Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    Fourtitude.com


    The Car Lounge
    Results 1 to 34 of 34
    1. Member HerrGolf's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 30th, 2002
      Location
      Columbus, Jugoslavija
      Posts
      5,851
      Cars
      2000 Civic D16Y7
      11-28-2007 09:43 PM #1
      Who made a better engine?

      It seems that the Duratec is found in more vehicle lines and was advanced for its time.

      On the other hand, the Mazda KL (in 1.8, 2.0 and 2.5 (warm cam and hot cam)) forms seemed to employ higher tech, like a two piece engine block and a Porsche inspired intake. Plus, it sounds really good in the Ford Probe.

      Which one is the better engine and why?


    2. Banned
      Join Date
      Mar 9th, 2001
      Posts
      13,716
      11-29-2007 01:21 AM #2
      Quote, originally posted by HerrGolf »
      Who made a better engine?

      It seems that the Duratec is found in more vehicle lines and was advanced for its time.

      On the other hand, the Mazda KL (in 1.8, 2.0 and 2.5 (warm cam and hot cam)) forms seemed to employ higher tech, like a two piece engine block and a Porsche inspired intake. Plus, it sounds really good in the Ford Probe.

      Which one is the better engine and why?

      I was under the impression that the KL motors had variable intake geometry before Porsche did; at least commercially?

      Edit: Porsche first used Vario-Ram starting in 1992 for their Euro-spec RS motors in the 964. Not sold in the US. Vario-Ram was featured on the 270 HP 1995 911 (993). This was bumped to 282 HP in 1996 with the addition of Vario-Cam.

      I've found the KL to sound a bit more exotic than the Duratec, and feel more responsive; even if the Duratec ultimately is a more powerful motor. (Part of the Duratecs lethargic feel is due to emissions control calibrations that the KL didn't need to meet earlier in the 90's)


      Modified by JrodVW at 12:31 AM 11-29-2007


    3. Banned
      Join Date
      Mar 9th, 2001
      Posts
      13,716
      11-29-2007 01:28 AM #3
      And for those in the lounge who are unsure what the KL series was in

      1993-2002 Mazda 626
      1993-1997 Mazda MX6
      1993-1997 Ford Probe GT
      1995-2001(2002??)Mazda Millenia (non S)

      All with the 160/164/170 HP 2.5 Known as the KL-DE or KL-03. The Hot motor was the KL-ZE that was more than just a hot cam. The upper intake was completely reconfigured pretty extensively. Those motors were good for another 30 HP out of the box.

      The 1.8 V6 was found in the Mazda MX-3 GS.

      The VRIS - Variable Resonance Induction System was similar to the intake system found on the Corvette ZR-1 and later found on Porsches in the form of Vario-Ram(not to be confused with Vario-Cam which is variable valve timing). A solenoid in the intake manifold would open at a prescribed RPM, switching the intake to a different set of runners for improved high RPM breathing.

      You could really feel the change over point; yet these motors often ran out of guts around 6300-6500 rpm due to restrictive heads. They were redlined at 7000 RPM; would freely spin past that, and made an exotic sound that would make Corrado owners jerkoff in the corner.


    4. 11-29-2007 01:34 AM #4
      The KL sounds like crap in Millenias


      Does sound good in the Probe though


    5. 11-29-2007 01:36 AM #5
      the Duratec is a good motor.. though i find it a bit noisy... un refined.


      lets not forget what motor Noble uses


    6. Banned
      Join Date
      Mar 9th, 2001
      Posts
      13,716
      11-29-2007 01:36 AM #6
      VRIS Further Explained.

      During times of resonance, the vibrating columns of air (which, though moving, still can support a standing wave) can actually help charge the cylinders. A vibrating column of air has dense sections and rarefied (low pressure) sections. If the standing wave is just right, a dense section of air meets the valve just as it opens. The denser air pours into the port, moreso than if resonance (and thus this standing wave) wasn't happening. The effect is a very mild "supercharging".

      But the engine RPM is always changing. If there was only one runner length, there would only be one resonance point. Mazda makes the manifold like a flute that can resonate at several wavelengths by making the runners have variable effective lengths. They do this by using butterfly valves in the manifold to direct air a "long way" or a "short way" (#2 is primarly responsible for this). Closed, the path is "long" and the primary resonance frequency is low. Open, the path is short and the primary resonance frequency is higher. By further changing the frequency in each surge tank (by opening or closing #1 valve, which exposes the each bank to the others' intake pulses, effectively doubling the frequency each surge tank sees), they manage to get several points at which good standing waves are set-up through the RPM band.

      In the KL03, the VRIS (variable resonance intake system) plates are controlled by the PCM, which is looking at engine RPM and loading (throttle angle) to know when to open the valves. #1 opens at 3250, which doubles each surge-tanks' frequency. #2 opens at 4250 which then shortens the average path length by 1/2. At 6250, both valves close.

      This 6250 point is a bit of a let down. The natural tendency would be to further shorten the path length but the realities of aluminum casting (driven by packaging and cost concerns) rears its head: there's no provision to make things even shorter. The only recourse they have is to revert to the longer path and lower frequency and rely on the 2nd-harmonic to provide a reduced-but-still-effective ram effect. It's a compromise and one of the things I dislike about the KL03 manifold.

      The North American I4 does not have this system, just the V6.

      BTW, people who get a KLZE but who don't upgrade their PCMs are getting hosed: the KLZE, with it's markedly different manifold, has different resonance points than the KL03. The PCM doesn't know this and switches the valves thinking it's an '03. Meanwhile, the ZE manifold never really has a chance to do its resonance thing properly because the PCM is stupidly flipping the valves at the wrong times.

      Also, people who remove or "tie" their VRIS are also hosing themselves. By disabling this feature, they're removing resonance points from the RPM band. Engine torque will suffer in the affected RPM areas and peak power will not climb. (Well, if someone completely removes the #2 valves & shaft, I suppose a bit might be gained from the removal of the restriction in the 4250-6250 range, but it won't be a huge gain and output will suffer everywhere else...)

      Its absolutely nothing like VTEC. It IS however, very much like quite a few resonant tuning systems used by nissan, porsche and bmw (to name a few). Adjustable cam timing and resonant air tuning are very very different.

      For even geekier info visit http://www.geocities.com/mikey...s.htm


    7. Banned
      Join Date
      Mar 9th, 2001
      Posts
      13,716
      11-29-2007 01:37 AM #7
      OK I'll stop I swear.

      Here is a Miata with a KL V6 with individual throttle bodies as well.

      http://youtube.com/watch?v=toughTZ9PIw


    8. Senior Member JustinCSVT's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 3rd, 2004
      Location
      Atlanta, GA
      Posts
      20,667
      Cars
      2011 VW CC
      11-29-2007 01:40 AM #8
      Quote, originally posted by HerrGolf »
      like a two piece engine block and a Porsche inspired intake.

      Those were actually Duratec features. IIRC, the original Duratec designed by Porsche was 2.7L and made around 250hp.

      Todras is on here and knows way more than me about the engine. I'll vote for the Duatec because mine was an absolute blast to drive and was tough as nails for the 35K miles that I had it.


    9. Banned
      Join Date
      Mar 9th, 2001
      Posts
      13,716
      11-29-2007 01:48 AM #9
      Quote, originally posted by JustinCSVT »
      IIRC, the original Duratec designed by Porsche was 2.7L and made around 250hp.

      Cosworth had a hand also

      If you can; track down an article called Night of the Living Iguana by John Philips from Car and Driver. It was from 1995 (IIRC) and was about flogging a prototype high output Contour at the 24 hour Nelson Ledges race (to become the SVT)


    10. 11-29-2007 01:50 AM #10
      The SVT massaged duratec sounded sweeet can;t knock it

    11. 11-29-2007 02:02 AM #11
      why the hell are you guys discussing low-performance economy car motors?

    12. Senior Member JustinCSVT's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 3rd, 2004
      Location
      Atlanta, GA
      Posts
      20,667
      Cars
      2011 VW CC
      11-29-2007 02:03 AM #12
      Quote, originally posted by lowerbacktattoo »
      why the hell are you guys discussing low-performance economy car motors?

      Because we can...

    13. Banned
      Join Date
      Mar 9th, 2001
      Posts
      13,716
      11-29-2007 02:04 AM #13
      Quote, originally posted by lowerbacktattoo »
      why the hell are you guys discussing low-performance economy car motors?

      What are you talking about troll? The KL was one of the most advanced V6 motors when it became available and was never marketed as an "economy" motor.

      The Duratec is also a fantastic design. Neither are boring, cookie cutter ho-hum V6's.

      Get the **** out and go troll some where else. You didn't even read a damn word any of us posted; you just saw Mazda and Ford = Not German; let's poo!


    14. Moderator staggered mk4's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 11th, 2003
      Location
      Bessemer City, North Carolina
      Posts
      5,068
      Cars
      '00 Jetta GLX VR6, '86 M-B 190E 8v
      11-29-2007 02:47 AM #14
      Quote, originally posted by Impeccable »
      The KL sounds like crap in Millenias


      Does sound good in the Probe though

      Amen. Miss my '94 GT dearly.

      "The hype of a wheel is not a derivative of its price... The cost is a derivative of their hype." M. Burroughs of Stanceworks

    15. Member GiacGtiAgain's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 8th, 2006
      Location
      Commack, NY
      Posts
      12,448
      Cars
      E46 coupe
      11-29-2007 02:58 AM #15
      My gf has a 2.5 litre duratec in her 5 speed 99 cougar. it feels sluggish, partly due to a ridiculously heavy flywheel and poor gearing. however, with just an intake, the thing makes some glorious noises at WOT above 4000 rpm.

    16. 11-29-2007 03:02 AM #16
      Quote, originally posted by lowerbacktattoo »
      why the hell are you guys discussing low-performance economy car motors?

      Wow, what an idiot.

      You might want to rethink your time here. We're not exactly the 16 year old amateurs you hang out with on the street racing boards....


    17. 11-29-2007 03:03 AM #17
      My vote is for the DUratec, only because of the flexibility of it. You can put one in a Focus with some degree of ingenuity. The SVT parts on the 2.5 SVT Contour mean that with some creativity, you can take a 3.0L block out of a Taurus and bolt it, and the SVT parts, together in a lighter car like a Cougar and have an absolutely screaming monster on your hands.

      I am still playing around with the idea of turning the Focus into a V6. It would solve every problem I have with it.


    18. Member Viss1's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 1st, 2003
      Posts
      5,877
      Cars
      2005 Outback Wagon, 2008 Mustang GT 'vert
      11-29-2007 11:01 AM #18
      Quote, originally posted by JrodVW »
      The VRIS - Variable Resonance Induction System was similar to the intake system found on the Corvette ZR-1 and later found on Porsches in the form of Vario-Ram(not to be confused with Vario-Cam which is variable valve timing). A solenoid in the intake manifold would open at a prescribed RPM, switching the intake to a different set of runners for improved high RPM breathing.

      FWIW the Duratec also had that feature.

    19. Member Merc-MarkO's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 21st, 2001
      Location
      Great State of Oregon
      Posts
      19,191
      Cars
      a '98 [on life support] and a '07
      11-29-2007 11:35 AM #19
      Quote, originally posted by lowerbacktattoo »
      why the hell are you guys discussing low-performance economy car motors?

      lol. trampstamp.

      Where is Kyron ??? http://www.bringkyronhome.org/
      Support our troops, bless the fallen.

      Quote Originally Posted by genjy View Post
      Yes, there is a high chance that the tractor trailer was the one going 160MPH, not the Porsche GT2 RS.

    20. 11-29-2007 09:53 PM #20
      Yeah, you're 30 year old amateurs who make 25k a year and love miatas only because you can afford them, all the while realized they're crappy cars.

      Anyway point is you're talking about low displacement motors that used previously existing technology and were placed into dull cars.


    21. Geriatric Member BRealistic's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 16th, 2005
      Location
      Tennessee
      Posts
      64,845
      Cars
      88 F150, 04 RX8
      11-29-2007 09:58 PM #21
      Quote, originally posted by lowerbacktattoo »
      Yeah, you're 30 year old amateurs who make 25k a year and love miatas only because you can afford them, all the while realized they're crappy cars.

      Anyway point is you're talking about low displacement motors that used previously existing technology and were placed into dull cars.

      The great thing about internet forums- you don't have to participate or even read threads that you are not interested in. Considering this thread has a very accurate thread title, it does raise the obvious question of why you even posted if you think these motors are somehow unworthy of discussion.

      On topic- didn't the Noble M400 use a twin turbo duratec 3.0 making 425 hp in stock form? While the 3.0 may be lower tech, it definitely seems to have been built (Ford) tough.
      I think the main issue with the Mazda KL series engines is that they really needed to rev to make power, and there were expensive distributor failures. But that may have affected more than just the KL engines.


      Modified by BRealistic at 6:06 PM 11/29/2007

      |˙˙ʇǝuɹǝʇuı ǝɥʇ uo ʇxǝʇ uʍop ǝpısdn ɯopuɐɹ pɐǝɹ noʎ :ǝɯıʇ ǝǝɹɟ ɥɔnɯ ooʇ ʎɐʍ ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ןןǝʇ oʇ ʍoɥ˙˙˙|http://hotlinktest.com/

    22. Member Shomegrown's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 26th, 2002
      Location
      Detroit
      Posts
      18,231
      Cars
      Current: Audi S4, Q3 2.0T quattro, Porsche Boxster S, Dodge Dakota 4x4
      11-29-2007 10:18 PM #22
      Quote, originally posted by BRealistic »

      The great thing about internet forums- you don't have to participate or even read threads that you are not interested in. Considering this thread has a very accurate thread title, it does raise the obvious question of why you even posted if you think these motors are somehow unworthy of discussion.

      On topic- didn't the Noble M400 use a twin turbo duratec 3.0 making 425 hp in stock form? While the 3.0 may be lower tech, it definitely seems to have been built (Ford) tough.
      I think the main issue with the Mazda KL series engines is that they really needed to rev to make power, and there were expensive distributor failures. But that may have affected more than just the KL engines.


      Modified by BRealistic at 6:06 PM 11/29/2007

      Actually, the KL motors were always praised for their friendly torque curves. Power fell off well short of redline and they were better short-shifted.


    23. 11-29-2007 10:19 PM #23
      Quote, originally posted by lowerbacktattoo »
      Yeah, you're 30 year old amateurs who make 25k a year and love miatas only because you can afford them, all the while realized they're crappy cars.

      Anyway point is you're talking about low displacement motors that used previously existing technology and were placed into dull cars.

      Since we're making generalizations...

      You're a 27yo douchebag with the dreams of a pedophile without the charm who makes plasma donations every Thursday in order to maintain residence in the attic room of the local crackhouse.

      Isn't this fun? I intarwebz!


    24. Member Shomegrown's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 26th, 2002
      Location
      Detroit
      Posts
      18,231
      Cars
      Current: Audi S4, Q3 2.0T quattro, Porsche Boxster S, Dodge Dakota 4x4
      11-29-2007 10:20 PM #24
      Oh, I might add that Duratec's have a nasty habit of insta-ploding if you take it to 7k or beyond, but a KL could rev to 8k all day (but doesn't make power there, stock anyway).

    25. Member Jetty!'s Avatar
      Join Date
      May 9th, 2006
      Posts
      18,531
      Cars
      2007 VW GLI, 2004 Honda S2000
      11-29-2007 10:26 PM #25
      Quote, originally posted by lowerbacktattoo »
      Yeah, you're 30 year old amateurs who make 25k a year and love miatas only because you can afford them, all the while realized they're crappy cars.

      Anyway point is you're talking about low displacement motors that used previously existing technology and were placed into dull cars.

      What car are you so proud of that you don't even care to share?

      By the way, I don't care for this topic too much but never realized how good that Mazda engine sounded.


      Modified by Jetty! at 9:29 PM 11-29-2007


    26. Geriatric Member BRealistic's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 16th, 2005
      Location
      Tennessee
      Posts
      64,845
      Cars
      88 F150, 04 RX8
      11-29-2007 10:28 PM #26
      Quote, originally posted by Shomegrown »

      Actually, the KL motors were always praised for their friendly torque curves. Power fell off well short of redline and they were better short-shifted.

      Oh- maybe I am thinking of the MX-3 GS 1.8 V6. hmm. Yes- that's it. Sorry.

      |˙˙ʇǝuɹǝʇuı ǝɥʇ uo ʇxǝʇ uʍop ǝpısdn ɯopuɐɹ pɐǝɹ noʎ :ǝɯıʇ ǝǝɹɟ ɥɔnɯ ooʇ ʎɐʍ ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ןןǝʇ oʇ ʍoɥ˙˙˙|http://hotlinktest.com/

    27. Member Shomegrown's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 26th, 2002
      Location
      Detroit
      Posts
      18,231
      Cars
      Current: Audi S4, Q3 2.0T quattro, Porsche Boxster S, Dodge Dakota 4x4
      11-29-2007 10:30 PM #27
      Quote, originally posted by BRealistic »

      Oh- maybe I am thinking of the MX-3 GS 1.8 V6. hmm. Yes- that's it. Sorry.

      I think you were. I really loved the Probe GT I had, shame it was the most unreliable car I've ever owned. I think it was a very underrated car at the time.


    28. Member Shomegrown's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 26th, 2002
      Location
      Detroit
      Posts
      18,231
      Cars
      Current: Audi S4, Q3 2.0T quattro, Porsche Boxster S, Dodge Dakota 4x4
      11-29-2007 10:31 PM #28
      Quote, originally posted by Jetty! »

      What car are you so proud of that you don't even care to share?

      By the way, I don't care for this topic too much but never realized how good that Mazda engine sounded.


      Modified by Jetty! at 9:29 PM 11-29-2007

      A KL series with a Borla catback sounds REALLY nice.

      http://video.google.com/videop...dex=0


    29. Senior Member JustinCSVT's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 3rd, 2004
      Location
      Atlanta, GA
      Posts
      20,667
      Cars
      2011 VW CC
      11-29-2007 10:59 PM #29
      Quote, originally posted by Shomegrown »
      Oh, I might add that Duratec's have a nasty habit of insta-ploding if you take it to 7k or beyond, but a KL could rev to 8k all day (but doesn't make power there, stock anyway).

      I don't know about that. DemonSVT had his limiter set at 8100rpm for awhile on his 2.5L before he decided to move onto a 3.0L. It wasn't safe but it still lasted. He said 7200rpm would be fine with the stock motor.

      But generally you should just stick with the stock redline.

      He has some good info here.


      Modified by JustinCSVT at 9:01 PM 11-29-2007


    30. Member Merc-MarkO's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 21st, 2001
      Location
      Great State of Oregon
      Posts
      19,191
      Cars
      a '98 [on life support] and a '07
      11-29-2007 11:40 PM #30
      Quote, originally posted by Shomegrown »
      Oh, I might add that Duratec's have a nasty habit of insta-ploding if you take it to 7k or beyond, but a KL could rev to 8k all day (but doesn't make power there, stock anyway).

      You can blame the Duratec for many things but not this,

      Link?

      Where is Kyron ??? http://www.bringkyronhome.org/
      Support our troops, bless the fallen.

      Quote Originally Posted by genjy View Post
      Yes, there is a high chance that the tractor trailer was the one going 160MPH, not the Porsche GT2 RS.

    31. Member Merc-MarkO's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 21st, 2001
      Location
      Great State of Oregon
      Posts
      19,191
      Cars
      a '98 [on life support] and a '07
      11-29-2007 11:42 PM #31
      Any guy with a trampstamp has no right to talk trash about anything.
      Where is Kyron ??? http://www.bringkyronhome.org/
      Support our troops, bless the fallen.

      Quote Originally Posted by genjy View Post
      Yes, there is a high chance that the tractor trailer was the one going 160MPH, not the Porsche GT2 RS.

    32. 11-30-2007 12:16 AM #32
      Having owned both motors (93 PGT, 98 SVT Contour) I'd give the nod the Duratec. The top end was better, it made some glorious noises above 4K RPM (not quite VR6 glorious though ). The Mazda motor was more polished, however.

    33. Member Shomegrown's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 26th, 2002
      Location
      Detroit
      Posts
      18,231
      Cars
      Current: Audi S4, Q3 2.0T quattro, Porsche Boxster S, Dodge Dakota 4x4
      11-30-2007 12:28 AM #33
      Quote, originally posted by JustinCSVT »

      I don't know about that. DemonSVT had his limiter set at 8100rpm for awhile on his 2.5L before he decided to move onto a 3.0L. It wasn't safe but it still lasted. He said 7200rpm would be fine with the stock motor.

      But generally you should just stick with the stock redline.

      He has some good info here.


      Modified by JustinCSVT at 9:01 PM 11-29-2007

      I was talking about the 3 liter.

      Quote, originally posted by Merc-MarkO »

      Link?

      Not everything in the world has a link pointing to it.

      I guess you could ask the firemen dispatched to clean up my dyno cell a while back.


      Modified by Shomegrown at 4:47 AM 11-30-2007


    34. Member ahardwicke's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 29th, 2004
      Location
      Laporte,In
      Posts
      5,252
      11-30-2007 04:30 AM #34
      I vote KL- series heres a quick vid of one of my mx6's
      I was once making a phone call in which I happened to go WOT and my fellow dubber on the end asked me when I had bought a vr? I laughed and told him I was driving my winter beater
      http://smg.photobucket.com/alb...7.flv


      Modified by ahardwicke at 2:31 AM 11-30-2007

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •