the redline on my car is sitting at 7500 RPM. ohh it sound sweet when you got thatsound going on haha

 

Thanks for that - but I think that's the turbo engine as the graph indicates about 250 HP at 6000 rpm. I don't know that the turbo affects the shape of the torque curve, but I bet that it does... this matches an online review I read of the Speed3 which comments on the "step" in the curve around 3000.

Nonetheless, I agree with your assessment - the 4000-5000 region looks pretty robust. Here's what I get when I generate a HP curve based on that (assuming the picture upload works):




[IMG]local://upfiles/15381/6DC16D052B084B11BD3466107886AC4F.gif[/IMG]

 

no, i am sure it's not turbo. (btw, how dod you get the HP reading from the orig plot? it only has torque reading). they are comparing baseline engine (blue) with direct injection on the 2.0L engine. turbo is added to the 2.3L engine along with direct injection. here's the source. I can't read Japenese, but one thing is clear is that it's not turbo.
http://www.mazda.co.jp/philosophy/te...ine/disi2.html
________
LIVE SEX

 

Ah, drat - I screwed up on the conversion. hp = torque (n-m) x rpm x 1.34 / 9549. That makes it look a little better. []



[IMG]local://upfiles/15381/E3AF4553C1714BBEADD64DA283FA0A57.gif[/IMG]

This is what I get for using an unfamiliar calculator at work and trying to hurry. Back to my trusty HP to get the right answer. [sm=smiley36.gif] BTW, that's HP for the blue curve.

 

I think you are right to keep the RPMs at 3500 or under. I'd stick with that until you hit at least 1000 miles. I'd also make the first oil change earlier than Mazda says - I did my initial change at 670 miles. Is that crazy? Hey, it costs under $30, and I think it provides a real benefit. RememberMazda reallyonly wants your car to be completely trouble free through the warranty period, after which they'd actually like to make some money off you fixing it, or selling you another new one. Presumably you want it to last longer and not need repairs. Lots of data out there suggests its good to get new engine manufacturing particulate that shakes looseout of there - why let it cause wear for thousands of miles?

Even now, I almost never take mineabove 4,000, regardless of what graphs may show, my feel is this engine delivers its best smooth power in the 3000-4000 range. Best gas mileage seems to beat 3000 rpm, +/- 200.

I hear ya about not buying the 2.3. I wanted the better gas mileage, and see the 2.3 as having too much potentialto cause speeding tickets.

 

Yeah, I'd about decided to change the oil around 1000 miles or so. Once the engine is well run in, then I can try out different shift points etc. So far the MPG has increased with each tank, and yet I'm driving a little more aggressively every week. 31.7 avg on the current tank, trending upward. Love that trip computer.

 

Well said, Urban. Being an ex-Civic owner I've been pleasantly surprised at the torque/hp in the 3k-4k range... it's plenty to pass people around town and make aggressive lane changes/run yellows. What a relief not to have to push my engine 4500+ to get some juice. Although Civics are known for their, well,CUTE torque numbers...at least in '97. What a difference.