3SGE and 3SGTE 3rd gen Diffrences Options

[Alan]

Hey guys its me I am back in the game hehe, I need some info with anyone who can help me out I need to know the main diffrences between the 3SGE and 3SGTE 3rd gen cylinder heads, I need to know what valve cover fits the 3SGE and if a fuel rail of a 3sgte will fit a 3sge head any other diffrence anyone knows please le me no

[yozef]

hey mate, anything I can help with?

[Alan]

hey mate, anything I can help with?

Xanna man I just need to find a quick guide with the diff in 3SGE and 3SGTE 3rd gen heads like top cover, mainfolds everything but I guess I better do the research my self :S as it too much info and I need to be 100%
How u doing?

[yozef]

Doing fine thanks.

AFAIK head is the same. Cams are different, suprisingly more agressive on the 3SGE, Inlet manifold, fuel rail, injectors all different. Top cover is the same. Call me if you need anything.

Are you turboing a 3sge? I've been long thinking of doing it but I have no time.

This post has been edited by yozef: Mar 17, 2010 - 7:03 AM

[6gtfour]

This is constantly on my mind. I will eventually end up doing some personal tests on this myself. The critical thing to take note of would be the differences in the amount of CFM both heads flow (or can flow) and if the 3SGE even has the potential to outflow the 3SGTE head at all values of valve lift then the variable cam timing of the 3SGE is guaranteed to be the nail in the coffin of the 3SGTE. The only factor that would remain to be considered is reliability under big boost/ high horse power usage.

[delusionz]

the 3s-ge was designed to make its peak power at 7000 while the 3s-gte is designed to make its peak power at 6000.

there are so many factors you need to take into consideration besides the theoretical output figure. you may find you sacrifice far too much and are better off having an experienced engine builder order some custom cams to account for all specifications.

examples are,
valve overlap (better for NA, not so good for turbo)
turbo size?
rev limiter increase?
engine durability?
low end response?
gearing (what will you do if you lose low end response on a long ratio gearbox like the E153 and E154F? Or will you stay with the S54?)

[6gtfour]

the 3s-ge was designed to make its peak power at 7000 while the 3s-gte is designed to make its peak power at 6000.

there are so many factors you need to take into consideration besides the theoretical output figure. you may find you sacrifice far too much and are better off having an experienced engine builder order some custom cams to account for all specifications.

examples are,
valve overlap (better for NA, not so good for turbo)
turbo size?
rev limiter increase?
engine durability?
low end response?
gearing (what will you do if you lose low end response on a long ratio gearbox like the E153 and E154F? Or will you stay with the S54?)

The 3SGE only makes its peak power at 7000 because variable valve timing introduces a broader torque curve that positively affects low rpm drivability / cylinder filling sufficiently enough to allow for a broader total RPM operating range.

valve overlap being better for NA and not turbo is not the whole picture. VVT changes the rules in valve overlap environment allowing you to have the best of both worlds. AFAIK valve overlap is a good thing at high rpm in turbo cars as well.

rev limit is a function of engine component specs and really nothing else. Meaning the components used in the build and their specs/configuration/installation will ultimately decide the engine's rev capability limitations.

Engine durability follows a similar thought process. It should be interesting trying to uncover whether the 3SGE or 3SGTE is ultimately engineered with the better potential for high power durability.

For low end response you simply cannot argue with the 3SGE being the winner. Variable Valve timing beats Static cam settings no matter how you implement them. Yet another significant consideration towards the possibility that the 3SGE may be the better platform.

Like i suggested before I really like this topic!

[Rusty]

nice you just compared the 4th gen 3S-GE, how about the 3rd gen 3S-GE now?

[delusionz]

6tfour you may want to edit your post when you realise what the discussion here is about.

First and foremost, the 3rd Gen engines DO NOT have any form of valve timing, they have ACIS which variates the length of the intake manifold runners.

valve overlap adds a supercharging effect to an NA engine, as the exhaust pulse is exiting through the pipes it creates a vacuum behind it, the moment that both valves are open after the exhaust stroke has finished and the intake stroke is beginning, it serves to pull air in through the intake. on a turbocharged application all this does is leak boost out the exhaust.

why do I talk about rev limit? the st205 3s-gte has a redline of 6800 with peak power at 6000, this allows you to hit your peak power and rev out somewhat so the next gear drops you into maximum power and boost.
the st202 3s-ge has a redline of 7000 and a peak power of 7000, this is done simply to juice as much power from the NA engine as possible, the gear shift will drop you out of peak power but you'll hit the 177bhp mark atleast once instead of hitting a plateau and a momentary pause in acceleration.

why do I talk about engine durability? the st205 3s-gte was not designed to rev over 6800, with cams dialed in for a peak power at 7000, calling for a rev limiter increase to perhaps 7800??? this brings factors into play such as the crankshaft balancing, strength of the valve springs and all the other jazz associated with the design of an engine according to how high it will rev and how much power it will put out at those revs.

why do I talk about low end response? camshaft profile has a trade off (which VVT compensates for, but since you've missed the point that we don't have any form of Valve Timing in this case.) the trade off is between power at high revs vs torque at low revs, the 3s-ge camshaft profile is a higher rpm profile than the 3s-gte so go figure.

if you go back to the original post, it only mentions cylinder head differences between the two 3rd gen 3S-G* engines, then this turned into a conversation about the intention of making more power from the st205 3s-gte bottom end with the st202 3s-ge head. but if you want to compare high power engine durability of the entire engines its easy, the 3S-GE has high compression, which means lower boost potential. It may be safe to run 7psi on the 3s-ge and get 250bhp with good response all the way through, but the 3s-gte is safe to run 18psi and surpass the 300bhp mark. case closed?

I honestly didn't think someone would make me have to spell this stuff out, especially not a fellow st205 owner...

[6gtfour]

waw talk about getting carried away with excitement. I guess I have to keep in mind this is a global website lol.
All of the ST202's I've seen with the 3SGE came with the beams so I just assumed that's what he was referring to. I've never seen a celica that wasn't RHD from japan plus i'm obsessed with VVTI + boost I just kinda jumped the gun there sorry haha. Would it be at all possible if we can steer this thread in the direction of the 4th gen rev 1 intake cam only VVT beams engine compared to the ST205 3rd gen 3sgte?

[delusionz]

Alot of the information circulating around Celica and MR2 websites will suggest that nothing in the Beams red top 4th gen 3S-GE engine is backwards compatible with the Gen 2 and 3 engines, Not even so much as a head transplant.

- However -

IIRC the latest Toyota Caldina GT-Four ST246 is already VVT-i equipped.

The Toyota Caldina GT-T ST215 engine is also known as a Gen 4 engine but shares nothing in common with the Gen 4 3S-GE Beams, the ST215 is NOT VVT-i equipped, it simply sports a .5 increase in compression ratio, a side feed intake manifold design and a 1 piece exhaust manifold and turbine housing design.
The flanges do NOT mate up with the older Gen 2 and 3 engines, but the head does.


To be honest, the addition of VVT-i to a turbocharged engine which doesn't already have it is somewhat beneficial to the lower rpm band (although alot lower than it would be in an NA engine, perhaps up to 2500 rpm in turbocharged vs 4500 rpm in NA) but in terms of bang for buck you're not getting anything for the money and time spent.

You -COULD- buy a whole Gen 4 3S-GE Beams engine, transfer your crank and pistons from the Gen 3 3S-GTE, add standalone engine management, have a custom exhaust manifold and downpipe crafted, have a custom engine wiring harness crafted, change over the old sensors back to the new setup especially the MAP sensor and drop it back in, god knows how much this would cost...

-AND THEN-

Wow you've gained a little bit of torque just before the point that your boost kicks in, the top of your engine looks beautiful in red BUT

You've just lost the mounting points for your very effective ST205 Water -to- Air Intercooler charge cooler forcing you to go front mount which means an extra 2 metres of length in intercooler piping and more turbo lag!!!! thus negating any benefit you gained from the VVT-i...

So sorry to bust your bubble though, VVT-i would be cool if it was available in 1994 for the 3rd Gen 3S-G* engines... But you'll just have to go without.

[Rusty]

waw talk about getting carried away with excitement. I guess I have to keep in mind this is a global website lol.
All of the ST202's I've seen with the 3SGE came with the beams so I just assumed that's what he was referring to. I've never seen a celica that wasn't RHD from japan plus i'm obsessed with VVTI + boost I just kinda jumped the gun there sorry haha. Would it be at all possible if we can steer this thread in the direction of the 4th gen rev 1 intake cam only VVT beams engine compared to the ST205 3rd gen 3sgte?

what part of the world may I ask your from?

We're helping Alan first: what parts in the head are interchangable/different between the Gen 3 3S's (GE & GTE) Your last sentance is a bit hard to read so I suggest you start a new topic as not to confuse people and infomation

I know of the cams
3rd Gen 3SGE M/T (AT's are smaller)
In: 252deg, 9.8mm lift
Ex: 240deg, 8.2mm lift

3rd Gen 3SGTE
In: 240deg, 8.7mm lift
Ex: 236deg, 8.2mm lift

will look into valve angles and sizes of those. (I think they might be the same)

[6gtfour]

Yes it seems a daunting task. Good read.
I am just as interested in VVTi for its capability to allow the car to idle smoother with a more agressive camshaft as well as the widening of the torque band. I know the benifit seems marginal but on the other hand I also know it's still worth the hassle. (listed in order of importance to me)
(1) I don't like having to use a higher idle RPM with agressive cams.
(2)I also dislike the lopey idle that comes with them and
(3)of course i'm looking for some additional width to the torque curve.
Concerning the water to air intercooler, I have already tested its limits and come to the conclusion that it would have to be replaced by an air to air exchanger or be fully upgraded to handle both the air flow and heat load that my intended configuration is going involve. Because I am the type that will go to extremes in order to maintain a factory lookng engine bay most likely the water to air configuration will be retained but with a custom intercooler, upgrade front exchanger and pump. So even if I'm non VVTi and retain the 3rd gen 3sgte there's still a possibility that I may have to customise the mounting points for the intercooler. Might as well try to get what I want while going through the hassle.

[delusionz]

How much power are you looking to get? Your needs will probably be more than taken care of by say.... a Garrett T2876R and a standalone engine computer?? Keep the stock cams to retain a smooth idle and good spoolup/mid range power... I think VVT-i will only really have a major effect to off-boost performance anyways.

[6gtfour]

How much power are you looking to get? Your needs will probably be more than taken care of by say.... a Garrett T2876R and a standalone engine computer?? Keep the stock cams to retain a smooth idle and good spoolup/mid range power... I think VVT-i will only really have a major effect to off-boost performance anyways.

I can't convince myself to tare apart the engine for anything less than a 600AWHP configuration on race fuel. The experience i've had with the T28 is that at 427whp on the dyno (front wheel drive only) that turbo was completely out of breath. It spools really well but not enough flow for my goals when the race map is loaded. I'd be happy with it everyday on the street but not for track days.
The annoying thing about me is if you gave me an F1 fighter jet I would fuss over how possible it is to make it as daily driveable as possible.
My on boost goal for VVTi is about exactly as you summed it up. On boost I would actually be happy with even less than an additional 2500 rpm added to the torque curve. I would settle for as little as 1000 rpm more torque bandwidth using VVTi. AS LONG AS i have the flexibility to load a well tuned pump gas street map with smooth low rpm idle characteristics, be able to get better off boost fuel economy, and generally better street manners in any way whatsoever then it's worth the stress. What is your opinion of the new series of borg warner extended tip fast spooling turbos. Honestly if the S259 EMS powered is working on has a favourable compressor map and specs I was honestly thinking about trying that one. Anyway as advised I should probably start a new thread since this is not the discussion Alan was attempting to spark by starting his thread.