Toyota 2GR-FE (Avalon) vs Acura J32A3 (TL)
 

Here is how I estimate the new 2GR-FE engine in the Avalon will dyno on a 248C in auto form. Since the TL and Avalon engines have similar peak horsepower and peak torque RPM's I basically modelled the Avalon curve after the TL, only I gave the Avy engine a bit more low-end since it has Dual VVT-i which is much more capable at optimizing low/mid-range torque vs the J32A3's 2-step SOHC VTEC setup can.

https://www.v6performance.net/galler...nEST_vs_TL.gif

The direct-injected 2GR-FSE that will find its way into the IS350 and GS350 eventually (Autoweek news snippet on Lexus trademarking the GS350 name in the US) should be able to make 270 lb-ft of torque if not more if they optimize it for performance. An extra 10 lb-ft of torque doesn't give you 20hp up top though so the FSE version will probably have a different induction setup and possibly different cams. ECU tuning will obviously be different due to the direct injection setup. Who knows.... all speculation.

Anyhow, I took the estimated chassis dyno torque curve for the Avalon, and applied the full specs of the car (gearing, weight, driver weight, tire size, tire drag, tire sag factor, aero drag, etc, the whole 9 yards) to get the overall acceleration curves and then compared it to the TL. The Avalon beats the TL pretty good. More power, more torque, similar or less weight, and more aggressive gearing. The only thing holding the Avalon back is the non-defeatable traction control (if so equipped), so you probably won't see particularly impressive mag times. Pull the fuse at the track though with some more aggressive rubber and this sucker should be able to pull off some mid-14 1/4 mile times like the 2004 Maxima autos can, if not better (it doesn't have to spin up heavy mutha 18" rims so it has lower intertial parasitics).

https://www.v6performance.net/galler...s_TL_Accel.gif


The biggest difference is in 1st and 2nd gears where the revs are lower and the 2GR torque is obliterating the Acura. Once into 3rd it's fairly even due to the Acura's VTEC being wound up, but the Avalon still has a small advantage. The Lexus models have a 6AT vs 5AT. I haven't checked the gearing but they're probably a bit more aggressive. I would not be surprised if an IS350 6AT could pull off low/mid-14 1/4 mile times. The G35 5AT guys can do mid-14's at least and the 2GR-FSE should be a bit more powerful.


I love Toyotas. :rockon:

Yea, Toyota takes the time to engineer torque into their engines, while Honda focuses on horsepower and VTEC to get their cars off the lot.

Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races. Or if you're a street racer, JDM TITE YO! :cool:

Steve! Been a fan of your work buddy. Keep the graphs coming! I love it when you school the trolls w/real facts instead of fiction they always try to get you with. :thumbup: :thumbup:

DOHC > SOHC :D

I co-sign that. A few people got schoolled on Maxima forum not to long ago(instant classic) and been looking and studying your graphs ever since. Really interesting, can learn a lot from them. Glad to have you around here now. I assume you saw my other thread, and if you didnt, wlecome to CL once again. :thumbup:

LOL, thanks guys. i didn't know anbody knew me here besides maybe 1SICKLEX. :)

y'all must have seen me dueling with the TL owner on Maxima.org about the Avalon. lol :egads:

Yes sirr, that thread and others. I actually said a few things in that particular thread and some others too. Good stuff.

One question i would love to have answered: WHY do Hondas have so little torque?

I actually dont know either....All i know is that they heavily depend on vtec

Different engineering philosophy. Remember, Honda started off as a motorcycle company primerily. I believe the their first automotive engine was two motorcycle engines mated together. Anyway, when you actually look at the torque, it is not that it really is low, but just lower than other companies with higher peak HP. Torque figures on their V6 are higher than torque figures on many V8 cars just 5-10 years ago. Back then some of those V8s were considered torquey. I mean, 260 lb-ft torque from their V6 is more than the torque on my 1UZ-FE engine. The one thing that Honda really needs to do is offer their DOHC engine on more of their V6 engines rather than just their top model and top 4 cylinder models. Once they do that you will see torque match other companies with equal size engines.

Nice graphs, Steve. You apparantly were at CL earlier before I joined.

You would agree, though, wouldn't you, that the design and weight of the flywheel and crankshaft can also affect engine torque....not just valve timing?

Years ago that was one reason why Ford and Mopar engines generally had more torque than Chevies. Their strokes were longer, the flywheels were heavier, and they were generally lower-RPM engines favoring a lot of twisting force at lower speeds. Chevies, meanwhile, had larger bores, shorter strokes, lighter flywheels, higher RPM's, and higher HP at those RPM's.

I read your stuff from the AV6 days! :thumbup: Wasn't a real fan of the AV6 other than the great package/price it had for it's time (98-01) that is.

Because they're designed for high revving power using old SOHC technology (even more so with their DOHC VTEC engines), hence weak torque numbers.

Sorry but I’m not a fan of your work. You’re already posting something about Acura on a Lexus forum.
Back in the day when I was on Acura CL you seem to hate Honda a lot more than any car company. But you continue to post on Acura CL. It really didn't make any sense to me. Well you should feel at home here b/c most people here hate Honda also.
But **** it, post whatever you like it's the internet. Secondly who the hell is take a Avalon to the track?

Yep, that's pretty much it. Honda's philosophy has long been to shun larger displacements in favor of higher revving smaller ones. It's not a bad one either, at least on paper, because smaller engines tend to be a bit more efficient, and with VTEC the smaller engine can still have the peak horsepower of the larger engines. But applied to the real-world they still come up a bit short. The gearing isn't always as short as it needs to be to take full advantage of the higher revs and make up for the lower crank torque, and the high-end biased powerbands give the engines a dull feel unless you're flogging it. Some people like that, though. But not me. The power in my 2001 Accord V6 got real old real fast. :D

Torque per liter wise, Honda V6 engines are still competetive but not top-ranking. DOHC i-VTEC with the cam-phasing would definitely help, but it still puzzles me why they're continuing to push their 10 year old 2-step SOHC VTEC setup even onto the $50k "flagship" RL now.

Pretty much everything can affect an engine's power curve. Bore vs stroke ratio, cam setup, intake manifold, exhaust, valve angle, head flow, port setup, and internal friction as well. Street engines aren't nearly demanding enough, so even if you have a hugely oversquare engine you can still give it great low-end, and vice versa, or whatever power curve you're looking for. All of that matters a ton more in full race engines, and especially Formula 1. An oversquare engine gives you more revving capability and more top-end potential, but combustion efficiency is poorer. A more undersquare engine gives you lower revving, lower peak horsepower (but better low/mid-range torque), but better combustion efficiency. You want everything at once, but you can't have it all. The actual internal configurations of F1 engines are very closely guarded secrets. In the papers I have on them they only speak in relative terms. But again, street engines are mild enough that you can still tune for whatever power curve you're looking for, especially with all of the modern whiz-bang variable technologies out there today.