While not a new product, there is still plenty to be excited about. Say hello to the new and improved CorkSport Aluminum Skid Plates for 2008-2013 Mazdaspeed 3 and 2004-2013 Mazda 3. We took all of the great features present in the original one-piece design, and then went back to the drawing board to improve the fitment, make installation easier, and make shipping cheaper for everyone. Read on as we go through the full details of this redesign.
Designing the GEN 3 Skid Plate
While designing the GEN 3 Skid Plate for 2014-2016 Mazda 3, we realized that utilizing a two-piece design is a fantastic way to save you some money on shipping. The overall design is smaller which allows us to use a smaller box to eliminate any oversized package charges from shipping companies. This is the same reason why our GEN2 Speed3 Front Lip is made of multiple parts. By designing the skid plate into two-pieces, installation on your vehicle becomes more flexible when aligning the front and rear sections. The multi-piece lineup creates wiggle room to help get everything all lined up properly on your car. Since each and every car is just a bit different, the extra wiggle room helps to achieve the best alignment possible, even on cars that have had their subframe, radiator support, and/or bumper removed and not reinstalled perfectly.
The Perfect Fitment
Going to a new design gave us the freedom to improve fitment even further. We have revised the mounting locations to ensure the easiest installation possible and reshaped a few areas to best fit on your car. Like the original though, no permanent modification to your Mazda is needed as we use all OEM mounting locations. Plus, the CorkSport Aluminum Skid Plates for Mazdaspeed 3 ship with all of the tools that you will need to install it.
Ultimate Protection Without the Weight
Both GEN1 and GEN2 CorkSport skid plates are made from laser cut and precision formed 0.090” aluminum sheet. This thickness offers great protection from road debris and the occasional tall speed bump without adding a ton of weight to the front of your Mazda3. Where an OEM plastic splash shield would crack and fail, the CorkSport skidplate can take a beating, offering you peace of mind whether you’re riding at stock height or have lowered your MazdaSpeed 3. Speaking of riding low, the CS under tray sits up slightly higher than the OEM shield, giving you that little bit of extra clearance when you need it.
If this is just your next mod in a long list of mods do not worry. The CorkSport Aluminum Skid Plates fit with both GEN 1 and GEN 2 Front Mount Intercooler Kits as well as the CorkSport Lower Tie Bar. The CS GEN2 Front Lip will fit as well but may require some modification to the skid plate and/or front lip. For all of you Mazda 3 owners, just a heads up that these skid plates were designed for the Mazdaspeed models so you may require some minor trimming for best fitment, all of which can be done with a simple hand saw or razor knife.
There you have it folks, the new and improved CorkSport Aluminum Skid Plates for GEN1 and GEN2 Mazdaspeed 3 & Mazda 3. Let us know if you have any questions down below and we will be sure to help you out!
New & Improved: The CorkSport Aluminum Skid Plates for Mazdaspeed 3 March 19th, 2019CorkSport
It’s time to break down our design for the CorkSport Performance Intercooler Upgrade for the Mazda 6 2.5T. We have covered both the OEM intercooler and piping, and our design plan for the upcoming Sky-T intercooler piping upgrade in previous blogs, but today’s focus is the intercooler itself. Intercoolers are a delicate balancing act between size, cooling efficiency, and pressure drop so naturally things can get a little complicated. Buckle up and stay with us, and be sure to drop any questions you may have down below.
Taking a look at the stock intercooler mounted on the Mazda 6 (shown above) shows us quickly where our size constraints lie. With the large crash bar, we cannot go too much larger in height without trimming the crash bar, bumper, or both. However, there is a ton of room for added thickness and better end-tank design that can really help increase the width of the intercooler. The stock intercooler core is 24.5” wide, 5.5” tall, and 2.625” thick. Our plan is to fit a 27” wide, 6” tall, and 3.5” core without any trimming. This sizing combined with a low-pressure drop will be good for 400WHP with no issues! Because the Mazda 6 comes with just around 200WHP from the factory, this sized core provides plenty of room for upgrading down the road without causing excessive boost lag that can occur if an intercooler is simply too big. Check out a prototype CorkSport intercooler mounted on the car below.
Now that size is taken care of, let’s move on to cooling efficiency and pressure drop of the CorkSport intercooler for the SkyActiv 2.5T. These are tied closely together as getting extremely high cooling efficiency usually means high pressure drop and vice versa. Just so we’re on the same page, cooling efficiency is how well the intercooler cools off the pressurized air that passes through it. So a highly efficient intercooler will be able to bring the boost temperatures down similar to the ambient air temperature. Pressure drop is exactly what it sounds like, a loss in pressure from the inlet to the outlet of the intercooler which can be caused by a number of things: poor end-tank design, too many intercooler fins, or simply poor flow distribution in the intercooler. Too large of a pressure drop means lower boost pressures reaching your engine and/or your turbocharger working harder to achieve the same boost levels.
Pressure drop and cooling efficiency are influenced primarily by two things: fin density and end-tank design. Fin density is basically how many fins the boosted air must pass over when traversing the intercooler. More fins = better cooling efficiency, but also more pressure drop. To choose the best core for the SkyActiv 2.5T we plan to use multiple different fin densities and test each for power, cooling efficiency, and pressure drop. While we can get pretty close based on our work from the CS Mazdaspeed Intercoolers, it’s always best to test and identify the best one for each platform. With this extensive testing, we can reach our goal of improved cooling efficiency, lower pressure drop, more power, and no CELs.
End-tank design is critical as it determines how the air reaches the core of the intercooler. Sharp bends, poor air distribution, and small inlet/outlet size all adversely affect the performance of the intercooler. To fit the core size we want, we had to do away with the plastic inlet and outlet pipes of the stock intercooler. This was advantageous as it gave us more room to have a smooth flowing end-tank that distributes air well to all the runners and does away with the sharp corners present in the OEM end-tanks. In addition, we were able to increase the inlet and outlet size of the intercooler to 2.5”. This is a fairly standard size that has shown to work well for the Mazdaspeeds with stock power and without choking flow way up to Barett’s 600+ WHP.
Those of you with a keen eye have realized that the connection between the CorkSport front mount intercooler (FMIC) and the OEM Intercooler is not the same. As shown in the CAD rendering above, each intercooler kit will come with the silicone and custom adapters that are needed to work with the OEM piping. If you decide to upgrade to the CS intercooler piping kit, later on, the CorkSport Intercooler for SkyActiv 2.5T will not need to be removed, and you will only need to change some silicone parts.
We will have more info on this kit coming soon, with the next blog covering our testing of the different core designs using a few new toys from AEM Electronics. Be sure to check out the product listing for more info, and to be notified when the intercooler is available. Last but not least, CX-9 Turbo and CX-5 Turbo owners, we are 99% sure this kit will also work on your rides but we plan on validating fitment before release!
-Daniel @ CorkSport
Let’s Get Chilly: CorkSport Intercooler for SkyActiv 2.5T March 14th, 2019CorkSport
We’re back on the new CorkSport turbocharger lineup again with today’s blog, this time focusing on the testing & validation of the “medium big” turbo, the CST5. Just in case you missed it, the CST4 (formerly known as the CorkSport 18G) is getting some company to go along with its new swanky name. Check out the full lineup here and the design behind the CST5 here. Now that you’ve read all that, let’s get into what you’re really here for, testing & dyno numbers.
We started with the internal wastegate option, to validate the CST5 for drop-in fitment. Since we’ve had great experience with the drop-in CST4, we knew how to design a turbo around the tight confines of the Mazdaspeed engine bay. The CST5 fit great in the OEM location with just a few minor revisions for proper fitment. It looks pretty good in there too if we do say so ourselves!
Next the car got put on the dyno for tuning and to push the new CST5 to its limits. With a little help from our friend Will at PD Tuning, the CST5 was soon putting down some impressive numbers. We started off with a “calm” boost level of ~25psi. This netted us 450WHP and spool time that surprised us, achieving 20psi by 3500-3600RPM. Turning up the boost and pushing the turbo to its limits, we achieved 519WHP at ~30-31psi on Barett’s built GEN1 MS3. Check out the dyno graph below.
Taking the car out on the street surprised us further at just how early the car was building boost for this size of turbo. Road logs showed that we were making 20psi slightly sooner than on the dyno (3400-3500RPM) but even more surprisingly the CST5 was making 30psi by 3700-3800RPM! Obviously this is an aggressive tune that would most likely kill a stock block, but, the CST5 can be tuned to be stock block friendly and still make good power.
Then came the testing on the EWG variant of the CST5. We had developed fitment for the CST6 which meant the CST5 had no issues upon install on both MS3 and MS6. Next was a quick retune and some power runs. The larger swallowing capacity of the EWG housing meant some extra power at peak, yet spool was nearly unchanged. We made 525WHP at the same ~30-31psi.
Comparing the IWG and EWG turbine housings you can see a small variation in the graphs. This variation is mainly due to the change from internally waste-gated and externally waste-gated. The EWG setup provides more precise boost control through the RPM range. The EWG setup allows us to better tune the “torque spike” around 4200rpm vs the IWG setup. For peak power the IWG and EWG housings are within the margin of error which makes since because they are both 0.82 A/R housings.
Further supporting the IWG and EWG setups, both options allow you to tune the spring pressure so you can better setup your CST5 and Speed for the fuel and boost levels you want and of course the most noticeable difference is what you hear. What’s an EWG without a screamer pipe!
Wrapping up testing showed exactly what we were hoping for with the CST5: a great middle ground between the existing CST4 and the upcoming CST6 that can be used on both high powered stock block and fully built cars. Our testing continues as this blog is written as the CST5 is being beta tested by a close friend of CS with a freshly built Dankai 2.
There’s more to come from the new CorkSport turbo lineup so stay tuned for more info on the CST5, CST6, and EWG housings.
-Daniel @ CorkSport
CST5 Spools!! Testing and Validation February 28th, 2019CorkSport
A few weeks ago we discussed some of the design intent behind the CST5 turbocharger for the Mazdaspeed platform. Today, we want to follow up with the CST6. The CST5 and the CST6 both were a result of CorkSport’s desire to develop a new stock flange turbocharger that goes beyond the power limits of our FANTASTIC CST4 Turbo.
During development of a higher power stock flange performance turbo we found that we were asking too much of the CST4 Design. The result of our efforts are the CST5 Turbo which you can see here and the CST6 Turbo which we are about to dig into.
In this blog we’ll dig into the wheel sizing, the CHRA, and some of the challenges we faced in the development and testing.
The compressor wheel utilized on the CST6 the well-known and trusted GEN1 GTX76. The GTX76 compressor is rated for 64 lb/min and is capable of boost pressures that will require a 4bar MAP sensor upgrade. Like the CST5, the compressor housing is a 4inch inlet with anti-surge porting.
Unlike the CST4 and CST5, the CST6 uses a completely different CHRA and bearing system, and for good reason. As the turbocharger wheel sizes increase so do the weight and potential boost pressure. This results in higher loads on the wheels, turbine shaft, and bearing system. To increase durability and performance of the CST6, we opted to move from a conventional journal bearing design for a more modern and robust ball bearing design.
The ball bearing system improves durability and stability for high horsepower/high boost operation along with improved spool and transient response. Changing the CHRA did pose some new challenges however. Ease of installation has always been a key feature with CorkSport products and that’s not lost with the CST6. The CHRA has been modified to support use of the OE oil drain line and all necessary oil feed components and coolant components are included for seamless installation.
Like the CST5 Turbo, we’ve put focus on the wheel size ratio and have validated it’s performance. The CST6 Performance Turbo uses the Gen1 GTX76 compressor wheel paired with the Garrett GT35 turbine wheel…aka GTX3576r. This wheel combination provides us with a ratio of 1.12 which falls well within the rule of thumb discussed the in the past CST5 blog.
In testing, we found that increasing the size of the turbine wheel from a GT30 to a GT35 with the same GTX76 compressor wheel resulted in more top-end power and no penalty in spool time. This combo also provided a good power delta from the CST5 to better provide an optimal power option for the community. Since then the CST6 has proven power at 600+whp at ~34-35psi and testing will continue past 40psi.
The initial testing of the CST6 started with an internally wastegated turbine housing as that was the original goal with the CST5 and CST6. However, it quick became obvious that a turbocharger of this size and power potential could not be safely controlled with an internal wastegate. The amount the wastegate port and “exhaust” or flow was not nearly adequate for proper boost control.
Boost would creep to nearly 26psi with no signs of tapering off. Nevertheless we continue testing knowing that auxiliary fueling was necessary. Once the CST6 power and durability was validated we moved to design a turbine housing that could provide the necessary boost control and power potential.
Above is the removed CST6 internally waste-gated housing. In our testing we pushed the turbo to nearly 600whp with 40gph of methanol auxiliary fueling. This amount of heat combined with a turbine housing that was literally being pushed to its limits resulted in a great learning experience. As you can see, the turbine housing was cracking! The GT35 turbine wheel and power was just too much.
From this discovery and analysis we developed the EWG turbine housing with the CST6 in mind. The scroll size was increased, wall thickness increased in critical areas and the 44mm EWG port added.
With the use of the EWG turbine housing, boost control is now spot on and can easily controlled from spring pressure to an excess of 35+psi. Stick around as we continue to push the limits of the CST6 as we continue testing and validation of the CorkSport V2 Intake Manifold w/Port Injection.
Thanks for tuning in with CorkSport Mazda Performance.
-Barett @ CS
CST6 – The CorkSport Stock Flange Record Turbo February 19th, 2019CorkSport
Today we’re taking another dive into OEM Mazda parts to better understand how they function. Specifically, OEM suspension springs, since there are CorkSport Lowering Springs coming soon for the 2018+ Mazda 6 2.5T. While a simple concept, springs are very important to the handling, appearance, and comfort of your vehicle.
The new Mazda6 Turbo uses a lot of the same components as the GEN3 Mazda3 and Mazda6, however the suspension has been optimized for the new “premium” feel and to deal with the extra weight that comes when adding a turbo. The SkyActiv chassis has largely remained the same though, with the same MacPherson strut front suspension and multi-link rear suspension shown below.
Now, onto the springs themselves; both the front and rear suspension of the Mazda 6 use standard compression springs. The springs job is to support the weight of the vehicle when at rest and adsorb impacts when hitting bumps or going quickly around a corner. That’s it. Seems simple enough right? Since the springs are the parts of the suspension that “suspends” the vehicle though, their characteristics and how they interact with the rest of the suspension system are critical.
There are two main characteristics that define a spring: rate and free length. Both are pretty easy to understand. Free length is simply the length of the spring with no weight or force acting on it. So set a spring by itself on a table, measure how tall it is, there’s your free length.
Spring rate is a little more complex, as it is the measure of how much weight it takes to compress a spring a given distance. So, if you have the same weight and put it on two different springs the one with the higher rate will compress less. The rate is usually measured in kg/mm (often shortened to K) or lbs/in.
For example, if you had a 2K spring and a 4K spring and applied 100kg to each, the 2K would compress 50mm and the 4K would only compress 25mm.
What do these measures mean for your car though? If we keep the rate the same but only change free length, the shorter the spring, the lower the car. For a given car, a spring can be too short, causing poor ride (sitting on the bump stops all the time), or the risk of a spring coming out of place, causing noises or at worst, the spring falling out of the vehicle.
If we change the spring rate and leave the free length the same, things are a little more complicated. The higher the rate, the stiffer the ride is, plus your ride height will increase. Since the weight of the car is not changing, the higher rate spring will now compress less when the car sits on it, meaning your car sits higher at rest. Too large of a rate and your OEM shocks cannot keep up causing a bouncy ride, and vice-versa if too soft you are hitting bump stops over the smallest bump. Obviously there is a balancing act to get the spring rate and free length correct for the application for the best in appearance, handling, and comfort.
Now that the basics are covered, let’s look specifically at the Mazda 6 2.5T. The OEM springs give a good ride as to be expected (likely very soft spring rates) as this can be a huge issue for potential customers if the car ride quality is harsh. Handling is decent overall but has a few quirks. When going around a corner quickly, the car rolls over onto the rear springs excessively before settling, and getting through the corner. When at the limit of traction, the car understeers severely, like most cars sold today.
Finally the ride height is pretty high, likely to prevent any issue with driveways saying hello to the new front fascia. Interestingly, the MZ6T sits a little higher in the rear; we think to ensure enough suspension travel in case there’s a full load of passengers and a full trunk.
For further analysis we also had the OEM springs tested for rate and ended up with the following: 3.05K front, 5.05K rear. While these numbers are fairly arbitrary right now, they are a necessary data point to have when designing lowering springs. These rates also contradict a very common misconception. Many people think that because there is less weight in the rear of a front wheel drive car, the spring rates must be softer in the rear for a good ride & handling. This is simply not true in most cases, after all why would Mazda do the opposite? Due to the design of the rear suspension, the spring is basically being pushed on by a lever. This means the spring needs to be stiffer in order to support the same amount of weight as if the lever wasn’t there.
So overall, the OEM springs are good, but have plenty of room for improvement. I just touched the surface of suspension design and as we go through more of this project we’ll get into dampers, natural frequency, and much more. Stay tuned for more info and if you have any questions, don’t be afraid to ask!
-Daniel @ CorkSport
Mazda 6 2.5T Stock Spring Evaluation February 7th, 2019CorkSport
We are working on our blog, We will get you the best Mazda content back up shortly