Mazda Protege5

the_big_h

varies greatly from make to make. German cars tend to have the lowest drivetrain loss ratio (consistently around 10-15% loss), whereas Japanese cars tend to have more loss.

I'd guesstimate the automatic in our proteges kill about 20-25% of engine's crank output.

based on other people's dynos, the 2.0L 130hp FS-DE engine has consistently put down 100~105 wheel HP on the Proteges. I'd expect a few more less HP if it's an automatic (95~98whp)

bluong1

For what I heard, the automatic transmission will eat few extra hp. My guess is less than 2%, not big deal.

Bruno

iamz

if I bolt on the Racing Beat exhaust and potentially gain 4-5 HP and 4-5 lbs of torque, then would my automatic be as fast as a stock manual P5? I realize it's not that simple since the losses through the auto would probably vary with engine's output and the shift points on the auto wouldn't be the same as a driver of a manual.

bluong1

I can answer your question but you got to tell me what approximatively is the shift point of the auto.

iamz

I'll check over the next couple of days and try and get an average for shift points. Thanks

iamz

With the pedal to floor she shifts from 1st to 2nd at 6300 RPM and 2nd to 3rd at 6200 RPM. I'm not sure if this helps but I noted that the shift into 2nd re-engages around 4100 RPM and the car hits 60 MPH in 2nd gear at around 5600 RPM.

bluong1

The shift point is a little on the low side of the optimum shift point, and the average power you'll get out is around 97 hp at the wheel on the auto v.s. 99 hp for the manual one. Let's assume that you loss around 2hp to the gearbox itself, that's around 4hp in total. So if you get out 4hp from the exhaust, I think you can be as quick as the manual car. Close call indeed....

Have fun with the exhaust and please tell us how it feels.

Cheers,

Bruno

iamz

Thanks. I'm still trying to justify the expense so I'm not at all sure if I'll buy the exhaust. If I can't convince myself that I will ultimately FEEL the difference, I'll probably pass on the upgrade.

Later,

ashutoshsm

You say 2hp, but I've read figures as high as 8-20% of total power (in the 100+ range) is lost to/in the automatic transmission.

Not that 4hp extra would hurt, but I was just wondering if actual losses are this low.

Anyone done a wheel dyno of identical cars with auto and manual tranmissions? Malt?

bluong1

I don't think we talk about the same thing: you are talking about the total power loss between the engine and the wheels regardless to the type of gearbox, whereas we (Terry and I) are talking about the addition loss of the auto gearbox with respect to the manual gearbox. I must admit I don't have an exact number, but I read that there is definitively some extra loss on the auto.

Bruno

dsm6

Racing Beat pretty much admits that the boost in performance is minimal. The biggest modification would be in sound, so really its mostly a question of how you want the car to sound, which is a matter of personal taste. I personally would pass on it on a bang for the buck basis and on a sound basis. YMMV.

BTW, I think folks may be underestimating the bottom line performance difference between stock manual and stock auto. I haven't seen times for the auto equipped Pro, but typical times for stock auto vs manual differ by maybe .5 - 1.0 seconds 0-60 (depends - it varies quite a bit, but these numbers are ballpark). So, it seems to me that we are typically not talking the equivalent of a mere 5 hp difference when you account for not only extra loss from the torque converter, but also extra weight and usually fewer gears.

bluong1

The average power numbers cranked out above is calculated from the gear ratios and the dyno power curves of the FS-DE engine (yes I have them in the digital forms). Torque converter efficiency is an unknown, however I assumed it to be -2hp for the auto. Extra weight is really insignificant IMO. The only thing I do not take into account is the lag of the auto gearbox.

mazdafun

At least until torque lock-up occurs, sometime after you get into overdrive and back off the RPMs.

I sometimes see folks using their acclerator to hold their AT-equipped cars on uphill slopes, kind of like riding the clutch. Neither is good for the transmission.

dsm6

Regardless of dyno results and hp calcs, the typical differences in 0-60 and 1/4 mile ET/speed (aka bottom line performance) for an auto/manual comparison speak to a larger equivalent power difference than just 5 hp. Equivalent is the key word here - as in accounting not only for dyno results but also weight, # of gears/gear ratios, etc.

Let me put it this way - If you were to add 5 hp at the wheels to your average 130 hp car, do you think you'd pick up .5-1.0 seconds 0-60? I don't think so. Not even close. That is basically what I think is being asked - if a new exhaust is put on a stock Pro with auto, will its "performance" match a stock manual Pro?

Now, by performance, one could mean dynoed hp, but I sure wouldn't mean that. I would be looking for bottom line performance on the street. If I guy in a manual Pro beats your auto Pro in a drag, would you just shrug it off and say - "Well, yeah, his car is faster, but my car has more hp at the wheels."?

iamz

Bruno's numbers seem logical to me. Lets say the auto P5 puts 97 HP to the ground and for example only, let's say it's 0-60 time is 9 seconds. Add 5 HP to 97 and you have 102 HP which is a 4.9% gain. If the 0-60 time improves by 4.9% you would shave .44 seconds off.

I don't think automatics are as bad as they used to be. In fact, the last generation of auto equipped Toyota Supras always have 0-60 times faster than the manuals. Didn't matter who was driving the manual, the autos always beat the pants off of the manuals.

dsm6

a 5% increase in power won't give you a 5% decrease in 0-60. Take the limiting case of 100% increase in hp. How fast will the car go from 0-60 mph then? 100% faster, or 0 seconds?

bluong1

Guys, I did a simplified simulation (in ignoring air resistant) using gear ratios provided by Mazda website and assuming 5% decrease of hp. Check out this graph. 5% loss of hp could cost you 1s in 0-60.

http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/slb-cycling/

Click on P5 folder, and P5acc

Bruno

dsm6

I will take your word for it, though.

dinu01

dsm6

the MP3 got a 10 hp at the crank increase (7.6%) - and its 0-60 decreased, what, .3 seconds or so?
I think you'd have to agree that the MP3 is a fairly relevant example in this case.

bluong1

it woks for me. Try this one:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/slb-cycling/

click on Photos on the left side, then P5, then P5acc.

If it still doesn't work, I would appreciate if someone could help me to put the graph with jpeg format somewhere else. Please send me an email at bluong2@slb.com.

Bruno

bluong1

Darren,

I agree, it's not easy to generalize a physics law from an experiment, especially the one that is complex as timing two cars with different engines, different tires, different weight, different conductors, different road surface, different atmospheric condition, ... you name it.

Bruno

altersys

The quicker times in a manual powertrain are not totally a result of lower powertrain losses. As some have seen, extrapolating these ET differences with power losses results in numbers that don't make sense.

Generally, the significant reason why manuals are "quicker" than autos is due to the ability to launch better off the line. Which is also bad for your clutch so it's not a realistic comparison anyway!

-Alt

bluong1

OK , it does't seem the second link is working either. So here are the numbers from the calculation. First column is speed in mph, second column is time in second for the manual transmission with shift point at 6700 rpm, and third column is time for the auto transmission assuming -5hp and shift point at 6250 rpm.

sp(mph) mt at(-5hp)
---------------------
10 0.70 0.78
20 1.68 2.04
30 2.70 3.24
40 4.27 4.88
50 6.09 7.10
60 8.34 9.45

Bruno

toddp_5

I'm not sure if these numbers apply to the Protege tranny or not, but here is what I was told. I had my Z28 dynoed by Hypertech on their chassis dyno, and the guy that runs the dyno told me that they use a "generic" figure of 20 percent total loss from the engine to the wheels for an auto, and 15 percent for a manual.

So, if you have your car dynoed on a chassis dyno, and you have an auto, you would take the horsepower figure at the wheels and divide that by .80 to get the "engine" horsepower; for a car with a manual, you would divide by .85. For example, my Z28 (sorry, haven't dynoed the P5) dynoed at 308 at the rear wheels, so that computed out to 385 at the engine/flywheel -- 308 divided by .80 equals 385.

Using those figures for an auto vs. manual in our car, if the P5 made 130hp at the engine, then the manual would be making around 110 hp at the wheels and the auto would make around 104 hp at the wheels, a difference at the wheels of about 6 hp.

Todd

mustang87

interesting discussion you guys are having. good points raised by everybody. haven't read messages here in just over a month. i have to start contributing again

my auto p5 no roofrack, removed resonance chamber, and removed fresh air intake (over radiator) with k&n panel filter, 87 gas and me about 210 pounds went 0-60 in 9.77 seconds. quarter mile was 18 flat (different runs).
both times are with g-tech pro.

an auto with exhaust will still not run as fast on the street as a manual. though i raced a 00 pro auto (1.8 sedan) with exhaust and a CAI and he did beat me.

any p5 (auto and manual) seem too loose a lot at the wheels. 25+% loss on a manual is way too much (it seems all dyno runs prove that thats what people are loosing). either mazda got POS transmissions and engineers working for it or the cars are not putting out what they are supposed to and that is 130hp at the crank. and I am more than sure its the second one.

bluong1

Dynos of the P5 gives 102-104 hp at the wheels.

Bruno

bluong1

Interesting number. What kind of wheels do you have?

Bruno

mustang87

stock wheels and stock rubber.
26k miles.

i do agree that the difference in performance #s shows more than a 5hp difference in hp between auto and stick. all other p5s in my club are stick and they seem to pull so much harder.

tetonman

Here in Chicago we've had our first real snow of the year. I took the P5 out and about to get acclimated to how it handles in the snow with its stock tires. I have to say that the handling and grip were very good. No slipping on starts ( I have a manual 5 speed) and it felt like the tires were able to maintain traction on semi-plowed roads. Front wheel drive always helps, but after reading our Canadian friends discussing snow tires on the boards, I am happy that the stock set-up works just fine.

Part 2 will come once we get more than 3-4 inches...

protege_fan

The stock tires may do ok in snow, but watch out for the ice!

tetonman

but no tires work well on the black ice we get around here...

Love this car though...

meinrad

We got a little snow over the weekend and I went out to test the stock tires also. I have been back and forth with the snow tire idea for a while.

I was happy to find they did just fine. My big test is if I can start on a hill. I had to be careful with the clutch and gas, but I got started without a problem.

Tested some defensive manuevers (like avoiding a deer) and didn't have trouble with that either. I don't particularly like ABS but it worked as well as I expected. Slammed the brakes and swerved out around my imaginary obstacle.

I think if I lived in a snowy climate I'd get the snows, but for the 4-5 times a year I've got to deal with snow covered roads I think the stock setup will suffice.

bluong1

can improve the traction on the snow. Has anyone try this and share the experience?

Bruno

protege_fan

lowering tire pressure in the winter was what you were supposed to do?

And Ray...seeing things now are we?

bluong1

I was right. For example, please check out the last sentence of this website

http://www.accidentreconstruction.com/news/nov02/112002a.asp

protege_fan

Thanks!

subyaudidude

An underinflated tire means that there is more tire contacting the driving surface. In snow, this is a bad thing. With more surface area contact, the weight of the vehicle is spread out over more tire surface area. This prevents the tires from cutting through the snow and digging in. Rather, the car "floats" on the snow. This is why low profile wide tires stink on the snow.

dinu01

Check it out (from the REAL drivers of this world)

http://www.wrc.com/en_GB/Gallery/Photo/2002/001/2002_R_S_Tyres.htm

Dinu

WRC Freak (I mean fan)

dinu01

http://www.wrc.com/en_GB/Gallery/Photo/PhotoSearch.htm?Media=Photo&Year=&Rally=S&Driver=&Team=

Dinu

bluong1

riopelle

Regarding the clutch chatter and TSB conversation that's also on the P5 problems and solutions board, would someone point me in the direction of where to find all TSB's for the P5? My clutch chatter has increased and I plan to take it in.

Thanks much. This board rocks.

protege_fan

www.nhtsa.dot.gov
OR
The good folks over at www.protegeclub.com have an FAQ that has a list of as many TSBs as they could find.

riopelle

Great references, much appreciated.

audia8q

Got an email from Mazda this morning...applies to most regions.

0% for 60 months

hurler4

audia8q, I couldn't find this on the Mazda website. Do you have any more info? Is this in lieu of all rebates? In the Boston area, you can buy a brand new P5 for $3000 off the MSRP. I would think that would pretty much negate the 0% for 60 months?

bluong1

well, I think rebate is from the dealer whereas 0% financing is from Mazda, therefore they are independent offer. Rich? Maltb?

audia8q

It's not on their web site...they are usually behind. Sometimes as much as a week or more.

It's either the dealer cash or the financing. Remember, dealer cash is not a consumer rebate and the dealer can give as much or as little as he wants.

The ad you saw is using the dealer cash which goes away if the consumer takes the zero percent financing.

khoa_98

I just got original mazda floormats for my Pro5, and noticed a little hole where I assume a little plastic peg would go to keep it from sliding, but I can't find the peg. My old sentra had one. Do people with mats from the factory have those?

dinu01

The driver one has the peg. All others don't. mats some standard in all Mazdas in Canada. Don't you like that nice "Protege" written on them?

Dinu