Ghoulie

+1 to this

//Thread

suprarale

Making a bold declaration is not proof. Quoting a previous post that you agree with is not proof. What may be considered sufficient evidence/proof for the issue? Literature from Toyota or Lexus in the form of the Owner's manual or the Toyota/Lexus factory shop manual will suffice.

Allow me to frame the issue as tightly as I can:

Were the 95-97 SC400's with 1uz-fe motors interference or else non-interference motors?

PROOF! PROOF! PROOF! please. Thank you

MDSC

iTrader: (3)

go to the dealership and demand proof see how quickly you get laughed at. You're acting like a fool , for those who know what they're talking about don't need prove. I personally know that 1uz non vvti is not interference. The cams in the vvti motor make it interference. Can I glue wood with gorilla glue ? You say yes and bottle says yes but I need prove ! Show me prove. Do you realize how dumb you sound now ?

suprarale

#1 Allow me to rebuttal MDSC. You are correct that the dealership may quickly laugh at the question. That is why I am addressing the issue on the forum and not at the dealer.

#2 As far as acting like a fool, it would be foolish to blindly accept the advice of others without sufficient evidence. That would be illogical as the conclusion would be based on an appeal to authority and not necessarily empirical evidence. Such would be a textbook logical fallacy of Latin: argumentum ad verecundiam. However, just because your method of argumentation is flawed is not sufficient reason for me to conclude that you are incorrect, as you very well could be correct about the non vvti being non-interfence.

#3 Is your personal knowledge sufficient to prove to this forum that the 1uz non vvti is not interference? If so, please share how you came to this conclusion.

#4 You state that the cams in the vvti version make the motor an interference motor. Are those cams necessary for making the motor an interference type? Could some other characteristic of the non vvti motor be sufficient in itself to cause interference?

#5 Can I glue wood with gorilla glue? That is not the issue here. Metaphorically speaking you are comparing whether you can glue wood with gorilla glue, which would not have catastrophic consequences if you get it wrong, with a motor that could potentially be ruined if there is a timing belt failure and the motor turns out to be an interference style. That is another flaw in your argument.

#6 Then you say " but I need prove ! Show me prove." Refer to your third grade English grammar teacher for why this is wrong followed by a Legal Reasoning 101 Professor as to why proof is important when stating your case.

#7 As far as your question of " Do you realize how dumb you sound now ?" , I say this:
That question is based on the false premise of me sounding dumb which makes the question inherently illogical and therefore requires no answer.

MDSC, will you have a reasonable response based on intellect and logic and not emotion?

eefmydee

So one time the timing belt tensioner fell out on me. Previous owner replaced it but used bolts that where to small and they vibrated loose. The bolts and tentioner were in the road. It took me for ever to find the bolts. When it fell out I was under power accelerating. When I went to check how much the belt how jumped If I remember correctly one was 180 degrees off and the other one 90 degrees (that's the cam in reference to a circle not the crankshaft). Didn't bend any vavles and car still drive. My car is a 92 Lexus sc400. Just use this as a rule of thumb. If it is belt Toyota made it non interference. If it's chain it is interference. Chain is less likely to break so it is safe to make it interference at that point. If you want proof read all the service manuals.

Dougspeed

iTrader: (2)

"Just use this as a rule of thumb. If it is belt Toyota made it non interference. If it's chain it is interference."

This rule of thumb is not correct for the 1UZ, as your motor and my VVTi version both use rubber belts. As a qualifier, I watched my mechanic disassemble the front end of the motor to replace the timing belt, tensioner, and water pump. So I can say with absolute certainty that even the interference version of the SC400 motor uses a rubber belt.

mrmj2u

iTrader: (2)

Found a Timing Belt replacement guide published by Gates:
http://www.raauto.com/pages/timing%2...nt%20guide.pdf

According to this guide, none of the 1UZFE engines are interference engines. The only ones that are listed as interference engines (according to this guide) are the 93-97 2JZGE engines.

Excerpt from page 12:

SC 300
1993-97 3.0L 6-Cyl. (2JZ-GE) * T215 60,000
1998-00 3.0L 6-Cyl. (2JZ-GE) T215 90,000

SC 400
1992-94 4.0L V8 (1UZ-FE) # T190 60,000
1995-97 4.0L V8 (1UZ-FE) # T190 90,000
1998-00 4.0L V8 (1UZ-FE) # T298 90,000

* - Interference engine. Other interference engine applications may exist which are not indicated here.

Supposedly, this information was compiled using maintenance manuals.

BsRodeo7s

Later versions of the 1UZFE received Toyota’s VVT-i system, which improved horsepower and fuel economy. A nice feature about the 1UZFE is that if the timing belt breaks, the valves will not interfere with the pistons. A broken timing belt won’t cause your engine to self-destruct.

• Production: 1989-2002
• Cylinder Block Material: Aluminum
• Cylinder Head Material: Aluminum
• Valve train: DOHC, 4 valves per cylinder
• Stroke: 82.5mm
• Bore: 87.5mm
• Compression Ratio: 10:1 – 10.5:1 (VVT-i)
• Displacement: 3969cc
• Redline: 6,200 – 6,500 rpm (VVT-i)
• Weight: 364 lbs