If you’ve been paying attention to the CorkSport channels, you may have seen rumors here and there of a race header for the GEN3 Mazda 3 and Mazda 6 2.5L. While I can’t say too much on that just yet, I can give you a breakdown of the OEM exhaust header that’s hiding in the back of your engine bay. Analyzing the OEM part is usually our first step in creating a new performance part and I wanted to bring you all along for the ride. It’s surprisingly complex for an OEM manifold/header and some serious engineering went into it.
Excuse the dirty part, this OEM header has had a hard life! I imagine many of you have not seen the stock header as it’s in the back of your engine bay covered in heat shields. Taking the heat shields off gives us a glimpse of the craziness that is the stock header. Mazda has gone with a true 4-2-1 design (also known as tri-y) with an integrated catalytic converter and what appears to be equal length runners. Stay with me, I’ll explain what all that means.
The image above hopefully helps you visualize the 4-2-1 design. Starting at the engine, there are four exhaust ports from the head. Each exhaust port gets its own pipe, known as a “primary”. The primaries then pair together to form two “secondaries”. Finally, the two secondaries combine into one collector pipe, in this case heading directly into the catalytic converter. The three unions or “y’s” are where the tri-y name comes from. The 4-2-1 design was chosen by Mazda for a very specific reason. Check out the image below and Mazda’s explanation HERE.
Essentially, using a very high compression ratio causes very high exhaust gas temperatures. If too much of this exhaust gas is leftover in the cylinders for the next combustion cycle, knocking can occur. In addition, if you have a short 4-1 header or a log-style manifold you can suck exhaust gas into a cylinder before combustion as one cylinder can be on an intake stroke while another is on an exhaust stroke (see the upper image in Mazda’s diagram).
The 4-2-1 has two benefits to fight this. First, the long length means the exhaust gas takes longer to traverse the pipes, so one cylinder sucking in another’s exhaust is drastically reduced. Second, the cylinders are paired correctly to one another (1 with 4 and 2 with 3). Since the firing order is 1-3-4-2, each secondary is receiving an exhaust pulse at a regular interval. If you paired 1 with 3 for example, you would receive two pulses quickly, and then a large gap as the other two cylinders fired. This helps with exhaust scavenging as the pulse from one cylinder helps “pull” the leftover exhaust from the cylinder it’s paired with. These benefits can also be present on a long tube 4-1 if designed well but, there is a good reason why Mazda did not choose this option.
Typically a well-designed 4-2-1 will make more power and torque in the midrange while a well-designed 4-1 will make more power way up at the top of the RPM range. Since normal driving does not involve being at the top of the RPM range all the time, it makes sense that Mazda went with the 4-2-1. We will likely do the same as we want to retain the low knock characteristics of the 4-2-1, high midrange power & torque, and because the SkyActive 2.5L is a fairly low revving engine.
It appears that Mazda also went with close to equal length runners. This means that each primary section is the same length and each secondary is also the same length. This ensures the exhaust pulses are arriving to the collector or Y at uniform intervals. The easiest way to explain why this is a good thing is to visual the entrance ramp to a highway. When the cars entering the highway follow the “zipper” method for merging, the cars currently on the highway do not need to slow down. The high and entrance ramp merge and flow in a smooth and consistent rate.
However, if a surge of cars come down the entrance ramp to merge onto the highway you will get a back-up of cars on the entrance ramp and will disrupt the flow of cars on the highway. If the cars are exhaust gases and the highway is the exhaust pipe, you can understand why equal length can help. Again, we will adopt this strategy with the CS race header.
So far so good then, as Mazda has put a lot of thought into making a high quality stock header. However, as usual there are a few areas we can improve on. That’s coming in a later blog though so you’ll have to stay tuned for more details! Let us know if you have any questions or thoughts down below.
-Daniel @ CorkSport
May of 2015, CorkSport launched its first high performance drop-in turbocharger for the Mazdaspeed platform. Fast-forward almost 4 years and CorkSport again is about to redefine what a stock flange turbocharger for the Mazdaspeed platform can truly be.
The original “CS Turbo” is now the CST4 to follow the turbo line-up that is soon to launch. The CST4 took a fresh approach to “big turbo” with all the included hardware, gaskets, and of course direct drop-in fitment. It removed the guess work for a quick and easy installation, but the benefits didn’t stop there. This “little big turbo” packs a punch for its compact TD05H-18G wheels.
With the CST5 and CST6 just around the horizon it would be easy to forget about the tried and true CST4, but don’t worry this Mazdaspeed Drop-In Turbo got some new love also. You will now have a EWG housing option for the CST4. You can pick it up in EWG setup from the start or if you already have a CST4 that you love, you can get the EWG housing kit to do the upgrade yourself.
Moving onto the CST5 & CST6 the possibilities for the MZR DISI have moved up significantly. What started as a single “bigger big turbo” has morphed into two “bigger big turbos” that, we feel, better provide for the various power goals of the community.
The CST5 bridges the gap between drop-in performance and big turbo power. The journal bearing CHRA uses a hybrid TF06-GTX71 wheel setup that provides more top-end than the CST4 with minimal spool and response penalty. Upping the big turbo feel is a 4in anti-surge compressor inlet which will require an up-sized intake system.
Unlike the CST6, the CST5 will be offered in both internally waste-gated and externally waste-gated setups. This provides you with the flexibility to setup your Mazdaspeed just how you see fit and both have been proven 520+whp on our in-house dyno and tuning courtesy of Will Dawson @ Purple Drank Tuning.
The CST6 redefines what the community thought was possible from the stock turbine housing flange, but first some details. The ceramic ball bearing CHRA uses a GTX3576r wheel setup that clearly out powers the CST4 & CST5, but that’s point remember?
The CST6 is a legit big turbo, spool will be later, but still sub 3900rpm for full boost, however a turbo setup like the CST6 is not intended for low-end response. If top-end power is your goal, the CST6 will deliver. In-house testing has pushed the CST6 to 633whp at a fuel limited ~33psi and 7900rpm redline.
Unlike the CST4 & CST5, the CST6 will only be offered in EWG setup.
In the coming months, we will be sharing more information about the CorkSport Turbo Line-Up; the design, the testing, and validation of each. For more information about the CST5 & CST6 along with the new EWG turbine housing option, check out these sneak peek pages.
Thanks for tuning in with CorkSport Mazda Performance.
-Barett @ CS
In case you missed it, we have been working on improving the flimsy rubber tube that comes stock on the cold side of your 2018+ Mazda 6 2.5T. Check out the first part on the cold side boost tube here and the full OEM piping & intercooler breakdown here. Since our last installment, we have been busy testing a prototype CorkSport Boost Tube and would like to share some results with you all.
Starting off we tested and data logged both the OEM tube and CorkSport Performance Boost Tube on the dyno. We were not expecting to see too much of a difference to power with just the boost tube changing however, we did see tiny improvements here and there, most notably way up at the top of the RPM range.
Check out the graph below, OEM=red, CS=green. We tested on the same day in identical conditions and the car had a CorkSport Intake and
Cat Back Exhaust installed for both tests. PLEASE NOTE: the variations below 2800RPM are due to inconsistencies associated with dyno testing an automatic car.
After noticing these changes, we went to the data logs to see how the boost changed between the OEM tube and the CS Boost Tube. The graph below shows the engine RPM versus the manifold pressure in psi. Both lines have the same smoothing done to the raw data. As you can see, the CorkSport tube (green) holds about 0.5psi through the midrange (3500-5000RPM) and is almost 1psi more when above 5500RPM. This correlates well with what we saw while dyno testing.
The small increase in boost pressure is likely due to the CorkSport tube not expanding as much when under pressure. To confirm this, we capped off both ends and pressurized the each tube to 20psi. Note: do not try this at home as the caps can easily fly off and injure you.
After measuring multiple locations both before and during pressurization, we found that the OEM tube expands about 12% in internal cross-sectional area while the CorkSport Boost Tube expands 3x less at 4%. Keep in mind that this would be an even larger difference if the same test was performed with the tubes installed on the car due to the heat of the engine bay. Since silicone is more stable than rubber at high temperatures, the heat of the engine bay will not soften it nearly as much as the rubber OEM boost tube. A softer rubber tube would mean even more expansion when pressurized and even more inconsistent boost pressures.
This data may not show drastic changes but it does not tell the whole story. The larger diameter and thus larger volume of boosted air of the CS tube provides a little bit better response when low in the RPM range. While this may just be a placebo effect on our end, there’s not too much of a wait before you can try it yourselves! Stay tuned for more information. If you want a more serious upgrade though, keep your eyes out for information on the upcoming CorkSport FMIC kit and Piping Upgrade kit!
P.S. 2016+ Mazda CX-9 owners and future Mazda CX-5 2.5T owners, don’t worry we will be checking this for fitment along with other CS goodies!
-Daniel @ CorkSport
4 years ago, we released the 60.5mm Exhaust kit for the 3rd Gen Mazda 3 (both in
axle back and full cat back flavors). It’s certainly been a hit, but there has been a few of you longing for more noise. Today we are proud to announce the 80mm variant of our cat back exhaust for the 2014-2018 Mazda 3 Hatchback and Sedan! At this time, just the hatchback version is available, but we will have the Sedan version ready in just a few short months.
Now I know what you’re thinking, an 80mm exhaust seems excessively large for a naturally aspirated car making less than 200whp. But, hear me out because I think you’ll like what’s coming.
80mm piping allows for some unique & louder tones its smaller little brother can’t offer, but it wasn’t as easy as just using the old design and making the pipes larger. We had to do quite a bit of resonator experimentation and NVH analysis to get to the finished result with as little drone as possible. I’ll be upfront with you guys though, this is loud. It’s a good loud with tons of fun noises, but if you’re looking for something subtler, then our 60.5mm cat back or axle back may be a better fit. We do a good job of capturing the audio for you though so you have a good understanding of what you’re getting. Be sure to check out the product video to hear it.
For those wanting this more aggressive exhaust note, sound isn’t the only bonus. We thought about the appearance, and how we could take advantage of this time to tinker with the design. The 80mm does a nice job of not only filling the exhaust tunnel under the car, but the axle back portion is a bit more prominent when you catch a glance.
On the Hatchbacks, the exhaust tips got a nice size increase up to 100mm and they are slant cut to help follow the profile of the bumper. Sedans have also been upsized to 100mm tips, which were lowered slightly to ensure your bumper doesn’t melt with the large piping. This has the added bonus of making the tips a little more visible from the rear and side of the car. In both cases, the way the upsized exhaust accents the rear of the car provides an aftermarket look, that’s classy and somehow the way it always should have been from factory.