• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

Engine Failed, CTSC Damaged

I have been messing around with a 'boost controller' to address this issue since last summer. Sounds like I should get going and bring it to market. It is an stand alone controller which will operate the by-pass valve which is already installed on the CT kit. It will bleed pressure out of the manifold when conditions are not correct for boost, limit how high the pressure can build.
 
.....when I hit redline..POW..oil light goes on and I could hear clunk clunk clunk..and see a trail of oil behind me.

The crack, if on your block, could be from a snapped rod or parts of the piston banging around inside the cylinder after it breaking causing the loss in oil. Now what caused it to happen. My guess is a lack of fuel resulting in a very lean condition and then detonation. It's too hard to hear detonation when you're going that fast with the engine and exhaust screaming away for most people.

Thanks for your response. What happened Sunday with my car was almost exactly like you have described. I will remember your suggestions when putting the car back together.
 
I have been messing around with a 'boost controller' to address this issue since last summer. Sounds like I should get going and bring it to market. It is an stand alone controller which will operate the by-pass valve which is already installed on the CT kit. It will bleed pressure out of the manifold when conditions are not correct for boost, limit how high the pressure can build.

Interesting. I will be on the lookout for any updates. :smile:
 
Donny - your story makes me feel sick... what a nightmare. I'm so sorry. Let me know if I can do anything to help. On a related note, in the colder weather I was able to confirm detonation with my CTSC. Please read this thread... everyone should read this thread!
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82726


Cliff notes:I have spoken to both Comptech and Shad about this issue. Comptech confirmed they are aware that the Autorotor is very sensitive to temperature and elevation changes. Meaning it makes more boost so easily and can lead to detonation under certain conditions. They said they are working on a "fix". I assume this means fixing the ACM to do the right thing when it sees cold temperatures. There was no ETA.

When I spoke to Shad, he confirmed my suspicions - as 1NSX2NV said in his post. Looks like this is clearly a relatively well known issue across the board. Hopefully Shad is working with Comptech on a fix.

In the mean time, I am always putting Lucas Oil octane booster in the car when I fill it up. I also made a change in the fuel pressure regulator as well ( bolt replacement) that basically allows fuel pressure to keep building on the rail. These are very "hack" interim fixes, but I have not heard any detonation since making these changes even in very cold weather (30deg). Hopefully the ACM fix will come soon.

Brian,

Thanks for providing the information. Apparently, I thought my setup with the good dyno result ensured safety on the engine. I guess I was wrong! I was not aware that the CTSC is that sensitive to temperature changes. I certainly didn't know at between 50-60F there exist a possible condition for detonation.

I have lost 3 nights of sleep so far and really have been wondering wether or not Autorotor is safe enough to use on the car.

I hope to stop by Zahntech during lunch today and see my car and will provide more updates later.
 
Sorry to hear of your situation. Please keep us updated when you find out the culprit.

Just when I was all anxious and looking forward to the colder months, this happens to you.

I do want to say to those reading this thread and who do not have a CTSC, I've tracked my car in December in colder temps with no issues. I also posted in Saber's thread how I did see over 9lbs of boost to at various other times on the street.
 
The last tank of gas was filled about 3 months ago.

I hate to say it, but this could be the, or a large contributor to the problem. Gas octane level decreases over extensive periods of time. One strategy is to keep the gas level low if you're storing the car, drive slow/nicely and then fill up the car, and then drive nicely for that tank is what I'd suggest.

Add that with a cold air in Seattle...I don't want to rub it in. Look on the bright side, you' get a new engine.. and maybe supercharger! :wink:
 
Do you guys think bad gas could have caused this?And if so will octane boost help?
I dont trust gas stations now that the diff. between reg. and premium is almost 30cents in some places.You think you are buying premium but their tanks have 87.
I knew someone that owned a station a long time ago and he used to do it.
I filled up my benz at a ratty looking station two weeks ago. immediatly after my check engine light goes on.I used up 3/4 tank filled it up again at a diff. place and the light goes off.

sorry to hear about your engine,as a ctsc owner Im a little worried now.
 
I have been messing around with a 'boost controller' to address this issue since last summer. Sounds like I should get going and bring it to market. It is an stand alone controller which will operate the by-pass valve which is already installed on the CT kit. It will bleed pressure out of the manifold when conditions are not correct for boost, limit how high the pressure can build.

First off very sorry to hear about this.

Dave, What do you think about tying boost to the stock IAT sensor? In other words if the engine goes into the boost range tell the ECU the air temps are hotter than they really are so the ECU will pull timing. If the ECU reacts to the IAT like we think it does this would be another band aid needed to fool the OEM ECU to make the CTSC safer. Zublin should be able to make this piece once a little testing is done to understand what temps the ECU needs to see to start pulling timing, either that or maybe trick the ECU with the knock sensors. The reason I think Zublin can handle this one is that this is very similar to the voltage clamp he is making for the MAP sensor, in fact the unit would be tied to boost so he already has all of that part done. According to my IAT Sensor table in the AEM the voltage drops as the sensor heats up so I think all that is needed would be a small resistor added in line to the IAT sensor input to the ECU when ever the MAP sensor is seeing boost. I will send a PM to Zublin and see what he thinks. Something should be able to be done for those who do not want to make the move to the AEM or another stand-alone.

I am not sure without testing an Autorotor but if I was a guessing man I think the bulk of the damage is being done at peak torque and then the catastrophic failure at high RPM's when stresses are increased and the ring lands let go. When I tune my timing I always pull out a little more timing were the peak torque was in the pull and then roll the timing back in as RPM's increase. If you have a low octane issue causing knock it should show itself in the peak torque area first.

Dave
 
I'm surprised that no one has the knowledge base, budget and balls to ceramic coat their forced induction engines that were never designed for FI and have high compression ratios to begin with.

I'm probably the first FD and one of the first RX7 guys to try this out and since then I haven't lost an engine to detonation.

Lucky for me one of my friends works for a local aero-space company in the Bay Area and hooked me up with this $500/quart ceramic coat solution that they use for their aero-space applications.

After popping a handful of engines I was motivated to try this out.

There are a few ceramic coatings out there. Most of you are probably familar with the "chrome" one that looks bling. But the difference with this one that I have in the FD is that it has a 35% heat soak/transfer reduction compared to a 15-20% from the chrome version.

The most common applications for ceramic coatings are on the exhaust system, manifolds, and headers. When ceramic thermal barrier coatings are applied to exhaust manifolds or headers, they provide two advantages. They protect the headers from rust and corrosion and also reduce heat loss, which translates into high power output. If the headers are internally coated, they will create a higher velocity of the hot exhaust gases and less turbulence due to a smoother surface.

Pistons can also increase their performance characteristics with ceramic coatings. Coating the piston's crown and top will cause heat reflectivity, driving a percentage of any detonation energy back into the fuel burn zone, to increase fuel burn efficiency. It will also lower carbon buildup, which reduces detonation quality, as it builds up on the piston's crown and increases the risk of detonation damage to the piston crown surface. By protecting the crown and land diameter surfaces, it will allow for a leaner fuel mixture.

Ceramic-coating the cylinder head's combustion chamber and exhaust ports will create a faster, hotter burn and help scavenge gases at a faster rate. The coating of these passages also creates thermal transfer from hot gases to the heads themselves. The cylinder head valley can be covered with an oil-shedding coating to speed the return to the sump. Some will coat the cylinder head's external surface with a thermal dispersant to aid in cooling the head. The valvesprings are coated with an oil-shedding ceramic to aid in the oil return to the sump. Camshaft bearing surfaces are not treated, but the rest of the camshaft is coated with a dry film lubricant. The crankshaft and connecting rods are sprayed with the oil-shedding coating to cut parasitic drag.

Types of Ceramic Coatings
· Thermal Barrier
· Anti-Friction
· Oil-Shedding
· Thermal Barrier Coatings for Exhaust Systems
· Anti-Corrosive and Salt-Shedding

Some more info:

http://www.petersperformance.com/shop/ceramic.htm

http://www.engineceramics.com/coating_pistons.htm

Here are the rotors that have been coated:

CCR2.jpg


My knock readings are non-existent without changing the past A/F ratios. My water and intake temps have dropped down.

A few years ago there was some guy in the internet that took a cutting torch to a ceramic coated piston face and couldn't do any damage with the ceramic coat on. I think it was a Civic piston.
 
I visited the shop for the very first time after the disaster and had a chance to spend some time talking to Zahntech.

We still have not been able to confirm the cause(s) of the engine failure. However, apparently, #3 and #6 pistons were destroyed. It's odd since #3 and #6 sat on the opposite side of the banks. I saw the bits and pieces of scrap metal. Seeing the destruction of the cast iron pistons, I really understand why having forged metal pistons is important for FI vehicles. I also had a chance to look at the damaged blower, and the sight is pretty depressing.

It's very strange as the whole thing on Sunday happened within a few seconds. There was no sign of trouble at all before the catastrophe. It's going to be a long process and hopefully we will be able to unravel the mystery soon.
 
The #3 and #6 cyls have the effected pistons, the pistons are completely disintegrated, the cause is still being investigated, these cyls are not in the same bank and only share a section of the crankshaft..as to why 2 pistons in two different banks failed at the same time is still yet to be determined.


Nate and others are working with me on finding the cause of this very unusual failure.

JZ
 
92 NSX
6-speed tranny with SOS short shift kit
Installed CTSC Autorotor at 70,000 miles (August 2006), current mileage 73,000
NEVER tracked the car, only for street use
HKS exhaust
K&N filer
RPS clutch
DEFI boost and fuel pressure gauges
All maintenance services up to date
May location – Seattle
Temperature – between 50 – 60F
Donny

Hi Donny,

First of all, I am truly very sorry to hear about your engine trouble.

Looking at your dyno, I see that your car was actually not even running high boost, but just low boost with just around 328 RWHP. Which is not much considering there are many people here on Prime who seem to have much more power but without the problems.
I am wondering since your car has a Autorotor CTSC. I believe this is the new type right?
It seems that many of the current CTSC-problems are with the Autorotor units ?? Is the difference between the two models that significant ?
 
First I am so sorry about the failure. I truly understand how upsetting this must be.

If you don’t mind, I would like to ask a few questions.

1) What octane fuel were you using? 91, 93, or something else?
2) Do you recall your peak fuel or boost readings during the final run or anytime during your drive that day prior to the failure? Did you happen to glance at your gauges?
3) Are you using the original fuel pump?
4) Did you clean the fuel injectors at the time of installation?

The last two questions most likely won’t mean much and I can see why you may not have changed/cleaned the fuel pump/injectors because you’re A/F ratio is within range at the time of your dyno.

FWIW I speculate that your engine ran lean. I am guessing when you originally dynoed your car it was making approximately 7 psi in the warmer months (late August). The cooler weather most likely allowed the boost to creep up to 9 psi (which seems to be common for the Autorotor in cooler weather at lower altitudes). The CTSC FMU was most likely pushing the same amount of fuel when you originally dynoed your car as it was moments before the engine failed. However, moments before your engine failed the engine was getting more air, but not more fuel. As a safety net for potentially lean conditions, higher octane fuel could be used in the car. I am not saying higher octane fuel would have prevented this, but it seems to be working in SaberX’s case.

I am really interested in your responses to the above questions.

**EDIT** I just read you are from Seattle which means you are most likely using 91 octane, correct?
 
Last edited:
Looking at your dyno, I see that your car was actually not even running high boost, but just low boost with just around 328 RWHP. Which is not much considering there are many people here on Prime who seem to have much more power but without the problems.

This post caught my attention. By chance did you tighten the belt after the original dyno? I ask this because the rwhp is a little low for the Autorotor and could be a result of a loose belt.

I question if during your initial dyno you were only seeing 5-6 psi and upon tightening the belt (maybe after leaving the dyno) you were getting 7-8 psi. This adjustment alone could affect you’re A/F ratio and push it closer to the 13:1 range. I realize the FMU is a rising rate unit, but it just can’t supply enough fuel to keep the A/F ratio in check when the boost gets up in the 8-9 range.
 
This post caught my attention. By chance did you tighten the belt after the original dyno? I ask this because the rwhp is a little low for the Autorotor and could be a result of a loose belt.

I question if during your initial dyno you were only seeing 5-6 psi and upon tightening the belt (maybe after leaving the dyno) you were getting 7-8 psi. This adjustment alone could affect you’re A/F ratio and push it closer to the 13:1 range. I realize the FMU is a rising rate unit, but it just can’t supply enough fuel to keep the A/F ratio in check when the boost gets up in the 8-9 range.

I was wondering the same since my low boost really wasn't making that much more HP compared with others.

The belt was tight alright. The belt was checked every 1k mile by Zahntech.
 
1) What octane fuel were you using? 91, 93, or something else?
2) Do you recall your peak fuel or boost readings during the final run or anytime during your drive that day prior to the failure? Did you happen to glance at your gauges?
3) Are you using the original fuel pump?
4) Did you clean the fuel injectors at the time of installation?

I am really interested in your responses to the above questions.

**EDIT** I just read you are from Seattle which means you are most likely using 91 octane, correct?

Paul,

1. I only use the highest octane fuel I can get in Seattle which is 92
2. Unfortunately, I didn't pay much attention to the gauges, I was only watching the rpm
3. My car is using the fuel pump supplied with the new CTSC kit
4. The fuel injectors were sent to be clean and set back to factory spec
 
Unless something went wrong with the fuel system such as a failing pump i would not suspect it so much as a timing issue. Reason being is that the intake temp should have been colder than when he dynoed resulting in more fuel delivery.?

there are the basics also...what kind of fuel etc.

One question i have is what the firing order is and if number 3 and number 6 fall in correlation right after one another on combustion stroke?? forgot?

good luck!
 
I hate to say it, but this could be the, or a large contributor to the problem. Gas octane level decreases over extensive periods of time. One strategy is to keep the gas level low if you're storing the car, drive slow/nicely and then fill up the car, and then drive nicely for that tank is what I'd suggest.

Add that with a cold air in Seattle...I don't want to rub it in. Look on the bright side, you' get a new engine.. and maybe supercharger! :wink:

Man, this really sucks! Sorry for your loss. :frown:

I don't drive my CTSC'd car a whole lot (<500 miles per year tops!) so gas lasts forever. The first year I stored it for the winter with a full tank in November and it lasted until the following October!:eek: I always add fresh gas at the beginning of my drives to help keep the octane up. I tend to run at 1/8th tank when it goes into the garage, then add another 1/8th or 1/4th tank (ie double the amount in the tank at each fillup) to keep it fresh.


Keep us posted on your results.
 
Would octane booster add an extra insurance?

If you are referring to the bottles you get off of the shelves, not unless you bought like 100 bottles of the stuff. The thing is, octane booster is only the octane for that bottle. So 500 ml of 104 octane isn't going to budge 8 gallons of 91 octane. I haven't done the math yet, but it would be like a .1 boost in overall octane once you mix it altogether. You're better off getting 100 octane race fuel and topping off the tank.
 
If you are referring to the bottles you get off of the shelves, not unless you bought like 100 bottles of the stuff. The thing is, octane booster is only the octane for that bottle. So 500 ml of 104 octane isn't going to budge 8 gallons of 91 octane. I haven't done the math yet, but it would be like a .1 boost in overall octane once you mix it altogether. You're better off getting 100 octane race fuel and topping off the tank.


Octane boosters are a wast of money. Just get a 50-gallon barrel of 104 for $6.00 /gallon (at least last year). This is how much 12 oz's of that 'supposedly' 104 Octane normally costs!!

I have it and mix a few gallons every now and then, especially in the colder times. I just put in a full tank (more by accident..) and the car really likes it!
I think this should be mandatory for anyone with FI who is planning on giving the car a good beating the at the track or otherwise, for extended periods of time... or in particular cold weather.. unless your car is tuned really rich to begin with.

http://www.sunocoinc.com/site/Consumer/RaceFuels/DistributorMap/
 
It will be a great buy if, and only if the seller is willing to ship to the U.S.
"
注意:
・ 早期終了する場合があります。
・ 設定された最低落札価格にまだ達していません。
・ 海外発送はしません。(Seller will not ship internationally
."

Find a broker who is able to transport the engine via shipping container to you, cost should be around $500 for such a service. The current bid is under $3k, for essentially a new 3.0L motor.
 
Back
Top