heyarms

iTrader: (5)

I dont see how you call mathematical calculations fictitious information. Here in the real world, 2+2 = 4, and if you cant understand that, then there is no getting through to you. Being a mechanical engineer, this goes against all that is truthful in life.

Maybe you have better sources, but I have always read that the IS350 has 12 injectors. Where did 16 come from? I'm no engine wiz, but how would 16 even make sense with 6 cylinders?

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Except I already mentioned the guy who blew his up on 10 psi.

Sure it can be. So can flying cars. Many decades later everyone is still waiting for the mass produced ones though.

Again you have confused "can be done" with 'will happen"

Someone could designed and create upgraded injectors that fit these heads, but nobody has despite it being on the market this long in several vehicles.... it's not nearly as widely used as, say, the 2JZ was.


But even if they did, again, it's hardly the only reason you can run a lot of boost on the stock motor.





Not at all.


For one, again, the 2JZ was running a lot more added power than the 2GR-FSE was 7 years after its intro.

For another, anyone doing that math even in 1992 would've seen the 2JZ as capable, on stock internals, of a lot more than the 2GR. They were just waiting on a number of other supporting parts to appear.

That's not the case here.

Here not only do the supporting parts not exist, the engine itself is far less robust, and calculated cylinder pressures and the like are simply too high to safely work on the stock motor at high boost.

The early 2JZ issue was JUST parts availability (to include tuning to be sure, but again in a much simpler way) to make lots of power. In the case of the 2GR it's parts and physics.

See again my bridge example.

You could certainly make the 2GR stronger to handle more boost- but HKS and others have been over the very significant (and expensive) challenges involved in that too. LC pistons alone won't cut it.


And on top of all THAT, with the turbo Supra, it's not like you could have spent 10k more and gotten a much faster/better version of the same car from the factory... Folks looking at the 2IS can just go get an F and have a much larger and more powerful base to start with (plus the much better transmission) rather than trying to MacGuver something into the IS350 at a much higher cost and lower reliability.


I don't know... sadly the supra forums weren't around in 92 to check. But again by this time in the supra lifecycle folks were making around 500-600 whp.

massively more than the 2GR-FSE can reasonably make at the same point.



I agree.

because you are arguing against what's called a strongman,.

You make up a point nobody is actually making, then knock it down.

Again, and this has been said repeatedly, for years....

nobody it saying it's impossible to put high boost on a 2GR-FSE period.

We;re just saying it would require insanely more money, time, invention, and engineering than makes any sense whatsoever.

Right now $25,000 is the entry point, and that's if you get very lucky in your initial guesses regarding engine internals and design, and do most of your own design and labor.


But it is what basically everyone else is debating.

And nobody is making the point you're trying to knock down.

I, and I think everyone, would agree that with infinite budget and resources you physically could make a 2GR-FSE run a lot of boost/power.... it'd just require replacing a lot of things, in many cases with parts you'd need to invent... and most likely it'd require going through a number of blown engines in the development too.

What everyone else has been debating is getting significantly past the 7-8 psi barrier for any reasonable amount of money- and that just isn't happening.



then prove it.

Until then I'll stick with physics... it tends to work.

mikellucci

iTrader: (56)

Isnt all of this debate motivational? I'm getting motivated..If someone can help me find a Map 3 piggy at a reasonable cost I'll boost double digits, dyno, data log and report out! I'm not going anywhere....I have too much money invested in foolish mods to dump this car any time soon. Its likely going to be my 3rd car for quite some time. I really "feel" this motor comes alive at 7psi. I would luv to experience it with 3 more lbs and see where things end up.

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Hit up 06isdriver, he's the guy running the MAPECU3 here in the US... there's also a guy in greece using one to make an LMS kit work on his 250.

I wanna say it ran about $1400 to make it work, but like half that was paying someone to invent the wiring, so he might be able to save you a decent bit there with what he learned.

From what HKS has said though you'll be running out of fuel before you reach your goal (I think he said injectors are at 100% DC by 9 or 10 psi, and you typically want to keep them running no higher than 80% if possible... which I think is around 7.

mikellucci

iTrader: (56)

I have the diagram map ecu posted from 06isdriver's car...I think it needed a change though...We'll have to talk offline. I will run additional fueling the old fashioned way to get to double digit boost!

06isDriver

Im lovin it.

06isDriver

page 46 of the mapecu guide might be able to give him some help
http://www.mapecu.com/MAP3-downloads/MAP-ECU3_V330.pdf


mapecu can drive up to six additional injectors in batches of 2 that will fire following each igniter pulse. I'm just not certain where you'd locate these mothers on the manifold........

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Well, only the DI system is firing at WOT, and you don't want to use that pulse signal for "regular" injectors as the way it injects is very, very different- DI uses multiple squirts per cycle in a way you don't want port injectors firing... this came up in the "mother of all ECU" threads when HKS350 suggested the idea of firing other injectors piggybacked off the DI signal.

06isDriver

well I think it has to do with the actual firing up the spark plug because MAPECU doesnt know when the fuel injectors fire.

Its basically an intercept for the maf signal and the spark. All injector duty is handled by the oem ecu, mapecu just gooses it to spit out more fuel.

If I'm not reading it wrong, you can have a up to 6 additional injectors firing in groups of 2 right after a speicific cylinder fires its spark. Im pretty certain that mapecu provides a constant flow for the aux injectors and not the pulsed effect for direct injection.

I suppose you could do something similar with a nitrous style activation to dump the required amount of fuel at WOT and let the oem injectors handle everything else. We are just getting into some neat things that maybe possible

MRxSLAYx

2+2 Is not a "suggestion"

The motor in the picture is not out of a IS350

clubfoot

I thought I posted this earlier but what about the V6 from the RAV4,...it makes 269hp stock on regular gas,...if it would mate with our transmission it would sure be a better starting point to make more boost than our engines?! I see TRD has a supercharger kit for the Tacoma and FJ!

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

You realize the rav4 is FWD right? so it's not gonna mate with anything. It's the 2GR-FE, same engine as used in the ES350, RX350, Avalon, Camry, and other FWD Toyota/Lexus offerings.

And if you were doing an engine swap you might as well just put a 2JZ in there.

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Neither is the math related to compression ratios and cylinder pressure/temp

That's why beyond a certain point, for a given octane of fuel, if you want to run more boost you have to lower the compression ratio.

MRxSLAYx

I understand what your saying, but thats really not what im talking about. I initially stated that the High Compression of the motor wasn't a problem, and that tuning is really where the problem is. If the motor can hold 500hp, it doesn't matter if the car has a 12:1 compression ratio or one that is 5:1... Its going to grenade at 501hp

I took physics and greatly understand the science of what were talking about. I just have never seen any "suggestion" be 100% concrete when it comes to the amount of variables were talking about. You say that some guy blew his motor at 10PSI, but that really does nothing for me because I have no idea how much air he was moving. If he blew up running 10PSI on a 150mm turbo, that's not bad lol. Do you know what HP 10PSI would have been with his setup? That might help us gauge a few things.

Im not an Engineer. I don't have any formulas that calculate the tolerances of all the different types of metals within a motor under precise situations. I cant tell you to give me all the information on your motor and ill tell you what HP its going to blow up at. I'm not that good, but then again, Ive never met or heard of anyone being able to do that. You tell me to prove it, ill try. Just give me the formula that does all that and ill see what I come up with.

HKS350

iTrader: (4)

I have always loved this write up on the 2gr-fse and this will apply directly the the 2UR also in the IS-F

http://www.sae.org/automag/techbrief...1-114-1-17.pdf

It talks (pg18) about the design of the combustion chamber and the almost impossible task it was for Denso/ yahama to produce a DI injector for this motor.


These are also sleaved blocks, so power output may reach double but much over that will produce broken rods.

The 2JZ has a solid deck. That happens to be cast iron. This is the difference also.

I predict from my magic ball that the head gasket will blow from the bottom end moving around, a condition caused by the open deck alu. Block design.

This motor will never be a powerhouse because of these very design flaws. And the same applies to the ISF motor. Sorry but look at all open deck designs that may apply to anything north of 700hp. You'll see motors that fail often

Hate away fellla's......