-
Grand Future Air Dried Beef Dog Food

Carnivore Diet for Dogs

Air Dried Dog Food | Real Beef
Go Back   Automotive Forums Car Chat > Mazda > RX-7
Register FAQ Community
Reply Show Printable Version Show Printable Version | Subscription Subscribe to this Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 06-23-2004, 10:57 AM
kyrx7 kyrx7 is offline
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
sequential or non sequential which is better?

i have heard if i run my car non seq. then it would have more horsepower and run better. i have heard that this is a simple thing to do. can someone tell me the good and bad about running it non seq. and how to do this. and if it gives more horse then how much more. is this expensive to do. and what accesories would i need to do this
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-23-2004, 11:50 AM
D3rELiC's Avatar
D3rELiC D3rELiC is offline
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 721
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

non-seq will give you better track time, but it will also shorten your turbos life

its like compairing a big turbo that takes time to spool but do the same power with than smaller turbo boosting more and spooling faster, the lag will gives your wheel the time to catch up with the tarmac and will reduce traction loss, but the car will be more laggy when you drive it in town. i'd keep the seq. until i go single, but im not a 1/4 fanatic.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-23-2004, 12:01 PM
kyrx7 kyrx7 is offline
AF Newbie
Thread starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

im not gonna run it on the track. i just want to out run these mustangs around here. seems everybody has a mustang. im the only person within 200 miles with a 3rd gen rx7. what about the upgraded twins that you can buy on rx7.com they give morehorse than the factory twins and they are cheaper than a single and bolt right back up where the factory was. would you go upgraded twinns or upgraded single. i like the 3rd generation cause the twins make it differant
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-23-2004, 02:48 PM
D3rELiC's Avatar
D3rELiC D3rELiC is offline
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 721
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

if u realy wanna keep the twin, get the 99' spec twins, they are a bit better and its still cheap. theres alot more potential with a single turbo IMO
theres so much vacum lines and emission stuff under the hood of a 3rd gen only that you can remove when you go single, its crazy

and you'll have hard time running something else than an powerFC with seq. twins (im talking about haltech, microtech and other standalone)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-23-2004, 03:21 PM
kyrx7 kyrx7 is offline
AF Newbie
Thread starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

whats a power fc im new to this so bare with me
and what size single turbo would you recommend
and about what does the turbo and kit cost for that size. and i have an automatic. i heard from several people that turbo cars are faster on automatics than manual cause they build boost faster.is that true
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-23-2004, 03:22 PM
f2racer f2racer is offline
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Don't forget when you start to upgrading that FDs are very sensitive to fuel delivery. Upgraded turbos should be done in conjunction with upgrading the ECU of the car.

The main benefit of sequential twins is that the smaller turbo spools significantly faster (especially at lower revs before the exhaust is diverted to the larger secondary), which means that there's little to no turbo lag. Switching to non-seq usually means you'll have some lag, not a huge deal if you're going in a straight line, but may have some impact if you drive the car the way it was intended.

Also keep in mind that the stock turbos are probably good to about 13-15psi (probably a good 20-30 rwhp). This would also need to be done with an upgraded or tunable ECU as well.

BTW, what kinds of Stangs are you running against? My mostly stock FD will take my mostly stock '94 GT (302) any day.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-23-2004, 03:40 PM
Soyo's Avatar
Soyo Soyo is offline
AF Fanatic
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,746
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Soyo
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

keep the turbo you have now and put in a manual tranny... if you drive an auto you suck... thats my opinion... I just hate automatic sports cars.

if you drive an auto you can't control the cars revs and power band as well, and sometimes not at all... seriously I'd get a manual...

oh and the people that tell you auto's are better, they are wrong. nascar uses manuals even(upgraded version ofcourse but manual none the less)

the way I see it is if you drive an auto your mostly along for the ride. but if you drive a manual your a piece of the car, controlling what it does way more than an auto.
__________________
1989 RX-7 TII --- Just got rebuilt and street ported
RB 3" dual exhaust, BNR stage 1 modified factory turbo, FCD, S-AFC II,
720cc secondaries, Aftermarket Turbo inlet duct w/K&N, Hawk HP+ pads
HKS Blow-Off Valve, Stainless brake and clutch lines
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-23-2004, 04:55 PM
kyrx7 kyrx7 is offline
AF Newbie
Thread starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

i just had the auto rebuilt maybe if it goes out again i will. trust me i wanted a manual but i couldnt afford one. at the time i came into some money the auto was the chaepest i found for what i was getting. i only paid 8000 for the car and it has about 3 grand worth of upgrades. course transmission went out 2nd month i owned it. i should have seen that comming. if i could fix this turbo problem then i would be happy. just cant figure out what is wrong with the turbo thats in it. no mechanics worth a shit around here
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-23-2004, 05:03 PM
kyrx7 kyrx7 is offline
AF Newbie
Thread starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

another question im losing boost geuss a vacuum leak. i am driving the car while im trying to get it fixed. will this hurt the car havina a leak i am not getting on it or anything
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-23-2004, 05:10 PM
Soyo's Avatar
Soyo Soyo is offline
AF Fanatic
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,746
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Soyo
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

probably is a vaccum leak... I doubt it will hurt it

I still say put in a manual tranny, if you can afford a new turbo you can afford a manual tranny
__________________
1989 RX-7 TII --- Just got rebuilt and street ported
RB 3" dual exhaust, BNR stage 1 modified factory turbo, FCD, S-AFC II,
720cc secondaries, Aftermarket Turbo inlet duct w/K&N, Hawk HP+ pads
HKS Blow-Off Valve, Stainless brake and clutch lines
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-23-2004, 05:44 PM
kyrx7 kyrx7 is offline
AF Newbie
Thread starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

i cant afford both
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-23-2004, 11:29 PM
Soyo's Avatar
Soyo Soyo is offline
AF Fanatic
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,746
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Soyo
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

so don't do both, theres nothing wrong with your turbos. you just can't compeat in an auto like you can in a manual... its your choice in the end, but turbo upgrades on an auto sounds like a waste to me
__________________
1989 RX-7 TII --- Just got rebuilt and street ported
RB 3" dual exhaust, BNR stage 1 modified factory turbo, FCD, S-AFC II,
720cc secondaries, Aftermarket Turbo inlet duct w/K&N, Hawk HP+ pads
HKS Blow-Off Valve, Stainless brake and clutch lines
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-24-2004, 01:35 AM
flex339's Avatar
flex339 flex339 is offline
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 520
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to flex339
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

^seconded
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-24-2004, 10:17 AM
D3rELiC's Avatar
D3rELiC D3rELiC is offline
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 721
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

+ if you upgrade the turbos, your tranny will need to be beefed up at some point,

start with the manual tranny swap before touching the turbos, soyo is right on this one.

and if you plan on going single turbo, while you take the tranny out, dont waste your money on the original manual ECU and get a haltech
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-24-2004, 05:00 PM
Soyo's Avatar
Soyo Soyo is offline
AF Fanatic
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,746
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Soyo
Re: sequential or non sequential which is better?

yea haltech with manual tranny should be about the cost of single turbo upgrade I'd think... something to look into maybe
__________________
1989 RX-7 TII --- Just got rebuilt and street ported
RB 3" dual exhaust, BNR stage 1 modified factory turbo, FCD, S-AFC II,
720cc secondaries, Aftermarket Turbo inlet duct w/K&N, Hawk HP+ pads
HKS Blow-Off Valve, Stainless brake and clutch lines
Reply With Quote
 
Reply

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD

Go Back   Automotive Forums Car Chat > Mazda > RX-7


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:27 AM.

Community Participation Guidelines | How to use your User Control Panel

Powered by: vBulletin | Copyright Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
 
 
no new posts