other in the heart and urinate on the decapitated corpse of anyone who dares put forth an alternate view hahaha

p.s. what is better, my own feeling is I always go with lower compression, this is why I never use 9.7:1 high comp NA rotors in any of my builds like some love to do. 9.0:1 is great (best of both worlds) and for mental people who have a death wish then I go the custom RR developed 7.8:1 (modified S4 set). It just depends what the car is for and mostly the fuel type used.

[marco]

With regards to porting, what is your take on beveled/scalloped rotors to modify the timing and duration rather than the plates?

[PGiljevic]

With regards to porting, what is your take on beveled/scalloped rotors to modify the timing and duration rather than the plates?

I do allot of it, listed all of the details on one irrelevant site many years ago with timing changes it gives and effects. on mine I scallop the intake open edge and closing edge, it is also a good way to make fine adjustments to the compression ratio as well

[marco]

Don\'t suppose you have a link to the site do you? I am trying to get my head round them!

[Grant Monkhouse]

I do allot of it, listed all of the details on one irrelevant site many years ago with timing changes it gives and effects. on mine I scallop the intake open edge and closing edge, it is also a good way to make fine adjustments to the compression ratio as well

Will you be using scalloped rotors in your next build?

Is the scallops what brings your street ports to match and some times beat bridge ports in peak HP?

[Erdin]

Will you be using scalloped rotors in your next build?

Is the scallops what brings your street ports to match and some times beat bridge ports in peak HP?

Which is why my car has them:Giggle

[Grant Monkhouse]

Which is why my car has them:Giggle

Oooo but what it someone scallops and bridges?! :censored::censored::censored::censored: on your bonfire won\'t it. Haha jokes

[Erdin]

Oooo but what it someone scallops and bridges?! :censored::censored::censored::censored: on your bonfire won\'t it. Haha jokes

LOOOL:rollin

[Mir]

Why is that?

One of my mate on a Supra forum sold one- he got F88 ECU after he sold his Motec M800 ECU. After runing his car on the F88 ecu, he didn\'t feel any substantial difference and decided to go back to MOTEC.

I can\'t remember, but he also had problems with the support team or something.

Before going Motec route myself, I did a lot of research on ECUs and Motec ticked loads of boxes for me.

On the other hand, I am a big fan of Motec and Haltec ECUs, so my dislike can also be motivated by the Love of Motec and Haltec loll

Mir

[marco]

One of my mate on a Supra forum sold one- he got F88 ECU after he sold his Motec M800 ECU. After runing his car on the F88 ecu, he didn\'t feel any substantial difference and decided to go back to MOTEC.

I can\'t remember, but he also had problems with the support team or something.

Before going Motec route myself, I did a lot of research on ECUs and Motec ticked loads of boxes for me.

On the other hand, I am a big fan of Motec and Haltec ECUs, so my dislike can also be motivated by the Love of Motec and Haltec loll

Mir

so being no worse than motec is a bad thing?!?

[Grant Monkhouse]

From what I understand life racing, syvecs are above the motec platform, they are for people that don\'t require help from the makers. They are somewhat near the level of pectel ECUs I think. You have all the options old too you. You don\'t have to pay to access features all ready on the ecu

[Mir]

You don\'t have to pay to access features all ready on the ecu

I would say, everything has it\'s pros and cons. However, I do agree with Grant above.