Page 1 of 3

MZR Option

Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 3:15 pm
by methos
Hello All,

I have a 2006 NC and I may need to consider a motor rebuild or replacement? The car is being towed into the shop tomorrow so that we can get a prognosis. Really not sure but due to the very loud and heavy knocking sound when I last powered my engine off it does not sound good. In any case, I need to be prepared for the worst as this is my daily driver and my good friends loaner is only available for a short while.

So truthfully, I don't know very much at all about my options but all options are on the table if I should have a problem with the motor. Some 43k miles on it and the car is otherwise in excellent condition and has a few suspension mods. that I have picked up from Good-Win Racing and is lot of fun to drive.

Since I am a Calif. resident, and Forced Induction is not a realistic option for me with the state smog emissions, what sort of options do I have going with a more powerful MZR short block? Can I get another MZR short block in there that's stronger and more powerful and pass smog?

If anyone has any suggestions I'm all ears!

Thanks,
M

Re: MZR Option

Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 4:24 pm
by Brian
Technically there is nothing you can do in California for more power except put in another 2.0 factory motor and run cat-back exhaust and CARB approved intake (our AEM). That's about it...

Engine swap is tough in CA, you could go bigger but you must use motor of same age or newer and transfer ALL smog equip from donor car, etc. Go see the smog officials before and after to make sure you are doing it according to the regs, etc.

Re: MZR Option

Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:32 pm
by methos
In all seriousness, I own property in Idaho and am thinking of becoming an Idaho resident.

That said, is there an MZR resource that someone could suggest where I could get a built short block? If so, I'd like to explore this route. I'm just starting out on this endeavor and I would not be doing the work as I don't have the know-how or the time. Any feedback is appreciated!

M

Re: MZR Option

Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 7:00 am
by grippy
I used the bottom end from a 2010 2.5 from a Mazda 3 with the head, cams, intake from the original 2.0. Everything bolted right up and I had Dynotronics do the tune. Last check and I was at 167hp and 163 lb/ft on a dynapack dyno. There was still a bit of tuning to be done to be perfect but it was quite a bit faster than the stock 2.0. The swap was good for 20hp and 30 lb/ft gain, but the area under the curve is huge.

You can buy a shortblock (or longblock) from Mazdaspeed Motorsports if you have an account.

Re: MZR Option

Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 7:09 am
by Brian
I think Gordon's method is likely the most efficient way to do it....and retaining 2.0 bits on top makes it look stock enough.

Re: MZR Option

Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 4:41 pm
by RUKnight
That's pretty impressive Gordon. Was that with a stock header/exhaust and intake?

That would be my recommendation, either use a 2.3l from the previous gen Mazda 3 or if you can swing it the newer 2.5l. Should give a really nice boost in mid-range torque
Thanks
Mike

Re: MZR Option

Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:58 pm
by methos
Your responses are all much appreciated!


Just to clarify my confusion or rather, lack of knowledge; if the Mazda3 2.5L has - 167-hp and 163 lb/ft of torque isn't that just about the same as my 06 NC's 167HP but more on the "torque"? which is about 143 lb/ft?

Re: MZR Option

Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:00 am
by methos
Does anyone know if a Mazda3speed 2006-2010 "Turbo charged" engine would fit into a 2006 NC and if this engine/vehicle combination will pass Calif. emissions?

Re: MZR Option

Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:38 am
by grippy
My setup has CAI, header, full exhaust, light flywheel, custom crank pulley. I used the intake and exhaust from my 2 liter. I also had AWR make some mounts that are 1/4" lower to gain a bit of room between head and firewall, nice but not needed. I removed the balance shafts, used the 2.0 oil pan, 2.5 front cover, timing chain, and head gasket. The special tools to align the cams is also the same as the 2.0. Engine sits level and looks completely stock (except CAI and header).

This was not hard, but quite involved to get everything right, I had to do a lot of research and test fitting. Might a bit too much for your average shade tree mechanic. That is 167 WHP on a dynapack "heartbreaker" dyno. I am hoping for 170 once the fueling is finalized.

Next will be an intake manifold, headwork, and cams (next winter).

The speed 3 motor will not fit due to the fuel pump being mounted to the back of the head, no room.

Gordon

Re: MZR Option

Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:46 am
by skeeler
methos wrote:Does anyone know if a Mazda3speed 2006-2010 "Turbo charged" engine would fit into a 2006 NC and if this engine/vehicle combination will pass Calif. emissions?
1) Why are you putting quotation marks around "turbocharged" (and spelling it with space and a capital T)?
2) Mazda tried putting the Mazdaspeed3 engine in an NC. The fuel pump on the back of the head interferes with the firewall. You might be able to make it work by modifying the firewall.

Edit: Looks like grippy beat me to the punch.