Mazda MX-6 Forum banner
81 - 100 of 108 Posts

· Registered
3,036 Posts
Over estimating is fine but I still don't understand why you just select the higher out of torque and HP, the calculator is programmed to use HP so if you use torque it will give a different result?
Because an engine needs enough fuel to match the peak amount of air it ingests and burns.

The calculator assumes engines make more peak HP than torque, most engines do and peak numbers are above 5252 rpm. The stock F2T makes lots more torque than HP, if you fuel for 145hp with an engine that makes 190ft/lb torque it will lean out and the air fuel charge will pre-ignite.

For the last time, when you burn air and fuel in a combustion engine it generates torque at the wheels or crank, when you multiply torque by RPM and divide it by 5252 you get HP.

145hp @ 5000 rpm requires 152ft/lbf Torque at the wheels.
145hp @ 6000 rpm requires 126ft/lbf Torque at the wheels.
145hp @ 4000 rpm requires 190ft/lbf Torque at the wheels.

The underlined numbers represent the amount of air and how efficiently the engine is burning it. It will require different amounts of fuel for each of those three torque numbers, the calculator is designed to give you a rough idea of the minimum size injectors required.

The calculator works with HP for the Honda civic, If you size your injectors to the blue line on the chart (Peak HP) nothing goes above the that line on the dyno and the injectors are big enough to supply peak fuel requirements.
Rectangle Font Parallel Technology Slope

If you do the same thing with the Mazda F2T motor and size the injectors to peak HP:
Rectangle Slope Font Plot Parallel

Where does the engine get fuel from to burn all the air above the blue line? The engine will be lean to 5100rpm.
The engine doesn't know or care what the injector calculator says or how you filled it out, it ingest air and burns it and generates torque at the wheels, it requires fuel injectors that can deliver enough fuel to match the peak amount of air it ingests.

F2T Peak fuel requirement (blue line):
Rectangle Product Slope Font Plot

If you where going to use this F2T dyno to program a stand alone fuel injector map for your car would you write a fuel map that follow the HP band or the torque band?

The answer is your fuel map should follow the torque band bellow 5252rpm and the HP band above 5252rpm for all combustion engines.

Again most cars make more HP than torque and for those cars the calculator works.

Slope Rectangle Font Plot Parallel

Rectangle Slope Font Parallel Pattern

If you do that to over estimate and be on the safe side then that's fair enough but it seems a bit arbitrary because I could choose to use pound-feet or Nm and they're both torque but will give different results.

If the injector calculator uses HP, (Torque (foot pound force) X RPM / 5252 = HP) you can't use Nm. If the calculator used kW than you couldn't use FT/LB. (Nm X RPM / 9.5488 = kW).

You need to convert Nm to ft/lb. One foot-pound = 1.356 Fig - newtons
FT/LB = Nm / 1.356
Nm = FT/LB x 1.356

· Registered
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #82 ·
The calculator assumes engines make more peak HP than torque,
OK I guess I got confused because I'm used to using the metric system which means I have literally never seen a car make more power than torque.
We use Kw instead of Hp and Nm instead of ft-lb so in the example of the ZZ632 you gave, the 1004 HP and 876 Ft-lb would have been represented by any dyno here as 734 Kw and 1187 Nm - i.e. torque is a higher number.

But I do understand your logic in general, sorry if it seems like I'm trying to argue, I'm just trying to understand. If I understood this enough to understand everything the first time you explained it then I probably wouldn't need to be posting on a forum

· Registered
3,036 Posts
I live in Canada we use the metric system also, but I find it easier to use hp and torque than kW and Nm, still don't know how kW, a unit of energy consumption = horse power, BTU can also be converted to kW and then to HP, I don't see a heater making any horse power but it can be calculated.

Both systems have their advantages, measuring someone in cm is too high a "resolution", 6 feet is much easier than 182.88 cm to visualize, Kilograms are too low a "resolution" when it comes to weight, a girl says she's 5'2" and 100lbs, I can visualize that but 158.48cm and 45.3kg not so much. I prefer mm to fraction of inches, km/h to mph (bigger number is more fun), grams to fractions of ounces for small weights, PSI is better than kpa (to much "resolution") or Bar (not enough "resolution") but I prefer * Fahrenheit to *Celsius above freezing (and when cooking) but * C below freezing.

Learn everything and use what works.

Never believe what you read on the internet, always question everything but it is your job to look into it, research and confirm or disprove what you read or are told.

· Registered
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #84 ·
So the guy with the Telstar said that he has a 1988 turbo model that I can get whatever wiring etc I want from, but that probably doesn't help does it, unless I swap over the whole dash loom etc etc?

As an aside I find it much easier to 'visualise' 155.48cm and 45.3kg than 5'2 and 100lb, guess it all depends on what you're used to.
My point about that was that yes I understand your point about using Torque instead of HP because for the calculations you want to be using the point where the engine is using the most air/fuel, but the reason it doesn't make sense to me is because I could simply change that calculator to kW instead of HP (avoiding the "power being less than torque" issue) but that yields different results than entering the ft-lb you suggested.

· Registered
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #85 ·
@Mazda Carnage sorry I know we've been through this a bit already but I'm still struggling a bit to grasp the differences between the A and B spec car wiring.
You previously mentioned a B spec car you had, converted to A spec F2T, and posted a photo with the dash etc removed to do interior wiring which seems like a pretty big job.
But that also seems to be the same conversion that this guy did and it sounds like all he did was colour match a few wires (maybe 10 or 20) on the big white plug near the ECU.
Mazda 626 Turbo Conversion, Plz help

I guess my question is, am I missing something, i.e. does it look like the guy in that thread is actually doing B spec to B spec but there are some minor variations in the wiring because he's going NA to turbo?

The reason I'm still pursuing this is because if I can get a complete A spec F2T wreck without the engine (I can, as above) then I'd have every piece of wiring I need, and it would just be a case of doing some colour matching.
This would mean I can run the stock F2T injectors etc, probably would be more reliable (because I'll probably mess up an extra injector controller or FMU at first) and would save mucking around with the vacuum distributor to retard timing under boost etc.

· Registered
3,036 Posts
When we converted an N/A to GT it came with the complete motor, transmission, sensors, shifter... installed, basically it had a GT engine bay and needed wiring, we where going to flip the car and had a complete donor MX6 GT aspec for the wiring and ECU, I had no interest in splicing wires and used complete harnesses and aspec digital cluster. We did get the car running by jumping the fuel pump connectors at the dash but I got sick of swapping harnesses and because my shop partner Rob was swapping it for a 626 5door GT auto, I threw the rest of the harnesses in a bag and tossed them in the back seat.
The hideous green disgusting hatchback shit automatic sat in a field at his house until he sold the house and the new buyer sent the two 626GT auto hatchbacks in the field to the scrapyard.

The goal wasn't to just get the car running it was to make it an Aspec GT (with crappy B-spec interior, body and metal), I only ever kept or drove one 90+ f2/f2t, it was a 92 mx6GT, the owner spent a fortune getting it to pass safety inspection, then the exhaust manifold leaked and the inner tie rods went so he sold it to me cheap, I kept it plated and drove my 89mx6GT, when the 89gt got hit I fixed the 92GT and drove it until I got the 88 626 GT (that rusted away) on the road and the running 92GT became a parts car. Boy did I hate B-specs but you know what I hate more than B-specs, pretty much everything built after them.
The B-spec F2T is better than most new cars but an A-spec F2T is way better built than a B-spec.

All to say buy the Aspec donor car, does it come with the transmission and mount's...
But didn't you mention you already had an A spec engine harness and ECU, your post link just uses the Aspeck engine harness and ECU and ties into the B-spec stuff, you would be buying the car for the coil, igniter, firewall vacuum sensors and knock sensor controller.
How much is the parts car?

Look that post you linked is your best source of info on splicing these harnesses, you can give it a try, reconfigure the GT harness connector to match the N/A dash harness connector, if it doesn't work or you can figure it out try plan B, EIC or FMU.

Look I gave you the recipe to run either one pig rich and work your way down in air fuel ratios, kinda fool proof, you worry about that failing yet you plan to rewire factory wire harnesses successfully. I am very good at reading factory wiring diagrams, wiring stuff and pulling pins from connectors but I guarantee I spent less time (5 or 6 hours) swapping harnesses and components on that Bspec N/A than it would take to read the pinouts, figure out what to do and rewire.

I can try to help when you run into wiring issues but the north american wiring could be different from the cars in OZ, I know the ECU chips won't work between the two .

I always said aussies will turbocharge anything but the other day I watched a video on youtube of three nut jobs that turbo charged a wood burning barrel, WTF, they used a leaf blower to get the comp wheel turning, compressor pressure to burn the would and smoke pressure to turn the turbine, once the turbo is spooling it will hit 45 to 60psi, shoot flames and charcoal out the exhaust, sound like a jet engine and threaten to cause an explosion, the 3 stooges ran away several times, destroyed the turbo and made a turbo spool using burning wood, I saw potential, if boost was regulated properly and boost and exhaust pressures spun turbines connected to generators you could make the worlds most dangerous and annoying wood powered generator in human history, but possibly the most efficient?

· Registered
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #87 ·
I always said aussies will turbocharge anything but the other day I watched a video on youtube of three nut jobs that turbo charged a wood burning barrel,
Ah yes this reminds me of the videos of people who put an engine inside an esky and drive it around, looks pretty fun!

But didn't you mention you already had an A spec engine harness and ECU, your post link just uses the Aspeck engine harness and ECU and ties into the B-spec stuff, you would be buying the car for the coil, igniter, firewall vacuum sensors and knock sensor controller.
How much is the parts car?
I don't have a full A spec harness, I have just the blue part from this diagram. I also don't have an F2T ECU but there is someone selling an A spec one for $100 I could easily buy.
Ecoregion Map Slope World Font

The parts car - I have to double check exactly what will be included but he's asking $500 (plus I'd have to spend probably another $200 on fuel and car trailer hire to pick it up).
It won't include the engine or gearbox, but will include ALL of the wiring, and hopefully the igniter, distributor, knock sensor etc.

Yes I could probably avoid spending any of that money by just using the 'blue' harness I have and adding wires etc to make up what's needed in the red headlight harness, but at that point it's probably easier to learn to do the extra injector etc. The point of getting the parts car would be that I would end up with basically a fully functioning factory F2T setup.

crappy B-spec interior, body and metal)
Boy did I hate B-specs
What's wrong with the B spec aside from being annoying to work with if you're converting from Aspec etc?
As far as I can tell there aren't really any differences to the cars apart from a bit of wiring and sensors etc?

· Registered
3,036 Posts
When you say "Blue Harness" I hope you mean the "white harness" in the WSM diagram.
The blue harness is for the starter, alternator and ground, it is the same N/A and GT, A-spec and B-spec.
You need the white harness that's pictured, if you want to do what you linked you need to splice the white harness at the drivers strut tower (Passenger on your car) and the two connectors next to the ECU, If you use the red harness from the A-spec than you have to swap all the shit it connects to (like 4 more harnesses).

Know how to tell where a front wheel drive car was built to be driven (left side or right side of the road)?
By the location of the transmission, the transmission is placed on the drivers side of the car, the transmission weighs less than the motor, so the drivers weight and transmission weight balance against the motors weight.
Eagle Talons for example got stuck with the Lancer Evo motor and had the transmission on the passenger side of the car, so they where built like a right hand drive car but set up like left hand drive car.

Not trashing your car, pointing out facts about the B-spec because you asked:
In the 90's manufacturers started saving money when building cars.
There is something called Coke that is used in the smelting of steel, it's a natural substance and the world ran out of it.
The world started recycling metal, aluminum can keep it's quality when recycled but steel can't, every time steel is recycled it gets weaker.

-The B-spec is made of thinner weaker steel, the worst steel was used on the 90+ MX6's built in the USA, but even the 90 626's built in Japan where thin and weak (yet they weigh the same as A-specs). They use crazy amounts of salt and liquid sodium on the roads here in the winter and a 1988 Mx6/626 will outlast a 92 MX6/626. So the B-specs where always in worse shape than the A-specs even though the A-spec could be 4years older. I have landed on the roof in an 88 626 from 30 feet in the air and all four doors still opened (one of those doors is on the 666GT I am building). I have been hit head on in my lane at 90km/h in a 88 626 and been hit or crashed in other Aspec 626/mx6's. I have seen B-specs crash and it's not the same.

Safety and durability aside.
-The B-spec (626 especially) has uglier tail lights, both 626/mx6 have redesigned front bumpers the air vents are moved up to the black trim line making it look weird, the black molding that runs all around the car is wider and doesn't look right, the lip under the front bumper (GT and LX option) was now part of the bumper and any B-spec I have seen that had the slightest powersteering cooler leak has a warped bumper on the right side of the car, the A spec lip is removable and the bumper doesn't warp if the power steering cooler leaks on it.

-The engine sensors and connectors that where changed on the B-spec are less durable and become brittle with engine bay heat.

-The digital cluster was dropped with B-spec and the analog cluster got some changes for the worse.

-The interior fabric and pattern was changed, it isn't as durable or as nice.

-A-specs require 87octane and run a 15.7sec 1/4 mile factory, b-specs require 91 octane and run a 15.7second 1/4 mile, both cars run the same engine, boost and turbo. Here the highest pump gas is 94 octane so with an A-spec if I run 94 octane and turn the boost to 16psi I have 7extra octane points to help prevent knock, with a Bspec I have 3 extra octane points.

-The Bspec spindles are different, the collar (not the arm) for the outer tie rod is thicker and the tie rod is thinner but the same length as the aspec, this means longer 19mm crown nuts can't be used because you can't fit a cotter pin. The shorter 17mm crown nuts have a tendency to strip with modified suspension rough roads and tight corners. (I think mazda felt the outer tie rod might groove the collar in the spindle and made the hole smaller and tie rod shaft smaller but reduced the torque that can be applied to the nut before stripping it due to the reduced number of threads on the nut. Proper torque is what keeps them from causing wear, I put A-spec outers on my 92GT, cut the extra metal off the spindles and drilled the holes to fit the tie rod shaft.). Oh and an even more F'ed up power steering system that the aspec shit choices.

There are many other changes that where made to the B-spec but those are the most relevant to me.

The cars we get here could be different than the cars you get there, no station wagons where sold here and the F2 motor was dropped for 1993.

The B-spec Mx6 GT has a better spoiler than the A-spec GT which is made of rubber with metal inside that warps after 30 years, the B-spec is plastic foam and doesn't warp ( it does break more easily that the A-spec) less strong but holds it shape for ever so it's a better spoiler.

I feel like Mazda tried to take a car that was meant to have an 80's look and make pointless changes, took some of the mean look out of the car and some of the quality.

· Registered
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #89 ·
Nope it's only the blue harness I have, it's all the engine came with, which is why I was looking at the parts car option.

So yeah I think what I'd have to do would be to swap everything over including the 4 additional harnesses or however many there are, and the red one, etc etc.

Question is whether it's worth the $500, sure there might be a few extra parts on the car I could sell or keep as spares, but I also don't want to wait for months or years for a cheaper car to come up. The turbos are rare here so who knows how long it could take.

I see what you mean about A vs B spec, I have noticed in other cars that have had differences in quality between years.
I'm sure the trim and interior etc would have been different over here between years compared to what you got, (for starters the "GT" was never a thing here).
I can explain what we got here if you're curious but it never really mattered to me as the car was always just meant to be something cheap to have fun with, in fact it's by far the ugliest variant of anything F2 powered in my opinion
Automotive parking light Automotive side marker light Car Wheel Vehicle registration plate

· Registered
3,036 Posts
Well I am on a fence about advice, the link you posted would be the easiest way to get the car running, you need the engine harness (white) and the ECU. Swapping all the harnesses could lead to issues at the doors or tail lights or climate control... because it's a station wagon, If you do go look at or buy the car take pictures of your tail light connectors (and count the wires, door connectors, sending unit/fuel pump connectors... (but if you have to swap the cluster you will probably have to run the A-spec sending unit) door harnesses can be swapped.

500$ for the parts car + 200$ to get it home makes an Extra Injector controller or standalone seem like a good idea.
Extra injector controllers are universal (like buying a water meth injection kit), you can transfer it to any turbo charged vehicle and it has a high resale value because it's not vehicle specific.

Or maybe the solution is as simple as what I just wrote in brackets (like buying a water meth injection kit).
With a water/meth injection kit (51% distilled water, 49% methanol) with the right sized jet (s) and a wideband, N/A injectors, dissi and harness, you can run 7, 8 or 10 psi, not run lean, leave timing alone and run no risk of detonation, make more power per PSI (cooler boost air) and even run 87 octane in the gas tank, spend about the same as the parts car costs, have a universal wideband and watermeth kit you can transfer to any vehicle in the future or sell when you're done with the 626.
On the N/A ECU you don't need a chip to remove the F2T 12psi boost cut, larger jets and you can run 15psi on the factory turbo or upgrade the turbo and run even more boost.

Yes water/meth injection can cover all the fueling need for the boost you'll be running, I would say a 300 to 400CC jet should be enough, run an in dash manual boost controller (I will show you how to set up the most reliable and accurate boost controller that cost next to nothing to assemble and kicks the shit out of every electronic boost controller I have read about).
Set up the water meth kit to come on at 3psi (or at 1psi only at wide opened throttle), shut the boost controller and run the factory 6.7psi wastegate pressure, and drive the car. Keep turning up the boost until the air fuel ratios are 10.8 at low rpm and 10.3 A/F near redline.

Now you've really got some thinking to do.

Stand alone, expensive and lots of work.
F2T aspec harnesses, expensive and lots of/more work.
FMU, blah.
EIC, simple and versatile.
Water Meth, simple, versatile and best bang for your buck.

You know what I really don't like the 626 touring sedan 5door hunch back cars but the ford telstar take the ugliness of the hatch back one step further by throwing hideous 80's ford tempo/topaz style bumpers and Ford badges on the 626 touring sedan.
Maybe it's because we don't have the hatchback here, maybe it's because I would never suspect it to have an F2T under the hood (If I came up behind it I would think "get that piece of shit off the road" but with an F2T in it the car falls in to the category of new corvettes, mustangs, chargers, GTR's... "You don't have to get that piece off shit of the road but get it out of my way your slowing me down" .
So I kinda like your station wagon but if you tell anyone I said that I will swim to Australia and kick you in the nuts.

· Registered
3,036 Posts
So I thought water meth injection was mainly to reduce temperatures, you might need to help me understand how it solves the problem of delivering enough fuel under boost?
Long version:
Water/Meth is mainly to increase octane (resistance to pre-ignition in the cylinder) of the charge gas (air and fuel), Methanol/Methyl Hydrate/Alcohol has an octane rating of 119, Ethanol has a rating of 115 and gasoline ranges between 87 and 94 octane at the pump. Commercially available Unleaded race fuel has a maximum octane of about 110, special order 114unleaded octane can be purchased in some parts of the world.

Methanol as an added bonus has the highest evaporative cooling effect, ethanol has an evaporative cooling of about 4 times that of gasoline, while methanol has the effect of about 9 times larger than gasoline.

At a 50% mix rate methanol has an octane rating of 105 and the same evaporative cooling as ethanol, when the other 50% is distilled water the cooling effect is increased.

In a 49% methanol 51% water mixture the properties are the same as 50/50 mix but the mixture can not ignited in liquid or mist form, it must evaporate to burn. And doesn't gum up over time like ethanol blended fuel or gas or pure alcohol.

The rule of thumb when adding water/meth (51/49)) injection to a turbocharged engine is to run 1 A/F point richer (air fuel ration is the number of times the air to 1part fuel, so an idle a/f of 14.6 : 1 means there is 14.6 times the amount of air to fuel in the cylinder).
The F2T under boost has a factory/happy A/F ratio of 11.8 to 11.3 at redline. With water/meth the air fuel ratio's should be 10.8 to 10.3 at redline.

Methanol is a fuel so if you had a factory F2T at say 15psi boost and wanted to add water meth at the same boost you would only need a small amount to make the air fuel ratio 1 point richer. (About 8.5% of the amount of fuel the injectors deliver of methanol would be required, because the methanol is only half the mixture the amount injected need to be doubled so 17% water/meth. so if the injectors deliver 600CC at 15psi on an F2T 17% would be 102CC of water/meth).

If you had a factory F2 and wanted to run 7psi boost on factory F2 injectors you would need to run more water/meth injection, enough to cover the gap between the factory F2 injectors and 7psi boost and 1 point richer A/F ratios.
Using the injector calculator, for the F2 fuel injectors would require 176CC each and could deliver a total amount batch fired of 352cc/min, F2T on stock boost requires 285cc injectors and a total amount of 570CC /min.
This means 218cc of methanol is required + 17% (for the richer octane point) = 318cc of methanol (636cc of water/meth) l. But the factory F2 injectors aren't at their limit at wide opened throttle, we don't know how much fuel the F2T or F2 are actually burning at wide opened throttle.
But these numbers are way off, if the F2T requires 600cc @ 1bar boost it would require less than 450CC at 1/2bar boost.
Also the injector calculator doesn't specify if it's for individually fired injectors, or sequentially fired or batch fired. Batch fired means the injectors fires twice per ignition cycle and on a 4cylinder 2 at a time, sequential and individual fired injectors can fire more than one injector at a time but usually fire once per ignition cycle when the intake valve is opened. All three injection types can deliver different amount of fuel on the same CC injectors.

I think 400cc of water/meth (196cc methanol at 49/51 mix) at the extra CC's of fuel available from the factory injectors should be more fuel than is required to run the factory turbo wastegate pressure boost of about 7psi and you will have to turn up the boost to reach an A/F ratio of 10.8 to 10.3 at redline under full boost.
But these are my quick suggestion thoughts, it's your job to figure out how to size your jet or jets properly, you can run 2 jets off one solenoid, this would give you more combinations of combined CC allowing you to dial in the amount of water meth to boost you want to run.

Most people running water/meth on turbo charged cars have a water/meth stage of boost, they run more water/meth than is required to simply run 1 octane point richer, this means more methanol and water in the gas mixture reducing cylinder temps more that simply running "17%" of the total injected fuel volume at the same boost. So instead of tuning the injectors to maintain fuel A/F's at peak water meth boost (11.8 to 11.3 for the F2T) they leave the injectors total fueling bellow the engine requirements and use Methanol to deliver the extra fueling required for the extra boost at that stage.
Engines that run 100% methanol injection kits instead of 50/50 mix have to chase a slightly richer A/F ratio with pump gas injection but have to dial the factory injectors down and increase boost to run those A/F's.


Short Version:
Methanol is fuel with a high octane rating and has a high eveporative cooling effect.
If water/meth can supply the fuel required for a 2nd or 3rd stage of boost on a turbo charged car, it can supply the fuel required for the only boost seen on an N/A tuned engine, a second solenoid and properly sized jet and you could run a 2nd stage of boost, large primary jet and you can run higher boost in the first stage of boost...

· Registered
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #93 ·
Alright I think that more or less makes sense, only problem is that based on a (relatively brief) search most water/meth injection kits seem to be between $500 and $1500, plus maybe a bit extra for various bits and pieces to get it all working in this car, plus ongoing costs of buying the methanol, by which point I might as well just buy the parts car (or do an extra injector for potentially less money).
That being said I will still look into it, and it is something I like the sound of if I was actually chasing serious performance in this or another car.

· Registered
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #94 ·
New development, I bought a 1990 MX6 turbo for $600.

As you can see (hopefully the photos load) it has a massive intercooler on it, the guy gave me the stock intercooler first but reckons it's blocked, he said when he first got the car it would stall straight away but after replacing the intercooler it runs fine.
The intake also isn't connected at all, he said it won't run if the MAF is connected.

I actually am a fan of the MX6 styling and it looks good in red so I'm tempted to fix it, but it needs quite a lot of work, it's auto, and has a couple of rust holes in the spare wheel well. So the current plan is to use parts including wiring from this to get the 626 running, and then sell parts from what's left to try and get back some of the cost.
Depending what parts I can sell, this will work out as the cheapest option compared to an FMU or extra injector etc as there are other parts that I need that I can get from this car (eg exhaust parts).

At least it should be a B spec being a 1990, meaning that hopefully all the wiring harnesses should be more or less plug and play.

So the next thing to do is pull everything off the MX6 that I'll need. At this stage I can think of the following:
  • Downpipe (turbo to cat)
  • Distributor
  • Injectors (or whole intake manifold)
  • Thermostat sensors
  • Igniter/coil
  • ECU
  • all engine bay wiring

Potentially intercooler and piping but the piping is just a dodgy DIY job so maybe not. I also have an XR6T intercooler that the guy I got the original F2T from gave me and he reckons it can be made to fit easily.

  • What parts have I forgotten?
  • Should I use the MX6 radiator? I believe it's wider than the NA one but is it actually worth it to swap over?
  • Do you know if spark plug leads are different between NA and turbo?


Unrelated question (probably a stupid question)
When I removed the old NA engine, when I removed the LHS driveshaft, it separated at the inner CV joint (see pic)
Automotive tire Motor vehicle Automotive wheel system Auto part Hood

Can I just remove what's left of the rubber boot and pull the rest of the driveshaft out of the gearbox and just reassemble it?

· Registered
3,036 Posts
Swap the intake manifold with vacuum rail, hoses, firewall solenoids and charcoal canister. You need to swap the Aspec bracket that goes from the block to the head for the Bspec bracket.
Yes you should use the GT radiator.

Yes you can rebuild the cv joint, you need a new boot, grease and boot clips.

· Registered
3,036 Posts
When you say bracket that goes from the block to the head, do you mean the one that goes from the block to the intake manifold?
Yes, they mount in different spots on the intake manifolds between A and B specs.

· Registered
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #98 ·
OK great, I have the original NA 90+ bracket I can use anyway.

Also, I remember seeing a thread on here but can't find it now - may have even been you who posted but not 100% sure - but someone had converted his car from auto to manual and there was a reply explaining how it would use more fuel because normally, if the car was factory manual, fuel would be cut if the car was in gear and coasting without the clutch being pressed (which makes sense), but auto cars weren't set up this way, so if the car was manual swapped it would use more fuel when coasting compared to a factory manual.

The question is, will I have this issue using the ECU etc from the MX6, since it's auto?

Not the end of the world if so but would be good to know.

· Registered
3,036 Posts
Well if I posted it fuel wouldn't have been the reason, 50% of the benefit of a manual transmission over automatic is lost, the ability to downshift and slow the vehicle quickly. Like when your doing 120km/h in a 100zone and see a cop, drop it from 5th to 4th and slow the car without touching the brakes.

The deceleration control system is and isn't in the ECU. These are 92 ft2 wsm pics.
Rectangle Schematic Font Parallel Slope

Font Material property Parallel Number Document

The 92 n/a wsm pages are the same but EC-AT control unit (atx) is not listed on the second page.

In our case switching auto GT to manual GT we jumpered the auto gear selector near the battery to neutral so the car would start and ran without a safety neutral switch/clutch switch at the pedal because of the auto dash harnesses.
Eventually I ran speaker wire between the clutch pedal sensor and the auto gear selector to act as a safety neutral switch so Rob couldn't run people over when he tried to start his car.

Depending on how much of your cars N/A wiring connects to the GT harnesses you should be able to make the deceleration control system work as it should on a 5 speed.
In your case most of the system is already on the car and the auto ECU will decelerate the car the same when installed on a 5speed.
The only thing you will have to figure out how and where to wire is the transmission neutral switch, a signal is sent to the switch that is on the transmission, in any position but neutral the switch is "on" this switch connects at the rad support next to the reverse switch. What you might have to do is find out where the signal comes from on your N/A 5speed and where the signal goes to (probably the ECU), then when you install the auto headlight harness that doesn't have this connection, your run 1 wire from where the signal comes from to one side of the neutral switch and run a second wire from the neutral switch to where the signal is going.

If I recall the reverse switch gets spliced into the auto transmission inhibitor switch connector.
Without an EC-AT control unit in your car maybe this will be different but the WSM wiring diagrams should clear that up for you.

· Registered
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #100 ·
Pulled most of the parts off the MX6 on the weekend, will start putting them onto the 626 this weekend.
Will probably run into some plugs that don't go together with the wiring but hopefully I can work it out.

I'm not sure what will end up happening with all the wiring that went to the auto transmission, but in the info you posted above, there are some similarities eg the auto's inhibitor switch and manual's neutral switch have the same function, so I'm hoping the connectors may be the same. Otherwise I guess I'll have to look at the wiring diagrams more closely.

I'm also considering whether there's a way to retrofit the cruise control system from the MX6 to the 626 - the 626 does have an aftermarket cruise system but it doesn't work. I suspect the hardest bit would be the dash wiring. Not really something I'll worry about too much at this stage but would be nice to have.

Unrelated - you mentioned something previously about the way the boost solenoid is set up, and something about removing it to make the car continue to make more power at higher RPMs. Maybe I was misunderstanding. But are you able to explain that more at all?
In other words -
1. How should the turbo be set up to run correctly/safely with the solenoid removed
2. Should I leave the solenoid in place to make sure the car is running properly first before playing around with that sort of stuff?
81 - 100 of 108 Posts