NA Power Stage 1: Basic Modifications

[BeanSoldier]

NA Power Stage 1
(designed, primarily for the Mz3)

This is the first stage of modifications for owners who want to start modding, or just give their 3 a peppier response, smoother acceleration, better electrical efficiency, and a small increase in gas mileage. Anyone interested in these primary modifications can easily access the instructions as I’ve linked to them. No need for searching and coming up empty. These modifications are very basic, very easily reversible and will not void your warranty.

1. Throttle Body Ground
2. Full Ground Kit - Voltage Stabilizer/Condenser Kit
3. Intake resonator removal
4. Panel filter replacement
5. Short shifter


1. Throttle Body Ground
Install: 5-10min (http://www.msprotege.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2400612)
Info: TB torque spec: 6-8ft/lb
Cost: $3-5
Pros: Smoother acceleration, Smoother shifting
Cons: N/A
This is one of the simplest do-it-yourself modifications you can do. It primarily consists of one heavy gauge wire (8-10ga) connecting from one of the bolts from the throttle body to the negative terminal or the main chassis ground. Users report a more linear acceleration and slightly better throttle response with grounding directly to the negative terminal. This in itself is a drivability mod. It will not show in a dyno as the throttle is at WOT (wide open throttle) the whole time. Dynos don’t test for throttle response.


2. Full Ground Kit -- Voltage Stabilizer/Condenser Kit
Install: 10-30min
Info: TB: 6-8ft/lb; Fuel Rail: 14-19ft/lb
Cost: $5-180
Pros: Smoother acceleration, Better mileage, More Power
Cons: N/A
A ground kit consists of several heavy gauge wires connected to a central unit; some are connect to the negative terminal of your battery. Stabilizer kits include a capacitor to regulate voltage.
These capacitors theoretically would reduce headlight dimming of 3s with stock halogens, but the alternator is too weak to help prevent that. They will however increase the electrical efficiency of the car. Steer clear of the $29 stabilizers on ebay. Stick with Buddy Club Condenser (http://buddyclub.us) or Apexi (http://www.apexi-usa.com) for the stabilizers. At the moment, there are much more 3 owners purchasing the BC Condenser due to its cost, look, and it’s been dyno-proven. If you don’t want to spend too much, you can make your own ground kit or purchase a universal kit from ebay. The universal kit\'s wires are not often very flexible, and the shipping costs too much.

Install is as easy as the throttle body ground, if your kit has a condenser/stabilizer; you just connect the condenser’s positive wire to the battery’s positive, and negative to negative. The ground wires can then be attached from the condenser to the ground points. I’ve chosen the left strut tower, the fuel rail and the throttle body.

Skeptics will always debate power gains, but here is my dyno for the Buddy Club Condenser. The graph looks that way because the run was started on 3K. More in this later.

Mods: AEM Intake + RX8 Wheels + Buddy Club Kit (taken at4500ft)
Info: RX8 wheel/tire combos are 45-46lbs total per corner (vs 42lbs for 17�, 39lbs for 16�)
http://i2.tinypic.com/t8m6hd.gif

http://tinypic.com/jj8t4j.jpg


3. Intake Resonator Removal
Install: 30-1hr (http://www.msprotege.com/forum/showthread.php?t=60565)
Cost: $0
Pro: Less intake restriction, CAI preparation
Cons: N/A
You can remove your stock intake\'s resonator to produce a stronger growl. This does not exactly make any power, but it prepares you for the stage 2 modifications. If you plan to just replace your stock air panel filter, then I advise you to do this step as well. You don’t need the intake resonator for a dealer to do engine work/diagnosis.


4. Replace Stock Air Filter
Install: 5-10min (remove 4 clips on the air box, lift up, remove stock filter, replace with new)
Cost: $40-60
Pros: Better mileage and engine efficiency
Cons: N/A
Replacing the stock paper air filter with a K&N panel filter will let the engine ingest more air than the stock filter due to the less restriction provided by the K&N (http://knfilters.com) . If you would like to go with an aftermarket later on, it would be advisable to skip this step of your modification process.

Part Numbers:
2.0L/2.3L : 33-2293
1.6L: 33-2874


5. Short Throw Shifter
Install: 30-60min (http://www.twmperformance.com/manuals/Mazda%203%20Manual.pdf)
Cost: $150-200
Pros: Shorter throw, Positive shift feel
Cons: Notchy shift feel
A short shifter shortens the throw by 20-40% depending on the brand. A suggestion is to purchase the kits that have a bend towards the driver, for aesthetics. Notchiness will be felt shifting with the stock knob. This will be alleviated with a weighted knob. The best and more expensive knobs come from TWM. This modification will not reduce the life of your transmission.

Shifters Kits (throw reduction):
TWM : http://twmperformance.com (40% / 2.5� height reduction)
ARK: http://www.arkspeedracing.com (35%)
Mazdaspeed: (20%)



You’ve now completed Stage 1. If you wish to continue, Stage 2 is slightly more involved, but it will introduce you to the bread and butter of the bolt-on modifications and better power gains. With more dynos and videos.

[Zaku_4]

hmm

ive read in alot of places that the groudn kits are totoally useless.

and the ones we do here, arent those the same just many more times cheaper? lol

[BeanSoldier]

This writeup is actually stickied at http://mazda3forums.com and at http://mazdaiii.com. Sabio reminded me that TM3 still existed so I decided to post it here as well.

I\'m not the only one who installed it as more than 5 people mazda3forums have it installed:

mamock116 04/06: just installed mine today before work. revs a good bit more free. there is a deffinite power gain, not much but i can tell it pulls a bit better. the idle is alot more smooth and it idles at a lower rpm. the air conditioner doesnt seem bog the car down as much when i turn it on and off. i would deff recomend it to anyone. i grounded the alternator, fuel rail, and the throttle body.

For the Buddy Club Condenser FAQ: http://www.mazda3forums.com/index.php?topic=44505.0

Here is my dyno split so you can easily see where the gains are, and a dyno from another member before he installed a turbo kit. Apparently G-Techs also show that \"gap\" like the first dyno.

Here\'s the dyno without the condenser, see the gap?
http://i1.tinypic.com/v5xsoh.jpg
Here\'s WITH the condenser (the gap gets smoothed out)
http://i1.tinypic.com/v5xstl.jpg
Here\'s another member\'s dyno (user has Draxas exhaust + high flow cat + Injen CAI [could be with stock wheels?]) see the gap?
http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/12/web/552000-552999/552940_33_full.jpg:sarc

[SABIO]

Originally posted by BeanSoldier
Sabio reminded me that TM3 still existed so I decided to post it here as well.

Nice of you to cut up this forum on your 4th post.



Sabio only has the courage to attempt to thread crap on my posts at mazdaiii.com though, since i only have 50 posts there. I\'m waiting for him to post about the ground kit that no longer in the market and try to pass it off as the same thing.


On this forum I don\'t have to crap on it.....people know it\'s crap already.
p.s and it is still for sale.........

[BeanSoldier]

edited.

[SourcE]

Give the guy a break, from what I can see, he\'s just offering opinions,


Originally posted by BeanSoldier

Sabio only has the courage to attempt to thread crap on my posts at mazdaiii.com though, since i only have 50 posts there. I\'m waiting for him to post about the ground kit that no longer in the market and try to pass it off as the same thing.



although I do think the above comment was a little unneccesary.....

[BeanSoldier]

I offer concrete dynos and reviews and I know that the regulars here know who I am at http://Mazda3forums.com and my contributions there.

edited.

[TheProfessor]

Originally posted by BeanSoldier
He actually bad mouths the 3 in M3F.

No worries, he does that here too :sarc

[BeanSoldier]

i\'ve edited all my posts (i everyone you to do the same) to keep the thread \"friendly\" and added two more writeups for everyone to enjoy, while I finish Stage 2. And another writeup in the suspension section. How\'s that for contribution after just 10 posts?

thanks for the PM sourcE. I forgot about that :)

[SABIO]

Originally posted by PSIVIC



Originally posted by BeanSoldier
He actually bad mouths the 3 in M3F.

No worries, he does that here too :sarc

Just the crappy gas mileage.;)

[TheProfessor]

Originally posted by SABIO



Originally posted by PSIVIC



Originally posted by BeanSoldier
He actually bad mouths the 3 in M3F.

No worries, he does that here too :sarc

Just the crappy gas mileage.;)

I know, I know, I\'m just buggin yah.

[MajesticBlueNTO]

while i commend your work and effort in dynoing the other mods that show actual gains, the dyno of the Buddy Club Condenser (http://i2.tinypic.com/t8m6hd.gif), statistically, shows nothing. have a best-fit line for both graphs and they\'ll be near identifal. instead, your graph actually shows that the BCC did nothing to stabilize the electrical \"noise\" in the dyno when the run was started at 3000rpm.

the erratic nature of both graphs could amount to any number of things that showed this \"gain\" or removal of the \"gap\":

not as many data points as in the runs that start at 2000rpm (i\'ve dynoed my old automatic maxima starting at 3000rpm and its graph was far smoother than this one...and both have distributor-less ignition)...heat soak?...when was the BCC run done? immediately after an ECU reset?... were there multiple runs done both before and after the BCC to gain an average and rule out any anomaly?


spending over $150 on something that advertises \"Cool blue led lights to spice up your engine bay\" and \"Exciting BLUE LED Illumination!\" as 2 of their selling points is buying into the hype.

one would be better off doing the big-3 upgrade and adding grounding points, as 4 AWG cables can be had for a fraction of the cost of the BCC.

other than that, great write-ups :)

[BeanSoldier]

Originally posted by MajesticBlueN


while i commend your work and effort in dynoing the other mods that show actual gains, the dyno of the Buddy Club Condenser (http://i2.tinypic.com/t8m6hd.gif), statistically, shows nothing. have a best-fit line for both graphs and they\'ll be near identifal. instead, your graph actually shows that the BCC did nothing to stabilize the electrical \"noise\" in the dyno when the run was started at 3000rpm.

the erratic nature of both graphs could amount to any number of things that showed this \"gain\" or removal of the \"gap\":

not as many data points as in the runs that start at 2000rpm (i\'ve dynoed my old automatic maxima starting at 3000rpm and its graph was far smoother than this one...and both have distributor-less ignition)...heat soak?...when was the BCC run done? immediately after an ECU reset?... were there multiple runs done both before and after the BCC to gain an average and rule out any anomaly?

Look at the split graphs and you get to see how different the graphs are, and i even showed a graph of the Apexi owner to show the gap\'s still there.

That graph is actually a more accurate interpretation of real-world benefits tell you why in a sec. Imagine cruising at 3K rpm, then all of a sudden, you want to race, and you WOT. The VVT\'s still in \"medium load\" until about 5k, where it switches to \"full load\". Would you really race someone by letting off the throttle until 2k then WOTing to request full load from the VVT right off the bat? No, as the guy you\'re racing against will probably be gone by then.

Dynos that start at 2k (like my other dynos) are only good to show peak power since you\'re requesting full load right away.

I scanned a diagram from the Service Highlights, which will show you what i\'m talking about:

http://i3.tinypic.com/vxgspz.gif

From the FAQ:

I can\'t completely verify this, but think I\'m pretty close. According to the Service Highlights Manual, the \"medium load\" operation ends for the VVT at almost 5K, then switches to \"full load\" (what happens during that time will be the fuel mixture calculations or A/F map loading, VIS opening, etc). The condenser eliminates that gap, and smoothens the powerband. So downshifting from 4th to 3rd and WOT-ing for example, will yield a smoother acceleration

The ECU was reset on both runs (accidentally by the dyno operator)-- he didn\'t know he didn\'t have to disconnect the battery to remove the kit\'s ground.

As for the marketting involved, if you\'re releasing a header that looks shiny, why not mention it?

Oh, come to think of it, i do have more recent dynos that start on 3k. Since you seem to be very skeptical.

If you know anything about Mz3 mods, you can easily tell what mods are in the filename.
Started at 3K after the advanced timing mod (for stage 2) vs the Buddy Club kit.
http://i1.tinypic.com/se1t3p.gif

After telling the operator to start at 2k instead, we get this.
http://i1.tinypic.com/sf8itv.gif

Don\'t worry, I\'m the only one in all 3 boards who have dyno-proven parts by dyno\'ing every part I install. Any dynos of your 3 you wish to share? :)

[BeanSoldier]

BTW, there\'s a group buy on the kit since this is the only part of the write up everyone\'s talking about. There\'s about 1 or 2 spaces left (only for those who are paying). $130 shipped USPS to Canada.

http://www.mazda3forums.com/index.php?topic=44301.0

[BeanSoldier]

any more skeptics that need some more explaining? If not, good, cause my other dynos are for something else :)

[MajesticBlueNTO]

Originally posted by BeanSoldier

That graph is actually a more accurate interpretation of real-world benefits tell you why in a sec. Imagine cruising at 3K rpm, then all of a sudden, you want to race, and you WOT. The VVT\'s still in \"medium load\" until about 5k, where it switches to \"full load\". Would you really race someone by letting off the throttle until 2k then WOTing to request full load from the VVT right off the bat? No, as the guy you\'re racing against will probably be gone by then.


the 3000rpm graph isn\'t a \"more accurate interpretation of real-world benefits\". the dynojet itself isn\'t really a good indicator of \"real world benefits\" as it doesn\'t take into account factors such as: the weight of the car, aerodynamic drag, etc. heck, even the tautness of the tie-down straps can have an effect on the hp/tq numbers. it is, however, the \"accepted standard\" for wheel hp/tq comparisons.

taking your example, according to the graph (http://i3.tinypic.com/vxgspz.gif), if you\'re travelling at 3k and go WOT, the car\'s ECU immediately detects a high-load condition. it doesn\'t wait until about 5k to go to full load performance (have you seen the calculated load value on a scan tool? it goes up almost instantaneously when going WOT?) and will go into the \"high load, low-middle speed range\" area of the graph (i.e. it is not \"still in \'medium load\'\").

and you wouldn\'t race someone by letting off the throttle until 2k then going WOT. the purpose of a dyno graph is to be able to plot the hp/tq for any given point in the rpm range. if you\'re travelling at 4000 rpm and go WOT, you would expect to get X amount of hp/tq, just as if you were to go WOT from 2000rpm and then get to 4000rpm. the purpose of me mentioning your 2000rpm graph was that it is a lot smoother and there are more data points for the dynojet to more accurately plot hp/tq.



Originally posted by BeanSoldier
As for the marketting involved, if you\'re releasing a header that looks shiny, why not mention it?


totally different...a shiny header is a result of the material used. the BCC is intentionally designed with blue lights. makes you wonder if they\'re masking the fact that it wouldn\'t do more than something a fraction of the cost would do... because, hey, it has cool blue lights that no one will see while driving unless one enjoys driving with their hood open.

remember, i\'m not arguing the fact that upgraded grounds/big 3 upgrade are good for the car, i\'m saying that products such as the BCC aren\'t worth the money.


Originally posted by BeanSoldier

If you know anything about Mz3 mods, you can easily tell what mods are in the filename.


the better test would\'ve been to 1) disconnect the battery, perform a dyno run with your AEM Cold Air Intake, RX-8 wheels, Draxas exhaust setup, Royal Purple fluids, AWR Engine Mount, Timing Advance, 89 octane gas in 3rd gear...then 2) disconnect the battery, connect the BCC, perform the dyno run.

even better, a 3rd run would be to disconnect the battery, remove the BCC unit but keep the 4 AWG wire from the fuel rail to ground, throttle body to ground, battery -ve to ground. then you\'d see if that blue unit really does anything.


as for your dyno question, yes i do have dyno plots when my car was stock from my PDA Dyno.

[BeanSoldier]

Finally, someone I can have an intelligent argument with, not like others who immediately yell \"scam!\" ;)


Originally posted by MajesticBlueN
the 3000rpm graph isn\'t a \"more accurate interpretation of real-world benefits\". the dynojet itself isn\'t really a good indicator of \"real world benefits\" as it doesn\'t take into account factors such as: the weight of the car, aerodynamic drag, etc. heck, even the tautness of the tie-down straps can have an effect on the hp/tq numbers. it is, however, the \"accepted standard\" for wheel hp/tq comparisons.


Dynojets are also more accurate in a sense compared to the mustang and bhp dynos. I\'d say the mustang dynos represent more of a \"real world\", but the operator would have to know exactly what values to enter it, if he can\'t or has to \"eye ball\" it, then you might as well go to a Dynojet shop. You\'re also right about the restrapping. I think it\'s the manufacturers that are more likely to do that. As a consumer, I can only afford 3-5 runs, and restrapping costs another full dyno session, which costs $75 to begin with. I\'ve pm\'d the member who had a g-tech run he posted awhile back. I\'m still waiting for the response-- it looks almost like the original \"baseline\" graph.


Originally posted by MajesticBlueN
taking your example, according to the graph (http://i3.tinypic.com/vxgspz.gif), if you\'re travelling at 3k and go WOT, the car\'s ECU immediately detects a high-load condition. it doesn\'t wait until about 5k to go to full load performance (have you seen the calculated load value on a scan tool? it goes up almost instantaneously when going WOT?) and will go into the \"high load, low-middle speed range\" area of the graph (i.e. it is not \"still in \'medium load\'\").

No, I have not seen the load values on a scan tool. Cause it knows a lot more than a dyno plot, and could possibly explain why it causes that gap. I\'ve talked to Mazda awhile back when I first took that dyno to ask them why is there a gap at that point and all they could tell me was ask a tech at the service department.


Originally posted by MajesticBlueN
and you wouldn\'t race someone by letting off the throttle until 2k then going WOT. the purpose of a dyno graph is to be able to plot the hp/tq for any given point in the rpm range. if you\'re travelling at 4000 rpm and go WOT, you would expect to get X amount of hp/tq, just as if you were to go WOT from 2000rpm and then get to 4000rpm. the purpose of me mentioning your 2000rpm graph was that it is a lot smoother and there are more data points for the dynojet to more accurately plot hp/tq.


I disagree with you on this. While the dyno only plots hp/tq at a given rpm point, it does give you an idea on what part of the RPMs you should be at- at a certain gear to get the most hp or tq, even more so after replacing cams. It shows you where the gains are at that RPM on that gear.

Also, there is the same amount of information from 3k-to whenever if extracted to an excel file. The Dynojet viewer allows that, and if you put it on excel, it will show both the same graphs, but the only difference is that now both of them both start at 3k. The most you can extract from a dynojet viewer is a step of 0.01, so you can get hp,tq,af,mph,gear starting from the initial RPM in steps of 0.01 until the end of each graph. I know that because I\'ve been downloading the excel files into my PDA trying to extrapolate how much tq i would get if I did start at 2K during my first dynos, and hopefully end up with a rough idea on my base line using AEM\'s test (since my baseline dyno consisted of only the RX8 and AEM intake. The peak HP would be about the same as a normal dyno that starts at 2k, -/+3.

If both of them didn\'t have the same amount of data (as you think that the graph that starts at 3k is \"incomplete\"), and one of them is being stretched, what you\'re looking at wouldn\'t be a graph because both Y and X axis would have completely different values to accomodate both graphs.


Originally posted by MajesticBlueN

Originally posted by BeanSoldier
As for the marketting involved, if you\'re releasing a header that looks shiny, why not mention it?


totally different...a shiny header is a result of the material used. the BCC is intentionally designed with blue lights. makes you wonder if they\'re masking the fact that it wouldn\'t do more than something a fraction of the cost would do... because, hey, it has cool blue lights that no one will see while driving unless one enjoys driving with their hood open.

remember, i\'m not arguing the fact that upgraded grounds/big 3 upgrade are good for the car, i\'m saying that products such as the BCC aren\'t worth the money.

So they decided to use Blue LEDs to show the capacitors, big deal. Apexi uses red. Sun doesn\'t seem to use anything. Besides, as you said, no one sees it unless they open up the hood-- like everything else in the engine bay that isn\'t a radiator or an intercooler. It\'s a ground kit. 1 or 2 members who got it plan to supplement their Big 3 with it.


Originally posted by MajesticBlueN
as for your dyno question, yes i do have dyno plots when my car was stock from my PDA Dyno.


Care to share pics of your dynos that start at 3k and at 2k? And since you do have a scan tool/PDA dyno (i didn\'t even know any of them worked with the 3, which one do you have?), can you explain what causes that gap that not only I had, but 2 other people (who have provided dynos that I know) have? Maybe you can provide some insight to what causes this.

It looks like 1 member from this board already joined the GB.

[MajesticBlueNTO]

Originally posted by BeanSoldier
Dynojets are also more accurate in a sense compared to the mustang and bhp dynos. I\'d say the mustang dynos represent more of a \"real world\", but the operator would have to know exactly what values to enter it, if he can\'t or has to \"eye ball\" it, then you might as well go to a Dynojet shop. You\'re also right about the restrapping. I think it\'s the manufacturers that are more likely to do that. As a consumer, I can only afford 3-5 runs, and restrapping costs another full dyno session, which costs $75 to begin with. I\'ve pm\'d the member who had a g-tech run he posted awhile back. I\'m still waiting for the response-- it looks almost like the original \"baseline\" graph.


we can agree that wheel dynos each have their pros and cons :)



Originally posted by BeanSoldier
No, I have not seen the load values on a scan tool. Cause it knows a lot more than a dyno plot, and could possibly explain why it causes that gap. I\'ve talked to Mazda awhile back when I first took that dyno to ask them why is there a gap at that point and all they could tell me was ask a tech at the service department.

if the gap is the jump in HP/TQ above 5000rpm, that is due to to something causing the engine to make more power. you can see the slope of both the HP and TQ curves have become negative until this \"jump\" point. it looks very similar to a VTEC graph and, also, a graph of a car with a variable length intake manifold. since the 2.3L doesn\'t have any type of valve lift variation, it looks like it could be the Variable Intake System coming into effect. I\'m not sure on the exact engagement point of the VI, but it does explain the surge in power.

as for why the jump is not as abrubt with the BCC, well, it could also be a result of the additional grounds rather than the BCC unit itself (as you probably aren\'t doing the dyno run with the AC on full blast, all lights on, the stereo cranked, and playing with the power window motors to put a drain on the alternator). The Condenser/capacitor portion of the BCC would only come into effect if there was a serious drain on the electrical system and its affect would be minimal and momentary.

again, a dyno of just the ground wires and not the BCC unit would show if the unit itself has any benefits.



Originally posted by BeanSoldier
I disagree with you on this. While the dyno only plots hp/tq at a given rpm point, it does give you an idea on what part of the RPMs you should be at- at a certain gear to get the most hp or tq, even more so after replacing cams. It shows you where the gains are at that RPM on that gear.

theoretically, a wheel dyno in each gear should spit out the same HP/TQ figures (especially on a manual tranny where there is no torque converter to give erroneous results). The dynojet doesn\'t take into account gear ratios and only measures how much force is needed to keep the drum (known mass) rotating at a particular acceleration. if you were to dyno 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th gears individually, you should see that the hp/tq curves are very close. therefore, the gains should be similar in all gears.



Originally posted by BeanSoldier
Also, there is the same amount of information from 3k-to whenever if extracted to an excel file. The Dynojet viewer allows that, and if you put it on excel, it will show both the same graphs, but the only difference is that now both of them both start at 3k. The most you can extract from a dynojet viewer is a step of 0.01, so you can get hp,tq,af,mph,gear starting from the initial RPM in steps of 0.01 until the end of each graph. I know that because I\'ve been downloading the excel files into my PDA trying to extrapolate how much tq i would get if I did start at 2K during my first dynos, and hopefully end up with a rough idea on my base line using AEM\'s test (since my baseline dyno consisted of only the RX8 and AEM intake. The peak HP would be about the same as a normal dyno that starts at 2k, -/+3.

If both of them didn\'t have the same amount of data (as you think that the graph that starts at 3k is \"incomplete\"), and one of them is being stretched, what you\'re looking at wouldn\'t be a graph because both Y and X axis would have completely different values to accomodate both graphs.


same mods, same day, 2000rpm vs. 3000rpm (http://i1.tinypic.com/sf8itv.gif), you can see which one is the \"cleaner\" graph that best represents the power output throughout the rev range. yes the 2000rpm graph has the same amount of data points from 3000rpm onwards as the 3000rpm graph, but that doesn\'t take into account the dyno variances that can happen when starting later in the rev range (RF from surrounding electronics starting at 3000rpm that affected the pickup wire? dyno software adjusting for the sudden WOT at 3000rpm with fewer rpms to fully adjust? - you can see in the upper rpms the graphs are essentially identical, etc).



Originally posted by BeanSoldier
So they decided to use Blue LEDs to show the capacitors, big deal. Apexi uses red. Sun doesn\'t seem to use anything. Besides, as you said, no one sees it unless they open up the hood-- like everything else in the engine bay that isn\'t a radiator or an intercooler. It\'s a ground kit. 1 or 2 members who got it plan to supplement their Big 3 with it.

those with the Big 3 that got the BCC should dyno as well. to see if it really helps.



Originally posted by BeanSoldier
Care to share pics of your dynos that start at 3k and at 2k? And since you do have a scan tool/PDA dyno (i didn\'t even know any of them worked with the 3, which one do you have?), can you explain what causes that gap that not only I had, but 2 other people (who have provided dynos that I know) have? Maybe you can provide some insight to what causes this.


page 1, scroll down in this thread (http://torontomazda3.com/forum/read.php?TID=2697). the dyno was in 2nd gear and started at approx. 1900rpm. i don\'t have one that started at 3000rpm but, then again, i\'m not using a dynojet. all parameters entered as accurate as possible (elevation GPS verified, Cd taken from Mazda specs, weight from a truck weigh station, barometric pressure taken from the ECU measurement (in inches-Mercury), temperature from outside thermometer, humidity reading from a hygrometer, tire diameter calculated by the PDA Dyno, gear ratio calculated by the PDA Dyno, Frontal area from width X height - open area).

i don\'t have any dynos of my mods as I have been busy travelling for work.

Nology PDA Dyno (http://www.nology.com/pdadyno), same thing as the Auterra Scan Tool (http://www.auterraweb.com/). you have to get the one that supports the CAN-BUS. This one (http://www.obdscan.net/index.htm) doesn\'t have dyno capabilites but it is far more useful now with the recently released Enhanced Software for the Mazda3/6 (http://www.obdscan.net/obdscan_mazda_m63_enhanced.htm).