The engine's in 7th and 6th gen Celica, Why did they change?? Options

[BonzaiCelica]

So i was thinking the other day of the difference between the motor's in the 6th gen and 7th gen celica's. The 3sge engine was a very potential motor with 3rd gen producing 177 hp 142 lb torque, 4th gen "Redtop Beams" 197hp 152 lb torque and the 5th gen "Blacktop" found in the Altezza producing 207 hp and 159 lb's torque. I would say those a pretty impressive numbers.

Honda has had their vtec since the nsx first came out in the early 90's and they have been improving ever since. So why did toyota decide to go with a 1zz-ge and 2zz-ge engine for the celica. I mean the displacement went down in .2 liters. The 1.8 ltr 2zz engine came with vvtl-i to compete with honda's vtec? In the US, the celica only produced a 180 hp and in japan it produced 190 hp. Then there was the trd celica which produced 194 hp. Still that wasnt even enough to touch the Integra type r B18c5 motor which produced 195 hp and had around the same torque as the 7th.

So why didnt toyota stick with the 3sge. They could have produced an 2 ltr engine that had around 215 hp with vvt-i on the intake and exhaust manifold just like the 3sge blacktop.

[Tony-B]

I was just going to say that!!

A 3s-gte can be tuned to 300bhp+ quite easily. Front mount intercooler, boost controller, fuel pressure regulator, 100 octane fuel, less restrictive pipework etc. None of which are too expensive or hard to get.

I think the power difference would overwrite the weight difference?

But it would be expensive, unless you where an engineer or something.

But the 2ZZ is a nice engine and seems to have a Lot of happy owners so........

Also 3s-gte's were being produced in japan up as far as 2007!

A 2007 caldina GT-4 engine swap to a 6gen? thats a different thread altogether.

[Edophus]

i think it would be pretty pointless swapping out a 2zz for a 3s-ge in a gen 7 as that money could be spent on the 2zz and really both are capable of big power with the right work done to it, i guess the only weak point of the 2zz is its gearbox, but you can probably bolt up the e series box from a 4agze as there really strong.

i still think next to the honda k20 the beams is up there as the best 2 litre engine out there, if you turbo a beams instead of a 3s-gte you end up with a powerband getting on for 2000rpm larger, the turbo will spool up about 1000rpm earlier than a 3s-gte thanks to the vvti, and the ones that have been built so far have managed the same power figures as 3s-gte's but with bigger powerbands, using less boost on smaller turbo's just because the heads so much better, so there is less heat to deal with, also the beams block is the last revision and strongest of all, you just need to swap the pistons/rods and you have the best 3s engine, better than even the caldina gt-four engine.

[richee3]

i think it would be pretty pointless swapping out a 2zz for a 3s-ge in a gen 7 as that money could be spent on the 2zz and really both are capable of big power with the right work done to it, i guess the only weak point of the 2zz is its gearbox, but you can probably bolt up the e series box from a 4agze as there really strong.

i still think next to the honda k20 the beams is up there as the best 2 litre engine out there, if you turbo a beams instead of a 3s-gte you end up with a powerband getting on for 2000rpm larger, the turbo will spool up about 1000rpm earlier than a 3s-gte thanks to the vvti, and the ones that have been built so far have managed the same power figures as 3s-gte's but with bigger powerbands, using less boost on smaller turbo's just because the heads so much better, so there is less heat to deal with, also the beams block is the last revision and strongest of all, you just need to swap the pistons/rods and you have the best 3s engine, better than even the caldina gt-four engine.

BEAMS is too high compression for a turbo.

An interesting way to look at torque vs. hp is a chainsaw. Everyone knows Stihl makes great chainsaws, and Husqvarna isn't doing too bad themselves. The difference between the two is that Stihl makes their chainsaws with torque, and Husqvarna tries to make the chain spin faster. The idea behind Stihl is that they want the chain to spin, no matter what. Husqvarna on the other hand wants their chain to spin ridiculously fast to get through the wood. Both methods work just fine, but once the wood gets tough, the Husqvarna lacks the torque to keep the blade spinning as fast and won't cut as well as the Stihl, that is still going.

Basically, torque is going to keep your car moving, even under load, such as heavy acceleration. But hp is nice too

[Edophus]

BEAMS is too high compression for a turbo.

An interesting way to look at torque vs. hp is a chainsaw. Everyone knows Stihl makes great chainsaws, and Husqvarna isn't doing too bad themselves. The difference between the two is that Stihl makes their chainsaws with torque, and Husqvarna tries to make the chain spin faster. The idea behind Stihl is that they want the chain to spin, no matter what. Husqvarna on the other hand wants their chain to spin ridiculously fast to get through the wood. Both methods work just fine, but once the wood gets tough, the Husqvarna lacks the torque to keep the blade spinning as fast and won't cut as well as the Stihl, that is still going.

Basically, torque is going to keep your car moving, even under load, such as heavy acceleration. But hp is nice too

there are thousands of beams blacktop and 2zz owners who have turbo'd there 11.5 :1 comp engines who would disagree with that statement do you know about dynamic compression? also with different pistons it can be any static comp you want.

also do chain saws come with gearboxes?

This post has been edited by Edophus: Aug 13, 2009 - 4:00 PM