MX-3.com

Is it possible to get to 200hp on these engines somewhat easy?

Has anyone done an eco boost setup?

Anyone ever heard of a 6 speed trans for these cars? With only 5 speeds I cruize at 3k rpm's and that doesn't seem to gas savy, esp when 3k on my mustang is like you need to shift.

I seem to have an exhaust valve tick under the rear valve cover... is this a terribly serious thing on these engines? I am guessing the best way to go about fixing that would be to take the head off but that is out of the question at the moment.

stangant wrote:Is it possible to get to 200hp on these engines somewhat easy?

what engines are you talking about? 4cyl, 6cyl, B6, B6DE, BP, BPT, K8, KLDE, KLZE?

stangant wrote: Anyone ever heard of a 6 speed trans for these cars? With only 5 speeds I cruize at 3k rpm's and that doesn't seem to gas savy, esp when 3k on my mustang is like you need to shift.

this guy's working on one right now for the v6's but he's not quite done.
http://www.xtremethings.com/F40_Transmi ... splant.htm

stangant wrote:I seem to have an exhaust valve tick under the rear valve cover... is this a terribly serious thing on these engines? I am guessing the best way to go about fixing that would be to take the head off

the valve tick is pretty much nothing, we have HLA's (hydralic lash adjusters) on our engines and they're very prone to ticking but doesn't affect anything

I have the 1.8L v6 that is stock in the GS.

Thats cool, i will have to watch out for that trans.


Ok that is good to hear, the engine only has 104 miles so not hoping for anything bad..

good performance Q's eh?


200HP is real easy. bolt in a rebuilt ZE. A few bolt-ons will net you 200 at the crank. 200 at the wheels is harder, which no longer falls under the "somewhat easy" category.


IDK what you mean by ecoboost. As far as I know, thats a Ford truck thing. Haven't paid any attention past that.


The whole RPM thing has been gone over a million times. A diesel red lines at 3k, thats irrelevant to when your MX should. Don't compare apples to oranges.

Its been found that the motor runs quite efficiently at this RPM. What amount of fuel the car consumes is only a function of how much air it needs to take in to make the power to do what you're asking it to. You can't just say that higher RPM = more fuel. The motor is making just as much power as it needs to cruise by limiting the air intake (IE, throttle). Its a balance, and RPM is one of the many factors. You can lower it 500 RPM with an MX-6 transmission. It had been lowered a lot in the past, by members from before I was around, and it fouled the plugs trying to cruise at significantly less RPM.



The HLA tick won't destroy anything, but if those lifter buckets are collapsing you're losing a decent amount of valve lift, which means you lose a bunch of efficiency and performance. Don't sweat it, but know what it is.

Ryan wrote:The whole RPM thing has been gone over a million times. A diesel red lines at 3k, thats irrelevant to when your MX should. Don't compare apples to oranges.

Its been found that the motor runs quite efficiently at this RPM. What amount of fuel the car consumes is only a function of how much air it needs to take in to make the power to do what you're asking it to. You can't just say that higher RPM = more fuel. The motor is making just as much power as it needs to cruise by limiting the air intake (IE, throttle). Its a balance, and RPM is one of the many factors. You can lower it 500 RPM with an MX-6 transmission. It had been lowered a lot in the past, by members from before I was around, and it fouled the plugs trying to cruise at significantly less RPM.

Couldn't of said it better myself, actually, usually it's me that says/argues this point, glad I don't have to this time On a related note, my Mx-3 averaged about 32mpg highway, no matter if I was cruising at the speed limit, or doubling it, it just ran great. My KLZE was coupled with my original K8 trans where at 120km/h she was at 4000rpms. My Rx-8 has the 6-speed of course, and at 4000rpms, she's at 125km/h. Having extra gears means nothing for lowering the RPMs on the highway, most cases, they just squeeze in an extra ratio between 1st and what was 5th would be considered 6th. This allows for the gears to be closer and for you to be able to take better advantage of the engine powerband by staying in it more often. If Mazda would of put a 6-speed in say the Mx-3, 1st would of been the same, 6th would of been exactly like 5th is, so you would still be revving the exact same on the highway, cause that's what Mazda figured to be the most economical, and gears 2, 3, 4 and 5 would of been shifted around to make room for the extra gear, that's it.

EcoBoost? That's just Ford's marketting stragety to advertise a turbo as a fuel efficient feature. Here, the Wiki article is perfect for it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_EcoBoost_engine

EcoBoost is a family of turbocharged, direct injected six-cylinder and four-cylinder gasoline engines produced by the Ford Motor Company. Engines equipped with EcoBoost technology are designed to deliver power and torque consistent with larger displacement, naturally aspirated engines while achieving approximately 20% better fuel efficiency and 15% reduced greenhouse emissions than these same engines. Relative to the power output and fuel efficiency of hybrid and diesel technologies, Ford sees EcoBoost as an affordable and versatile alternative and intends on using it extensively in future vehicle applications.

Basically, they use a turbo 4cyl instead of a v6, and a twin-turbocharged V6 instead of a V8 in related applications. So their point is that using the smaller motor, it'll be better on fuel economy (duh!) but you'll get the power when you need it with the turbo.

Perfect example would if, if you wanted to "Ecoboost" you're Mx-3, is to take out the K8 1.8L V6, and put in say the 1.6L DOHC 4cyl, than slap a turbo on it, B6T style; that's your Ecoboost.

If you want to look into Mazda's version of what "Ecoboost" would be, read into the KJ-ZEM Supercharged 2.3L V6, aka Miller Cycle engine. The Millenia S has the same highway fuel economy as the 2.0L 4cyl Mazda 626, but you get the power equilavent of a 3.0L V6 of that era. (Mazda's own words)

Off topic, I know... I still don't get how I can't surpass 30 MPG highway in my '92(K8). The gearing is the same as my '93(KL), but I can't do it for some reason.

Just get the 93-97 mx6 or 626 v6 transmissions they have a 5th gear that is awesome for mpg's on the freeway. Try it & you'll see u wont need a 6th gear. It'll get you over 140mph with a ze without redlining it with bolt ons & kl36 ecu.

MrMazda92 wrote:Off topic, I know... I still don't get how I can't surpass 30 MPG highway in my '92(K8). The gearing is the same as my '93(KL), but I can't do it for some reason.

Does your KL get 30+ mpg? Best Motoring did a review of the Mx-3, it's on YouTube. Just watched it this week actually, they said that the Mx-3 K8 is rated for 28mpg highway, but they managed to get 30mpg out of it in mixed driving.

I got roughly 30 driving my '93(KL) up from Santa Cruz to Eugene.

My '92(K8) city record(I recorded 4 tanks from each of a few stations to determine which station's additives worked best with my engine) was 32.xx MPG. I keep it between 2 and 2,400 in the city, and am gentle as possible on the throttle. The lights around here are super predictable, and that helps a ton when you like to coast through them.

I know economy isn't tied to RPM alone, but it's the only conclusion that makes sense, I drive 5 over on all major highways/freeways, so ~3k on the highway, and 3.5 on the freeway.

Generally speaking, is the K8 less efficient at 3k+ than the KL?