When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Oh yeah you are right it is the Chevron stuff.. doh. The shell has some additives also I forget what its called.
It kept my stock end squeaky clean when I had a really good tune on my aem, there was no carbon at all when we opened it up.
after running on the tt ecu mod for a while with some super rich afr's in the 10-11 range (before I cranked the boost way up), it carboned up all the pistons.
I did like a manual water injection (sprayed water into the throttle body little at a time) to steam it loose and a lot of it came out I think.
I don't think it is a terrible idea to add a little water / methanol injection kit and even if you just spray a little bit at high boost it will keep things clean.
Or turn up the boost to where the afr's are closer to 12-12.5 since you have 8.5:1 compression and you shouldn't gunk things up.
like you also noted driving and letting it warm up completely can go a long way too.
I never payed much attention till it was all gunked up, but at that point its such a huge hassle its worth it to think about it in advance on a fresh build.
I have been driving around the Taco a lot more and I have decided that I strongly dislike the interior, and it would take so much work to do something custom.. the seats are terrible.. literally the worst, the dash rattles, I could keep going on.
Part of me wants to get a second gen, but more likely if I don't keep and swap the Tacoma, the whole setup I am building is going to go into the GX instead just have to swap back to a rear oil pan.
Ali , do you know anyone who has done a vvti NA-T with a GE head gasket ? I definitely would like to know their experience. As you know , I never had an NA-T that is why all the more this side project excites me . I am tempted to install a GE head gasket and have a torque monster at 400-500rwhp with E85 and at around 10.5:1 compression. The long GE intake runners will also help me have better torque down low. It is a run around SC so that torque down low will be fun. I am using an aftermarket ECU (proEFI) for this run around SC so I will be able to control timing and fueling well . If I use a GE head gasket , the combustion chamber will also have a near to perfect squish / quench area. There is a gas station that has E85 within 3 miles my place so I can go flex fuel and most of the time be on E85.
I have decided to inspect the bottom part of the block so the oil pans were removed and cleaned . Bottom end of this engine was clean with just some minor caked in oil on the pans . It wasn't even that bad compared to the so many engines I have opened and have less than 200k miles. This one has 251k miles .
upper oil pan drilled for the turbo oil return. Bottom end is now closed and all bolts torqued. Decided not to replace the rod bolts with ARP since I am just after a very modest hp for this run around SC. Replacing the stock rod bolts with ARP will entail a lot of work . I will have to disassemble the whole short block assembly to check rod bearing clearances since ARP bolts have different clamping force. Then if clearances have changed then I have to get the rods resized . Just too much work when the stock pre vvti rods can easily handle 500rwhp which is my goal for this car. So I left everything down there stock pre VVTi assembly.
I just need to clean more that oil pan bottom and block before I start painting the block ... red . I like my blocks red so I see right away any oil leaks.
Got the water pump and oil pump installed together with the VVTi timing gear / crank sensor .
After cleaning and painting the block , time to disassemble the vvti head , pressure wash it , inspect it and reassemble with new valve seals then mate it with the block .
Craig - your short block is ready to rock and roll . It won't be long .
Man it takes me way back but Omar built one back in the day (2010 ish ) that was close to that setup and I helped him get it running on an aem at the time.
I hope I remember this right but hopefully he will chime in, it was a completely stock non vvti short block, a ge vvti head, a ge headgasket and he ran it on E85.
At the time it wasn't well known how to control the vvti, so I think he got a shop to machine down a gte intake cam to fit the vvti head, so it was a vvti head chamber wise but without vvti if that makes sense.
More or less it was the first attempt I had seen that was all na-t with a full distributor delete (not using a gte head).
The vvti would affect the down low power, but in terms of max power and higher rpms it should be similar.
When he got it on the dyno it layed down just over 700whp if I remember correctly, then something happened and it overboosteed and popped the headgasket. I want to say he used factory head bolts too to try and see how far he could push stock stuff, but I am not 100% on that.
I did ride in it when it was working and the power came on so hard we both thought he was gonna grenade the stock rear end.
Getting it started was hilarious cause we couldn't figure out why the motor wouldn't rev up more than 2000 rpms, and it took a better part of the day and some coronas to figure out the crank sensor was wired backwards
I wouldn't bother with the bottom end either for the power levels you are talking about. I am 90% you will pop a headgasket before you loosen up anything down there.
The stock rods held up to the 700whp E85 thrashing just fine.. but I wouldn't push it further than that on the corn due to the torque.
I remember we were all debating what compression the motor would end up with on that setup, if it was still 10 or if it was 10.5 or somewhere in between, but after playing around with it and the fact the he did manage to pop it eventually made me lean towards the vvti head adding in some compression over a non vvti setup.
Gerry, this is really moving along! You definitely aren't wasting any time to get it running!
The crankcase does look very clean to me too. Maybe it was the frequent oil changes I did but that is so much better than what I expected to see. It really was just an issue in the original cylinder head after all.
A few posts back I think you also mentioned that the exterior of the block was cleaner than you expected. Well... it was ok but I actually did clean it with de-greaser on the engine stand before I removed the cylinder head A lot of caked grime you never got to see because I got rid of it and wiped a lot of it down.
The new hardware looks great so far! Are you going to paint those VVT-i valve covers before you get the cylinder head fully buttoned up? A nice wrinkle black finish would look really good!
I thought the GE head gasket actually had strength differences due to its material versus any of the GTE head gaskets. Higher compression NA-T will definitely be good for off-the-line torque if you're at 10.0:1 on the flex fuel ECU but wouldn't 9.2:1 compression be safer all around? Since there won't be any exotic parts (other than the ECU) used on this engine build.
From what Ali mentioned above about the GE VVT-i head adding more compression over non-vvt would it be out of the realm of reason to think in terms of GTE head gasket compression actually being even close to the in the 9.6:1 range?
I think there was a big thread a while back that went into examining the chamber volumes between a GTE non-VVT head and GE non-VVT head. I don't recall if any VVT-i head was also measured.
I'm out of my league when it comes to pushing the limits of an NA-T setup with a custom ECU map so I'm really just sitting back and learning from the discussion you and Ali are having about this
It's exciting, watching that old 2JZ that took me so many places and always reliably got me where I needed to be... plus the life it had with the original owner from 1992-2009... get a fresh lease on life to breathe 500whp like it was always meant to
Originally Posted by Ali SC3
I have been driving around the Taco a lot more and I have decided that I strongly dislike the interior, and it would take so much work to do something custom.. the seats are terrible.. literally the worst, the dash rattles, I could keep going on.
Part of me wants to get a second gen, but more likely if I don't keep and swap the Tacoma, the whole setup I am building is going to go into the GX instead just have to swap back to a rear oil pan.
Wow...! Has anyone ever done a 2JZ turbo GX before? If you go that route you may be the first...?
Thanks guys. . indeed there is a big difference on the head gasket thickness of GE and GTE. Considering the fact that Toyota used a multi-layer gasket for the turbo version , it definitely was meant to withstand more abuse with boost. I have decided to use the TT gasket. What I am just considering now is will I get the vvti head milled around .030" so I am back to 10:1 compression and with better squish / quench area or leave it as it is , be at around 9.2:1 compression but without an optimal squish / quench area on the chamber. As you both remember am sure , the GTE head has no recess while the GE head has a 0.030" recessed area. Milling that area out will give me GE compression of 10:1 but with thicker / stronger head gasket.
Ali - I know many doing NA-T have simply slapped a TT head gasket thus lowered their compression to around 9.2:1 . The effect of it though is it had increased the squish / quench area to a non optimal number . My question is , where there any other adverse effect ? I am not trying to squeeze every ounce of power from this side project (remember I already have 940rwhp SC and soon my SC with a stroker motor that will make at least 1250rwhp) so maybe I can just do what most are doing , slapping a TT head gasket in there and saves me some work and money and get the car running quicker. All I want on this project is a very responsive and yet reliable 400-500rwhp run around car .
Actually , the plan now is wire it for the GTE vvti ECU so I can always use that ecu for trouble shooting and get it running first reliably on stock 440cc injector before I throw in the aftermarket ECU to better control timing and fueling like flex fuel. Then make a patch harness from stock ecu connectors into the proEFI.
If I stick with the 9.2:1 then I should have the complete drive train installed in the car before the year ends and be running since I don't have to bring the block to any machine shop for milling. Having said that ,today I then can reassemble the head since I have disassembled and cleaned it so I can also install new valve seals.
The good thing with 10:1 compression is it helps on spool contributing to a better response. It loves high octane fuel like E85 that produces more exhaust gas that helps spool and consequently power and torque down low . And together with the VVTi head .. can be a very fun and responsive run around car. I don't have to boost higher to get into the 400-500rwhp. Only thing , higher compression cars have less room for errors , a good tune is the secret to maximize their capabilities especially if you are running pump 93 also. And that can only be done with aftermarket ECUs.
Gerry, this is really moving along! You definitely aren't wasting any time to get it running!
Craig - you should know me by now , as long as I have everything I need , then I want things done yesterday . I told you , I was just waiting for your short block and I will be on the move getting it running quick.
a couple of pictures of head disassembly yesterday .... this head had around 220k miles so I had to disassemble , inspect , clean it up and replace the valve seals. But looks like someone already replaced the valve seals not too long ago since they all look new . But I might as well replace them again just to make sure. The head isn't that very dirty compared to many heads you will see in which oil and grime is caked in . I will still pressure and steam wash it though.
then decide if I will get it milled .030" or not ... Ali - what do you say ? get it back to 10:1 compression by taking out that recess or just slap in a TT head gasket and settle with 9.2:1 compresion
Right now I am leaning with the 9.2:1 so I can mate this head to the short block, bolt every accessory on the long block like intake manifold , etc. and mate the transmission by tomorrow before we head to our place to the south. That means after Christmas, the drive train will be dropped into the engine bay and get it running before New Year . If I will get it milled , pretty sure , shop will tell me pick it up after New Year :.
I am still in the camp that the vvti cylinder head adds a little compression and it is not all from the ge vvti pistons as the ge vvti is rated at 10.5 compression.
I believe we had a discussion on this before and I am not sure there was a definitive answer but the TT gasket is still a safer bet.
My thoughts:
lets say if the vvti head has the same cc's as a non vvti, then with the vvti head/tt gasket you have 9.2:1 like a traditional na-t.
lets say that .5 bump all came from the vvti head, it would work out closer to 9.6:1 with the TT headgasket which is what I was personally shooting for and doing.
so real world speaking, it would be in the 9.2-9.6 range depending on what that head really specs out to.
We do the same with the ge gasket, you would be looking at a range 10:1-10.5:1.
I have run 10:1 before but 10.5:1 on worries me on pump gas.
Now on a strictly E85 car I would say that is really good compression and you will get more power, but then my one real world example of a vvti head with ge compression did pop the gasket on an overboost, which could all be just in the setup or could be other factors.
Which got me to thinking, why did they use a multi-layer gasket in the first place? they could have made the piston and head volumes different to lower compression without using a multi layer gasket on the gte right? So my guess is that having multiple layers is like more insurance for getting a good seal in the case the head starts to warp/expand etc... you have different layers helping make up for the movement instead of one super thin gasket.
I can't say that this is a 100% why they did it or that it is even correct, it is just something I was thinking about when I was wondering why they made the gasket like that, and then you look at the different layer like the copper layer etc... and my educated guess is that the multiple layers is less prone to blowing due to head warpage or expansion contraction than the single layer.
So that is why I stayed away from the GE heagasket personally and also due to running pump gas.
I haven't heard of any na-t's having issues with the squish being "sub-optimal" and if you deck the head you will be lowering the squish closer back to the optimal range.
.030 is alot and you might be safer with .010 or even .020 if you are going to get it done. I would also check to see that the recess is the same on the ge vvti as the non vvti, If I remember right I think its pretty close. I wish I hadn't bolted on my cylinder head I would check... maybe I will lift it off since I haven't done the final torque.. waiting on that 1/2" 12 point deep socket to arrive
I went with the vvti head, tt headgasket and .01 milled off, but since you are doing flex fuel or E85 you have more options.
I would still consider the ge gasket with the higher compression, but it is more of a gamble in my book... but could pay off.
I think you will find the 9.2-9.6 compression more responsive compared to 8.5:1 anyways, so maybe just bolt it on and go.
thanks for the insight . I have made up my mind , not milling the head so that saves me a lot of time and can get this car running quicker
I have an extra GTE head , vvti GE head and non vvti GE head laying around. I will get some measurements of the non vvti GE .030" recess later today or tomorrow . If indeed that non vvti GE has that amount of recess , based on my measurements of the VVTI GE I just did , then you will be right that the VVTi head has something to do or contributed to the bump of compression which is 10.5:1 for the simple reason that every cylinder of the vvti head am cleaning up now has a consistent .027" recess which is less that what they claim of .030" for the non vvti GE. I will confirm that myself . Surely a part of the compression bump was also from the pistons since the valve recess area on the pistons are also smaller on the vvti GE. Once I have opened my three other vvti GE engine , I will reconfirm if truly their recess is only .027" . With the non vvti GE , I have three of them here already laying around so those I can confirm from the three if the non vvti GE recess is truly .030".
Well, that resolves things. I will settle with the 9.2-9.6:1 compression with the TT head gasket which is still better than the 8.5:1 for E85. I will deal with the sub optimal squish. I will finish assembly of the head today so I can mate it tomorrow with the short block and complete the whole drive train since by Saturday we are heading to our place in the south . I got to get moving now ... hahaha.
Apparently I lost my digital caliper so even if I take the head off I am not that much of help but I think you will be happy with that setup.
I know you like the flex fuel so it'll be a good trade-off, and the TT headgasket is a proven way to go even if squish isn't perfect it still works really well.
Good luck on the assembly, I am sure you will have have it together in no time and can give me some pointers lol.
Is that block the 95+ that is tapped for the vvti oil feed already? You were right that mine has it after I checked.
Yeah I would like to hear on the measurement differences measured by the same person so we can get some more data.
I had a non vvti ge head that I dropped off at a machine shop and they claimed they took .030 off of it and there was no more recess.. now if they actually did a little less or more I can't say for sure but that is what they said. it looked like this... and you can still see a hair of recess at the side of the left and right edges or it would have been cut by the mill and shiny.
95+ 2jz blocks have a bigger hole for the oil pressure sensor that is exactly the same hole for the VVTi oil feed . What I am using right now is pre 95+ , if I am not mistaken it's 93 (Craig correct me if I am wrong) so I need the adapter from PHR .
My initial measurements on the first non vvti GE head tells me it has around .030" - .035" recess. I was tired after finishing assembly of the vvti head last night so I will repeat those measurements this morning. Pretty confident now that somehow the vvti has some contribution on the compression bump.
Well at least we have some data about those heads though I will settle for a lower compression by slapping a TT head gasket. Since am not trying to squeeze every ounce of power for this side project I will deal with the sub optimal quench area. After all that setup have been proven by a lot of NA-T running setups.
My goal is around 400-500rwhp which will be perfect for the TT auto transmission plus a few transmission coolers. I thought of initially mating a tripod version W58 trans I have around but that thing won't survive long with that power goal so am going for the TT auto trans which will be a perfect match for this run around car.
EDIT :
Just got out there a few minutes ago and re measured the cylinders recess of the non vvti GE . Indeed it is .029"- .031" ... so I will put it at .030" after the +- tolerance .
Gerry, you are correct. The block I gave you is from my 1993MY SC300. Originally manufactured in 1992. So you definitely need that PHR adapter to run the GE VVT-i head. Same thing that Jim did with his SC even though he started with a 1998+ VVT-i 2JZ-GE block with the larger oiling port in that location.
You do have that Aristo A340 TT auto trans to install but... just being cheeky since that SC shell already has three pedals... the W58 you have would not survive at 500whp but any R154 or converted AR-5 would be lots of fun Or, well.. maybe just the CD009 6-speed since there would be oiling concerns. At least the newest R154's from a JZX100/110, Verossa, etc. do better supposedly. And the AR-5 should since it is like a newer update from Aisin to the older R154. There is also that pressure relief tube you mentioned and Aaron's (DM) electric circulating/cooling pump kit for R154's. But... I know we already had that discussion when I was at your place. You have several manual SC's and MKIV's already, lol. Of course my goal is to encourage you to build more fun into the SC in the most complicated way possible when you already have a suitable transmission, lol
The chamber measurements you both are discussing seem to suggest that the actual compression ratio with the TT head gasket, GE VVT-i head and 1993 GE block and stock pistons will be slightly LESS than 9.6:1. Perhaps closer to 9.4-9.5:1? I'm not calculating the math well but from what you are both observing from measurements it sounds like the GE VVT-i head does not add quite as much compression over non-VVT as you'd both originally thought?
Thanks for the clarification Craig. I remember it was 93 but wasn't really sure.
Well , I don't have an R154 and am not about to install my remaining brand new V160 and brand new Built Tremec Magnum on this run around car that is why I thought of the TT auto transmission which I have a few as you have seen. Though I have a tripod W58, I will just tear it apart with that power and more likely same torque so there is no point of even installing it. PLUS I am trying to build a boosted / fun run around car without spending, in as much as I can, by just using what I have around, hahaha. So, don't make me spend on an R154 just for it to be a manual car. I have quite a few of those 6 speed and 5 speed cars right now as you very well know . At the end of the day , this project might just be my boosted car for which I practically have not much money on it , hahaha. . Though , it will add some work on my part . I need to modify the harness for a VVTi TT auto transmission. If it was manual, I didn't have to do anything with my current harness.
I am done with the engine meaning long block from camshafts to the bottom closed and every bolt torqued . I am just sad that the temperature is very cold that it won't enable me to paint the short block and valve covers so I won't be able to bolt on all the accessories and transmission and torqued accordingly.
Observing and comparing both vvti and non vvti GE heads , I don't see much difference on their chamber sections except that minute recess difference. The difference is small but it doesn't take much to fill up that .5 compression difference of vvti and non vvti 2jzGE engines. Most of the difference if you observe well is on the pistons . The valve relieves are a lot smaller for the vvti GE engines.
That leads me to a question ... I know the non GE is non interference and the vvti GE is interference (I hope I got those right ) ... with a combo now of non GE pistons and vvti head is it now an interference or non interference engine ?
EDIT : (I saw Omar logged in and reading this thread so let me ask another question for him and Ali )
which is better to use the pre 95 lower intake runner or the 97+ intake runner ? The older ones I believe will give me a better choice for injectors ?
Man it takes me way back but Omar built one back in the day (2010 ish ) that was close to that setup and I helped him get it running on an aem at the time.
I hope I remember this right but hopefully he will chime in, it was a completely stock non vvti short block, a ge vvti head, a ge headgasket and he ran it on E85.
At the time it wasn't well known how to control the vvti, so I think he got a shop to machine down a gte intake cam to fit the vvti head, so it was a vvti head chamber wise but without vvti if that makes sense.
More or less it was the first attempt I had seen that was all na-t with a full distributor delete (not using a gte head).
The vvti would affect the down low power, but in terms of max power and higher rpms it should be similar.
When he got it on the dyno it layed down just over 700whp if I remember correctly, then something happened and it overboosteed and popped the headgasket. I want to say he used factory head bolts too to try and see how far he could push stock stuff, but I am not 100% on that.
I did ride in it when it was working and the power came on so hard we both thought he was gonna grenade the stock rear end.
Getting it started was hilarious cause we couldn't figure out why the motor wouldn't rev up more than 2000 rpms, and it took a better part of the day and some coronas to figure out the crank sensor was wired backwards
I wouldn't bother with the bottom end either for the power levels you are talking about. I am 90% you will pop a headgasket before you loosen up anything down there.
The stock rods held up to the 700whp E85 thrashing just fine.. but I wouldn't push it further than that on the corn due to the torque.
I remember we were all debating what compression the motor would end up with on that setup, if it was still 10 or if it was 10.5 or somewhere in between, but after playing around with it and the fact the he did manage to pop it eventually made me lean towards the vvti head adding in some compression over a non vvti setup.
Hahhaha got damn!! remember those years?? its was in 2007 lol .
Learned alot on that setup!! See you remember like it was yesterday.
Yeah Gerry , Slap a tt headgasket on it and let it eat. I blew the headgasket on mine because it over boosted hitting 28psi when the crappy Boost controller broke...
I know i should have used a Mac Valve lol. It made plenty of power and got became more reliable once i stopped using 93 octane and ran ethanol full time.
There was no aftermarket cams for the VVTi back then, so i have one of my local shop machine a tt camshaft to fit in the head...I should have kept the VVTi and used the Injector #7 to turn it On and Off but didnt know what i know now.
The most reliable setup ive never had in 10years.
You will love it once its all setup , i wouldnt even put any camshaft in it, if its just a daily beater hahaha.
That block came out really night, top of the pistons look great!!
My block was burried under the snow for 2 months, i dug it out and dropped it in the car lmao.
Since you have a bunch of manual cars, i think you should throw and ar5 in it and be done!!
Yeah man, seems like forever ago but those were fun times... we really didn't know what was going to happen half the time lol.
I think it'll be a good setup too with the TT gasket, and I have to agree with the manual trans.. it'll cut down on wiring too haha
Gerry, use the obd1 lower runner, the other one is useless with that air injection stuff.
You can bolt the vvti upper to it just fine also or even just the Y part I think.
12-17-18, 11:30 AM
. Just too much work when the stock pre vvti rods can easily handle 500rwhp which is my goal for this car. So I left everything down there stock pre VVTi assembly.
. I like my blocks red so I see right away any oil leaks.
.
) that was close to that setup and I helped him get it running on an aem at the time.
. I told you , I was just waiting for your short block and I will be on the move getting it running quick.
.
