6G Celicas Forums

Hello,
I'll start off by saying that im a Toyota Supra owner, and i've always liked 6g Celicas also, and i've been looking to get one as a daily driver. I've been looking for general info on this car and thats how i found this site. I'd like to congratulate you guys on making such a great site with a lot of good info.

I read Charlie97L's post (sticky) on the Supra TT engine swap out of curiosity, and i was AMAZED to find so much misinformation in the post. My post may be deleted for some reason (im not familiar with your forum policies), but i dont see a reason for it - people like you deserve to know the truth.
When i read Charlie97L's comparrison between the 2JZ-GTE (Supra's engine) and the 3S-GTE i was stunned. I've had experience with both engines, and comparing them is like comparing a Chevy Corvette to a Chevy Cavalier.

"You may think the twin turbo Supra engine is hot ****, but the 3S-GTE can eat it for breakfast"
This has got to be some of the funniest stuff i've read in a LONG time. Lets examine all his reasoning in detail:

"1) Yes, the 2JZ has 320 HP stock, and the 3S-GTE has 225-255 HP (depending on the year). However the 3S-GTE has more potential than the 2JZ."

Much more potential? Are you on drugs? 2JZ-GTE is absolutely superior to 3S-GTE in EVERY category except weight. 2JZ-GTE's potential is virtually unlimited, as its being proved right now, as i type. There is not a single number out there that accurately describes what the engine is capable of, the bar is being rased every month. If you talk to ANY experienced race mechanic, they will all tell you one thing - one of the most important factors that determines an engine's potential is displacement. There are other important factors also, such as engine geometry and design, but i can assure you that the 2JZ isnt behind the 3S in any of those categories. I will provide some hard facts later in this post.


"2) It is interesting to note, that in almost every instance when a tuning company has built a Supra to race, they put in a 3S-GTE. Why? You can get a lot more HP out of it. (I know, if you can do this, why can’t you put the 2JZ in the Celica? It is because you can mount the 3S-GTE longitudinally in the HUGE Supra engine bay, lots of room to work.)"

Are you even serious? Like i said above, the ONLY advantage that the 3S has over the 2JZ is the weight. That is why in SOME (very few) applications 3S was used in a Supra. 3s, being lighter, will change the weight distribution on the Supra, aiding in the cornering abilities. Thats why most exotics put the engine in the back, to make the front lighter, giving more traction at the drive wheels, and increasing the cornering abilities.
No offence, but "Why? You can get a lot more HP out of it." (3sgte) is a statement that i would expect from a person smoking crack daily for the last 20 years. More HP out of the 3sgte? If you ever bothered to check any Supra boards or information sites, you would soon find out that 2JZ is capable of numbers that even big block V8 domestic owners are jelaous of. If you go to a supra board, such as www.supraforums.com , and go to the "Dyno Tuning" section (i think you can only view it if you register), you will see NUMEROUS cars making WAY more HP than the 3S-GTE has EVER seen. 1000RWHP is becoming a standart for the 2JZ these days, and some cars such as Saad Saad's supra made 1450RWHP, and Marko recently made 1520rwhp through an auto tranny. Thats right, 1520 horses at the rear wheels through an automatic tranny... thats approximately 25% drivetrain loss, putting him in 1900 crank hp range. And thats on a 100% street car with full interior, ac, and sterio system. Im not even going to mention the race 2jz engines used in cars such as Bullish Racing Solara, making over 2000hp, and running 6-second times in the 1/4 mile. Show me any 3sgte making anywhere CLOSE to that power, and ill delete this whole post. In fact, im willing to bet that there isnt a 3sgte engine in the world making as much power, as the 2jzgte can make on BONE STOCK internals. Tim Iacoli recently put down 1017RWHP on a 100% stock Toyota bottom end(stock pistons, rods, crank, etc). That was no fluke either - before that Mike Carlin held the stock internals record at 980rwhp, and people with less than 800rwhp dont even start looking into any modification to the bottom end.
I often hear stupid statements such as "Supras are dyno queens". This is also complete b.s., as the car mentioned above, Marko's car ran 8.4 sec in the 1/4 mile on his old setup, putting down only about 1200rwhp. With the new setup mid-high 7 second times are expected. And let me mention it again, its a 100% street car with mo modifications to the chasis, stock sized tires, full interior, etc. Paul Efantis ran a 7.9 sec time aslo, on drag radials. HKS Supra ran high 6-second times on their tubed Supra, and Bullish Racing are running low 6 second times on their 2JZ powered Solaras. Hows that for a dyno queen? I can give you much more examples, but i dont think its needed. There is actually a VERY SMALL number of 3S powered Supras, all of which were build for very specific purposes.


"3) The 3S-GTE has won multiple World Rally Championships for Toyota, and Rallying is really the most What has the 2JZ done, besides been in the Fast and the Furious? Nothing."

Thats right, nothing. Except maybe multiple world records on the dragstrip. Also pushing 60psi of boost, making over 600hp/liter is a more strenuous test you can put on an engine, in my opinion. Funny of you to mention the Fast and the Furious, where the engine that was used was actually a 2JZ-GE , being the non turbocharged version of the 2JZ-GTE (hence the lack of "T" in the code, which stands for "Turbocharged") If you look closely when Jesse "Popps the hood", even you can probably notice the lack of Turbo, and the pipe from the intake filter leading straight to the intake manifold. Thats actually my favourite scene in the movie, when Jesse looks at the Naturally Aspirated Supra engine bay and says "Lets see what we got here... a T-78 Turbo.........etc"
This again proves how knowledgeable you are in the 2JZ-GTE department.


"4) While I’m on the F&F, Supras are not 10-second cars stock. And it’s going to take a lot more than “15 grand” to make a 2JZ hit the 10 second mark."

Another bull **** statement. (how unexpected, huh?). It takes way less than 15 grand to make the 2jzgte Supra run 10-second times. This is due to a fact that a lot of the parts dont need to be upgraded, as they would need to be on other cars/engines, such as the 3s. You need approx 600rwhp to run 10sec times in the Supra, and at that power level you dont need ANY modifications to the long block, or the drivetrain. The v-160 tranny that the Supra uses has proven itself to handle over 1000rwhp, same for the driveshaft and the differential. The only major mods you'd need to run 10sec times would be a good turbo upgrade, better fuel system (fuel pump, injectors, afpr, maybe bigger lines and fuel rail), full exhaust, some piggy-back engine controllers and nice, fat rubber at the back. This would run you WAY less than 15 grand. In fact, running 10 seconds might be possible on the stock fuel system, which as you probably know (since you are a 2JZ expert) consists of 255LPH fuel pump and 550cc injectors. I cant think of any cars right now running 10 sec on the stock fuel system, but its possible in theory if you really push it to the limit. There is actually a third generation Supra, powered by the 7M-GTE engine (which is inferior to the 2JZ) running 10.5 seconds in the 1/4 mile for about 12000$ , including the price of the car ($4K for the car, and $8K in mods).


In conclusion i'd like to say that im in no way bashing the 3S-GTEm its a GREAT powerplant, no question about it. It outperforms many (if not all) engines in its class, and certanly has great potential. But the 2JZ-GTE engine is not in it's class. Comparing a 2.0 4 cylinder to an I6 3.0 liter is just foolish. Not to mention that the 2JZ is nearly a decade newer.

I've spend over an hour writing this, in a hope to add some REAL information to this great site. Being a member of many other automotive boards, it always saddens me to see people without any facts saying stupid things for unaware auto enthusiasts to read.

Thank You
Dennis

whoa sombody did their homework took me f*(& 30 mins to read this...good 411 i guess...

I see the post your talking about, seems like 1/2 is good, the part about the not fitting into a 6g or not being cost effective to do it, but the other parts which you point out are pretty meh. I never read that sticky before, weird.

Anyways, I dont think your post will be deleted its not like some other forums where you post something that contradicts the forum's beliefs and your banned or w/e, we have good management.

This post has been edited by Supersprynt: Feb 16, 2005 - 12:27 AM

Dennis,
thanks for adding a second opinion to the matter. as a moderator of this site, I can say that charlies post has been up there basically since the site started many years ago. I totally agree with you in how many misleading statements are made in it and how there really is no proper support to back it up. IMO the reason it has not been adressed is no one has actually said anything about it, discussed it, or even mentioned that thread for a very long time... Many members here are much smarter than that, and im sure charlie would retract most of that if he were to come back to the boards. This board began when most of its members were just starting to pay more attention to the mechanical side of these vehicles and we're not completely knowledgable about the subject at that point...

With that said, the main intent for that thread was not particularly to bash the 2JZ or make the 3S sound like a godlike platform, basically we had about 30-40% of new members signing on and automatically asking about a 2JZ swap. In reality, is not for the faint of heart or plug-and-play mechanic. It is a VERY involved swap that requires more than its fair share of customization to nearly everything including structural modifications on the uni-body to fit the motor and increase rigidity to handle the extra power. No one has completed this swap, to my knowledge it was never seriously attempted with the proper funding... so after about 8 months of constant arguing with no real backround information on the swap or even much knowledge about the motors themselves, a thread was made to relieve this and its been there ever since.

anyways... everyone has their biases, and i wouldnt say the 2JZ is a decade newer... the 3sgte has gone through 4 different generations and has been better profected everytime... the 3sgte is still in production in japan in the Caldina platform... so the motor still lives, it has just had a longer history

welcome to the boards! im sure any input you have here will be greatly appriciated! good luck in your celica search

his argument is based off of the sticky in the Engine/Performance forum dealing with the 2JZ swap, i think it is very important this be discussed, obviously there are quite a few generalities that were exhadurated. the thread should probably be lost, we havent had any 2JZ questions asked here in well over a year.

and as a comparison...

what is the current worlds fastest stock bodied Supra's 1/4 time? isnt it in the 8s maybe high 7s judging from your previous post?

MR2s have yet to break past 10s on the registry... and i think the fastest alltrac/GT4 was low 10s high 9s... but these are all out of memory so dont quote me.

if any one can confirm with some stats please post them.

Yeah i found it and edited my post.

nice info. I think it is time to revise.

time to delete is more like it... personally id like to see the topic discussed further by someone who has the funding to attempt something like this... but then again considering this car tends to be someones first or second vehicle, finding that person is going to be very difficult.

What tranny bolts up to it? Does it physically fit? What axles would you use? Im sure they'd have to be some hybrid with whatever tranny your using. Do you have to convert to RWD? Does a FWD even bolt up? Would you want FWD with that power? IDK I think the engine is a little much for this car.

This post has been edited by Supersprynt: Feb 16, 2005 - 12:44 AM

its not worth discussing when you dont have anything to look at... we would never get any further then what we did years ago which prompted stickying charlies post... without having the parts and a celica shell and even maybe just a simple tapemeasure, theres no way to claim one way or the other.

and as far as the engine being too much for the car... tell that to bill strongs Northstar V-8 MKI MR2

or the alamo motorsport Supercharged V-6 MK2 MR2 for that matter

Thanks for the good comments and the welcome, guys. I absolutely agree with the first part of Charlie's post. Even though i have no personal experience with the 6g Celica, it makes perfect sense to me. Putting a RWD engine into a FWD car is never easy or cheap. You can only use RWD trannies with the 2JZ, which would make them seat in the middle of the car, underneath the gear shifter. I dont see a way to use the 2JZ keeping the FWD. Even if it was somehow possible, the modifications needed to the chasis would be more difficult to perform than converting the Celica to RWD. If you were THAT crazy about performance, it would be easier and cheaper to build a tube chasis for the 2JZ, and just put the Celica shell on top.

boosted_K2, fastest stock bodied, stock suspension Supra right now would be the Paul Efantis car, with a 7.9 1/4 mile time. It will soon be beaten by Marko with his new 1520RWHP setup. Marko's car is also 100% full weight - stock power leather seats, stock hood, stock rims, etc. Its also a car he drives daily - he put over 5000miles on it during the last year. Both these cars retain the factory IRS suspension. There were Supras a little faster, in the 7.7 range running a solid rear axle, but thats not technically a Supra anymore.

I think i've seen pictures of the HKS drag 6G Celica somewhere. If i recall correctly it ran 9 second times. Ill try to dig those up.

Dennis

both platforms are amazing
i see it as an idea of what you plan to do
if you want more speed, then 2JZ...more displacement, more cylinders, more potential.
if you want to watch weight and try to even it out and skim it everywhere possible to get a nimble yet quick car, 3S.

there is no real arguement here IMO
the MR2 needs it's 3S
a 2JZ is the ideal choice in ANY situation really when doing toyota swaps, but realism plays a role, such as do you want that much more weight located at x distance from the COG?


yea i dont even really have a point other than the engine you pick depends on what u plan to do, and how far you plan to take it.

I was under the impression that a lot of us already knew most of the information in Charlie's post was incorrect?

I knew it, especially why 3sgte's are put in Supra's sometimes- a pratice to get around weight restrictions in engines in certain race series- a pratice which I understand is now mostly illegal?

The 2jz is not the end all to end all engines, neither is the 3sgte, neither is the supra, nor the celica, nor the skyline.

Unfortunetly, while the 3sgte is almost 10 years older than the 2jz, the 2jz is a lot more popular and draws a lot more attention. It means that just about now, the 3sgte is expierencing the tuning revival that the 2jz already went through- people are just now starting to take it above and beyond the limits (and just now starting to document it)

I doubt very much that either engine has been taken to its limits limits yet- the 2jz is probably getting there (hehe, comeon 1500hp!)

But just like you said, it's a drag engine. I wouldn't take a supra to places I would take a 3s AWD Celica.

I disagree that you think you can get the supra to a 10 second quarter mile so easily, you better have one hell of a driver- whose also a midget on a diet. Bigger turbos, fuel upgrade and rubber to get to 10 seconds will run you near 10 grand already to buy the size of the single turbo you need to get 600rwhp

I think Charlie's post has served a great purpose- it keeps newbies from continually asking about the 2jz swap

Good info.
In many senses, you are right. The 3s is not in the same class as the 2jz. The 3s is still though the greatest 4 banger ever made, and the most fessible swap for most of the members on this forum. When you consider the engines pound for pound though, I think that the 3s is still an equaly designed engine. I've seen 3s pushing over 1200 hp after heavy modification, almost 6 times its stock hp. Concidering that the 320 hp stock 2jz pushes 2000 hp after heavy moding, that is also about 6 times its stock hp. So in this sense, the engines are equals, where the 2jz simply has a greater displacement.
I love supras and would buy one and sell my celica, if money was not an option. The Celica has been called before a "budget sports car" because it not only looks good, but because it is very reasonible and reliable as well. Thank you though for critisizing and challeging something that many here simply took for granted. When it comes down to it, the Celica and the Supra are not in the same class, but I respect both cars greatly.
Welcome to the site.

This post has been edited by CheesyLobster: Feb 16, 2005 - 3:10 AM

i wouldnt really go as far as calling the celica a sports car... its a sport coupe, that just happens to take alot of its styling cues from one of the best known japanses sports cars in the world

Just to clear something up.

The race Supras ran 3S-GTEs for a simple reason. The rules for the formula limited power by forcing the engine to breathe through a restrictor. Limiting them to around 500bhp.

A 3S can kick out 500bhp with no problems, and it's lighter and sits further back in the engine bay. Easy choice.

Both of them are fabulous engine.

And my celica is a sports car, thanks very much. A seriously quick one as well.

im speaking with the USDM watered-down biased lol

Or a fastback? wait, that dosnt make sence. sports hatch.. lol

Ok, The biggist thing about the swap for the CELICA is weight. You dont want that much extra weight in the front of such a small, and not heavy ended car. simple as that. Just going to the point why its not a good engine for the celica.

It's not a good engine because it's mounted the wrong way to drive the front wheels. So you'd need a whole new transmission.

At which point it's a lot easier to build a kit car from the ground up and hang celica panels off it......

(that might not be true)

This post has been edited by Mr_E: Feb 16, 2005 - 12:28 PM