Original Hotside MP62

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

It is appropriate for Moss to bring back the MP62 hotside as they did the first one in 2001. Here is an interesting atricle about the kit. When they decided not to sell the kits, they made arrangements with another company to take the design and build and ship the kits, buying the blower parts from Moss. Now they are building and shipping them again. Hats off to Moss.

Our 200 WHP version hotside kit will be basically the same as the Moss 170 WHP kit with the addition of the 75mm BTB, e-cool and the 6 rib belt with auto-tensioner.

http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/projectcars/0204scc_project_mazda_miata_part_4/index.html

[BlownMX5]

I get a "not found" on that link.

Pat.

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Pat,

try it now. The link got messed up somehow. Sorry about that.

[mike whitehouse]

I remember reading that when it came out. As best I can tell, they never followed it up as was implied by the article.

[J_Man]

It is appropriate for Moss to bring back the MP62 hotside as they did the first one in 2001.

I remember this - it was few years ago. But it was Shiv (Vishnu) and Oscar Jackson and not Moss. Shiv and Oscar Jackson bolted in the Miata a third gen M62. Later Brant followed with a MP62.

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

I guess Shiv should get the credit for doing the design. After all, the article he wrote does say he drove the car to Jackson and dropped it off. Then came back and picked it up. At that time, Jackson Racing was the design group for Moss. Moss sold 187 of the MP62 blowers through a company out east that they had an agreement with when they gave the company the help needed to get them up and running.

[Griff]

Any more news on price / availability / dyno of the Hotside ?

Thanks

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Latest word is that we should have the new parts around the 15th.

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Price is still at $3500 with everything. Two PC-Pros, e-cool, BTB, ~200WHP (non CA CARB kits.), 6 rib belt with auto-tensioner and MP62. For reference, the comparable SOT kit is ~$4100.

Availability for 94-05 kits is estimated for early February. We also hope to have the 90-93 kits by mid-February.

[J_Man]

Does this mean that the two PC-Pro plus and an injector cost over $1200 ?

[lovemx5]

We also hope to have the 90-93 kits by mid-February.

Woohoo! Finally a MP62 setup for 1.6. Now the hard part will be to decide if I will buy your kit or Gary's (TDR).

I want 180+ whp with no ping on 91 octane. Gary thinks he can get me there and beyond with his A/A IC, a Greddy Emanage Ultimate and larger injectors.

So I'm a bit sceptical that your kit will get me there with 2 PC-Pros, e-cool, and BTB. If it does then great, because I prefer the simplicity of your kit.

Good luck with the kit, I hope that you can reach your goal.

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Does this mean that the two PC-Pro plus and an injector cost over $1200 ?

It would be $900. $500 for the first PC-Pro mounted on the plug in harness and $400 for the 5th injector kit which includes the PC-Pro and injector. If ordered together, the second PC-Pro would also be pre-wired on the harness.

I think you missed the BTB. The SOT kit has that as an extra. It is included in our kit. I think they get ~$500 for that?

[J_Man]

It would be $900. $500 for the first PC-Pro mounted on the plug in harness and $400 for the 5th injector kit which includes the PC-Pro and injector. If ordered together, the second PC-Pro would also be pre-wired on the harness.

Wow, it gets pricey. Can't there be a way with future firmware upgrades for single PC Pro to control 5 injectors instead of 4 and this way avoiding a second PC Pro for the fifth injector?

If not maybe exploring options like the upcoming AEM F/IC could be a good idea. It will be able to control all the 5 injectors, and have ignition timing and datalogging features as a bonus and the total price of one will be cheaper than two PC Pro ...
Of course it won't be covered by the CARB EO but there will be people who put functionality and price ahead of CARB EO or not need the CARB EO in first pace



I think you missed the BTB. The SOT kit has that as an extra. It is included in our kit. I think they get ~$500 for that?


SOT have listed on their site similar configuration ( which includes an auto tensioner, BBK brand BTB and their new anodized pulleys ) without engine management for $2825:

This means that if someone wants to use it with your $900 dual PC Pro setup and fifth injector the total will be $3725

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

We are always looking for ways to improve our product but, for the moment, the two PC-Pros do the job exceedingly well. You have brought up the AEM a couple times already here and other places. I won't debate it's merits here and, suffice to say, I wont be giving up my hard earned CARB to use it at this stage. Their website says "coming soon". It also has no price. I'm sure you can find a thread somewhere that somebody has put one on some car (maybe even a Miata) but I would not change horses at this stage on a maybe when I have 100% perfect drivability with the PC-Pro on all versions of my product so far. You said it was cheaper than 2 PC-Pros ($600). I saw now pricing on their website either. I'm certain you can find somebody someplace who has seen a price somewhere BUT I would need to see AEM post an actual price before I would even consider it at this stage of developement of my kits. As it takes thousands of $$ to perfect a map that works across the board for all model years as the PC-Pro, I would be extremely hesitant to take that expense on in the hopes I might save a few bucks. Especially when the only benefit would be that, if it did possibly work as well as the PC-Pro, it is in one box. Lastly, when I went to the AEM website it asked for the Make, Model and Year of my car. I tried several years of Miata and it just didn't have any product available. Again, I am sure you can find somebody someplace that has adapted one to a Miata but, until the manufacturer blesses it for use on a Miata, I am not interested. Lastly, I have posted prices for my kits with NO engine management so people can buy it and use whatever engine management they want. Some like to tinker and know they can do a better job than I can (yourself for example). Most of my customers want to install the kit, turn the key and drive a perfectly civil Miata with a load of power. As unlikely as it is, I am always available to take your order.

Yes they did add the BTB for the 94-97. However, for 99-05 you must add $500 for it. As the bulk of the kits are 99-05, that would make it $4225 (wow. That gets pricey). Thank you for correcting that. If you want to average them out, weighted for 99+ as 60% of the kits, that would make the average $4025 (wow. That's still pricey). That would compare to my kit at $3500 (wow. That is really reasonable :)). And you can buy my kit WITH the BTB (all years) for $2795 and add your own engine management. That would compare with an average price for theirs at $3125 (using the $300 average for the BTB). Besides, with me, you get someone answering the phone 7 days a week. Even Christmas eve and Christmas day. Priceless. ;)

When you get one of the AEM FIC and get it working on your car, let me know how it runs. I would love to hear your first hand impression of it on your car.


Wow, it gets pricey. Can't there be a way with future firmware upgrades for single PC Pro to control 5 injectors instead of 4 and this way avoiding a second PC Pro for the fifth injector?

If not maybe exploring options like the upcoming AEM F/IC could be a good idea. It will be able to control all the 5 injectors, and have ignition timing and datalogging features as a bonus and the total price of one will be cheaper than two PC Pro ...
Of course it won't be covered by the CARB EO but there will be people who put functionality and price ahead of CARB EO or not need the CARB EO in first pace





SOT have listed on their site similar configuration ( which includes an auto tensioner, BBK brand BTB and their new anodized pulleys ) without engine management for $2825:

This means that if someone wants to use it with your $900 dual PC Pro setup and fifth injector the total will be $3725

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

New outlet manifold. Ran the red run with the old manifold. Then replaced it with the new manifold. Picked up 1PSI boost. The new manifold required a tweak of the fuel as it was flowing more air. First couple runs were a touch lean. Ignore the orque number on the red run. There was a tach sensor glitch and that caused the spike at 5500.

http://www.FastForwardSuperchargers.com/Dynos/New-Outlet-Manifold-RPM.jpg

[Bill @ Fast Forward]

Wow! And that is at the 200rwhp level... imagine what it would do at 300rwhp! LOL yeah, yeah I know your business plan is at the 200-220rwhp level :). I guess I have another FFS part that I will need now lol.

Bill

[chuckerants]

I have to say that the car feels just like it did when I went from a STB to a BTB. It feels that dramatic. WOW!!!

According to the Split Second R4 software, I went from 10.5 PSI to 11.4 PSI with the new outlet manifold. I'll post a pic later of what they both look like.

[Bill @ Fast Forward]

I recall I posted some calculations a few years back on the BRP forum about how much smaller the outlet manifold cross section was at the point where it is welded to the squished pipe. Brant didn't think it would help much by opening that area up even just a little bit. Ooops! :)

Amazing how these kits have evolved. Just compare where we are now vs. 5 years ago with the original 4-rib hotside! At that time I thought 170rwhp on the base non-intercooler kit running a 130/72.5 pulley ratio was just great! Now you are seeing 37 more rwhp with the same pulley ratio!

Bill

[Silverstreak02]

Tom

What set-up are you testing (pulleys, big throttle body,etc.)?

Jeff

[chuckerants]

Tom

What set-up are you testing (pulleys, big throttle body,etc.)?

Jeff

The new outlet manifold was tested on my car which has as of today:

* 65mm nose, 115mm crank FFS pulleys
* 75mm BTB
* FFS fuel rail
* Aquamist WI
* PC Pro
* 5th injector with SS AIC
* And whatever else that's on my sig below

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

What we are referring to as the 'outlet manifold' is the piece bolted to the top of the supercharger on the hotside kits. The goal at Moss was to let it breathe a little easier. Looks like it worked. All it lacks is "FFS" engraved in the top. ;)

Didn't take 10 minutes to replace. It didn't have a nipple for the 1/4" hose for the bypass valve so we drilled and tapped for a brass barb. Strictly a bolt on part.

It does have a much larger shaped volume to feed the pipe. It appears to simply flow better. Kudos to Moss for the development.

[Silverstreak02]

Tom

Do you have a picture of the new outlet manifold? Have you established pricing?

Jeff

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

No and no. I don't have pricing yet. Maybe Chuck will take a picture and post it. It is not anodized and doesn't say "FFS". :(

[Serpico]

Nice Chuck.

I'm a little confused though..... I thought you made 202whp with a 110mm pulley and now you are making 207whp with the 115mm and new outlet manifold???? Is that right or am I just lost as usual.....?

Will the new outlet manifold fit under a shock tower brace?

[Elphaba]

Nice Chuck.

I'm a little confused though..... I thought you made 202whp with a 110mm pulley and now you are making 207whp with the 115mm and new outlet manifold???? Is that right or am I just lost as usual.....?

Will the new outlet manifold fit under a shock tower brace?:confused: And did the hood close?:confused:

[Bill @ Fast Forward]

Nice Chuck.

I'm a little confused though..... I thought you made 202whp with a 110mm pulley and now you are making 207whp with the 115mm and new outlet manifold???? Is that right or am I just lost as usual.....?

Will the new outlet manifold fit under a shock tower brace?

I would trust what he posted here more for a back to back comparison of the original outlet manifold vs. the new one. 202rwhp was from dynoruns he had done previously (correct me if I am wrong Chuck). The 198rwhp was what it happened to make during this dyno session where he swapped outlet manifolds. Trying to compare what it made with the new outlet manifold to a best dyno run from months back is comparing apples to oranges.

Bill

[chuckerants]

I would trust what he posted here more for a back to back comparison of the original outlet manifold vs. the new one. 202rwhp was from dynoruns he had done previously (correct me if I am wrong Chuck). The 198rwhp was what it happened to make during this dyno session where he swapped outlet manifolds. Trying to compare what it made with the new outlet manifold to a best dyno run from months back is comparing apples to oranges.

Bill

That's exactly right Bill.

Whatever happened with the last set of dyno runs done months ago mean little today. However, the important numbers to look at are the max boost numbers that increased almost 1 full PSI.

I wished I used the record feature more on the SS R4 software, but neither Tom nor I knew how to save the recordings, so I think they are gone. Luckily, I had a chance to look at the records while at the dyno.

Also, I was worried about the new manifold clearing the hood, but it doesn't seem to be a problem.

[Serpico]

I guess what I'm getting at is the new manifold seems to add about as much boost as a 5mm pulley change.

Cost of new pulley- $60 (but I think they have gone up a little)
Cost of new outlet manifold- ????

I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers. Just trying to do the math before I spend any more $.

Nice results Chuck . I bet it's a blast to drive :)

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

We did have to cut a big hole in the hood but, yes, it did close. ;) j/k

:confused: And did the hood close?:confused:

[Bill @ Fast Forward]

I guess what I'm getting at is the new manifold seems to add about as much boost as a 5mm pulley change.

Cost of new pulley- $60 (but I think they have gone up a little)
Cost of new outlet manifold- ????

I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers. Just trying to do the math before I spend any more $.

Nice results Chuck . I bet it's a blast to drive :)

Remember that the resulting increase in power and boost is from improved efficiency with the outlet manifold. Though one could probably get similar results by going from the 115 to a 120 pulley, there would be more heat and more chance for ping with the bigger pulley.

[Bill @ Fast Forward]

Also, consider that the original 4-rib Hotside setups made about 170rwhp with the same pulley ratio as this one making 208rwhp :). That was with a 72.5 nose pulley on the 4-rib (the stock crank pulley is 130mm). Consider how much ping you would have to deal with the original 4-rib setup trying to run a 59mm nose pulley :). That is what you would have to run to have a pulley ratio that would give you the equivalent power increase from 170 to 208rwhp by going purely with a pulley change.

Just an illustration of why going by route of efficiency is better. And also how all the little efficiency improvements can keep adding up to make it impossible to get the same improvement by brute force... well, at least if you want the engine to stay together.

Bill

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

My ultimate goal is to make reasonable WHP with minimal spin of the blower. I really just want to make a hotside like my coldside. ~200WHP for $3500 and no intercooler.

All we did Saturday was make a couple base runs, shut it down and change the manifold and then start it up and make a couple more runs (8 runs total, I believe). When we fired up with the new manifold, the fuel was a bit leaner (~13 vs. 12) and boost was up 1PSI. We adjusted fuel to correct back to 12:1 and made that last run. Nothing else was done. I actually think we could have made a few more WHP but our time was up and there were a bunch of cars waiting.

[Serpico]

I agree 100% with what you've said Bill. I'd rather gain power by removing as many restrictions as possible. Unfortunately my A/A intercooler seems to be the biggest restriction, but it has to stay until I find a better solution and since there seems to be so few '01 & up hotsides, it may be a while.

Now the only question is ............how much for the manifold?

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

I won't have a clue on manifold price for a couple weeks. Not sure it has been released to the world yet. I know they are shipping my test kit this week. The goal is to mount it in Dan's 1.6L and test. They (Moss) have finished their design/testing on the 94-97 and are now heading for the 99/00. I will check on manifolds and let you know. I think it is not this or that but the combination of things that make it all work. Manifold, BTB, remote IAC, new manifold, E-Cool, PC-Pros, 6 Rib belt with auto-tensioner, etc. that make the system work.

[chuckerants]

Remember that the resulting increase in power and boost is from improved efficiency with the outlet manifold. Though one could probably get similar results by going from the 115 to a 120 pulley, there would be more heat and more chance for ping with the bigger pulley.

Now that I have a more effecient manifold, I won't be as sad this summer when I go back down a pulley size.

As for the manifold making as much power as a bigger pulley, it may and it may not. The only way to know for sure would have been to test a 110mm pulley with both manifolds, and the 115mm pulley with both manifolds.

But, I think the big question has been answered - Does the new manifold flow more air? That's a big YES!!!

[Serpico]

Did the manifold end up looking like this prototype?

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

yep. Looks just like that, more or less.

[chuckerants]

http://www.chuckfullobeans.com/images/miata/4322.jpg

Here they are side by side.

http://www.chuckfullobeans.com/images/miata/4323.jpg

Here's the old manifold on top and the new one installed.

Using a tape measure, I measured the manifolds at the first bolt hole closest to the outlet. The old manifold measures 1.5" high (or thick) and the new one is around 3" high (or thick). Now that's a lot of airflow.

[Scuba Steve]

I see one other minor advantage. It lets you get rid of another 3LA (3 letter acronym). The less I am reminded of the who I bought my hotside from, the better. :2gunelf:

[Scuba Steve]

I agree 100% with what you've said Bill. I'd rather gain power by removing as many restrictions as possible. Unfortunately my A/A intercooler seems to be the biggest restriction, but it has to stay until I find a better solution and since there seems to be so few '01 & up hotsides, it may be a while.

Now the only question is ............how much for the manifold?

It seems odd I don't have the intercooler issue you and dazoom do. When I pull my car out of storage this spring I am going to dyno with the Pc-Pro. I most definately will have post and pre intercooler PCI measurements taken.

It will be interesting to see the results.

[chuckerants]

I see one other minor advantage. It lets you get rid of another 3LA (3 letter acronym). The less I am reminded of the who I bought my hotside from, the better. :2gunelf:

LOL

That's why I asked Tom if he had the time to replace those 3 letters with FFS, but he didn't have the time.

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

I'm thinking that, if it came from me, I would engrave it with three initials as well. ;) :devil2:


I see one other minor advantage. It lets you get rid of another 3LA (3 letter acronym). The less I am reminded of the who I bought my hotside from, the better. :2gunelf:

[Silverstreak02]

Tom

Do you plan to offer this as a stand alone upgrade or does it have to be purchased from Moss?

Jeff

[Serpico]

Thanks for posting the pics Chuck. Did you make a gasket for it or did you use ultra-black?

FWIW, I gained about .5psi just by un-kinking my intake hose, so I can see why the new manifold makes a difference.

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

I wasn't planning on selling them but it wouldn't take much to convince me to do it. ;) Mike is on vacation so I won't be able to get a price for a couple weeks but I will. My price will be the same as theirs. Of course, they would be a few dollars more if they had FFS on them. ;)

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

We couldn't get the paper gasket off the old one so we used ultra something. Not sure which. Whatever they had at the dyno.

[Serpico]

Hopefully the price will be close to these.......
http://www.miatamania.com/Shop/ViewProducts.aspx?PlateIndexID=33921

If so, Please put me on the waiting list!

[Scuba Steve]

I'm thinking that, if it came from me, I would engrave it with three initials as well. ;) :devil2:

I have no problem with this if we receive what is promised. I have the vendor name on my turbo kit and am very happy with it.

If FFS provides the drivability promised by the the other SC vendor and can deliver the drivability, I am have no problem with FFS being engraved on it. :flowers:

[Scuba Steve]

I have no problem with this if we receive what is promised. I have the vendor name on my turbo kit and am very happy with it.

If FFS provides the drivability promised by the the other SC vendor and can deliver the drivability, I am have no problem with FFS being engraved on it. :flowers:

Sure wish I could edit this post, so I at least sound literate :oops:

[Kyp J]

Sure wish I could edit this post, so I at least sound literate :oops:

You could change your forum name to "Scuba apparatus Steve" and go with a theme on all your posts.

[Silverstreak02]

Tom

If you or Moss would like to try this on an 02 I would be game. I'm thinking the increased efficiency would lead to not only more power, but lower post blower temperatures. The lower temperature would help with ping resistance. I could do a before and after dyno run to verify any power increase. If it works I'll go down a pulley size to save my clutch for another day. I'm thinking smaller pulley, same power and increased ping resistance for those hot days of summer.

Jeff

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

I will get a price from Moss. They have tested on a 99 and a 2002 (2003?) with great results. I just did this test because it was the last piece of the puzzle before I stepped into the hotside world.

[94brg]

All we did Saturday was make a couple base runs, shut it down and change the manifold and then start it up and make a couple more runs (8 runs total, I believe). When we fired up with the new manifold, the fuel was a bit leaner (~13 vs. 12) and boost was up 1PSI. We adjusted fuel to correct back to 12:1 and made that last run. Nothing else was done. I actually think we could have made a few more WHP but our time was up and there were a bunch of cars waiting.

Nice bit of comparision work, would be good to see a bit more data though.... Such as everal runs without any changes for each system. You'll have to forgive my questioning, but I have seen 10BHP differences without changing anything - same dyno, same setup, same day.

Cheers
Matt

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

The owner of the dyno (keith) has two kids. I have already put both of them through college. We put 356 runs on the 05 just getting CARB perfect.

We made 3 or 4 runs on the old manifold and they were basically identical. We shut down and replaced with the new manifold and got basically the same numbers but it was pretty lean and boost was up 1 PSI. Adjusted the fuel to get back to where it was with the old manifold (more or less) and got the results shown. Didn't see any need for more runs. Also saw no need to put the old manifold back on for more tests there either. All I was trying to do was satisfy myself that the new kit was a go. I'm satisfied.

Now, we will have lots of dyno runs on Dan's 91 when we put the kit on it. That should help Keith buy a new car for each of the kids. ;)

[Silverstreak02]

I will get a price from Moss. They have tested on a 99 and a 2002 (2003?) with great results. I just did this test because it was the last piece of the puzzle before I stepped into the hotside world.

Tom

I just thought I'd offer to help. The truth is I would prefer to leave everything alone for awhile. The car is still running great after 7 weeks with the PCPro.

Jeff

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. ;)

[Silverstreak02]

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. ;)

I've never had seven weeks when everything worked as advertised. While the car is running great there was one problem. The BRP intake pipe broke and had to be replaced. Ironically it broke across the BRP logo. The logo was the weak point in the bracket. Go figure.

Jeff

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

LOL. I wont say what I was thinking. I saw your picture or somebody's picture of the break across the logo. Best I will say is that I'm sorry it happened to you.

I wrote this reply 4 times but erased the meat of it each time. Best left there. :)

[Silverstreak02]

LOL. I wont say what I was thinking. I saw your picture or somebody's picture of the break across the logo. Best I will say is that I'm sorry it happened to you.

I wrote this reply 4 times but erased the meat of it each time. Best left there. :)

Tom

Yes that was my post with the picture of the crack going through the logo. It seems appropriate that even the logo created a design issue. The news of a 1psi increase with the MOSS redesigned outlet manifold only reminds me of another part that has the same logo. Please tell me I have something that was designed correctly.

Jeff

[Scuba Steve]

LOL. I wont say what I was thinking. I saw your picture or somebody's picture of the break across the logo. Best I will say is that I'm sorry it happened to you.

I wrote this reply 4 times but erased the meat of it each time. Best left there. :)

I too have done that many times as I suspect have a couple of other people with whom I have PM'ed many times and are regulars here. Life is too short to hold a grudge, learn a lesson and move on.

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Tom

Please tell me I have something that was designed correctly.

Jeff

The PC-Pro? :)