I was looking at the tundra solutions site and noticed that tundras do a base dyno of around 200-210hp, while the 1uz does around 180, right? Isn't the iuz rated at 250 crank hp and the tundra 235hp, also the 2uz makes the peak way lower in the rpm range as a truck should. I wonder the differences in the cam specs on between the engines and if the valves are the same size and overall head design. I think JBrady felt that the 1uz is really around 230hp which sounds about right considering dyno results. Some have mentioned installing 1uz head on a 2uz for an ultimate flow combo, but does the 1uz head, really out flow the 2uz head? At this rate the 1uz makes slightly higher horsepower per liter than the 2uz, but not much and i wonder if that has more to do with higher compression ratio, thoughts?
2uz > power than 1uz?
- Thread starter WDoherty
- Start date
The 1UZFE EGR Delete Kit is available for sale here.
Drivetrain loss is effected by many things including the weight of the drivetrain and the type of transmission. Do the Tundras that are dynoing around 200-210rwhp have manual or auto trannies?
Also, the drivetrain isolators (rubber and other absorbtion devices) designed to make a quieter smoother ride actually absorb some power. Drivetrain loss is also a function of each gear and transition interface.
All the above said, typical 1990-1994 1UZFE engines dynojet around 175-180rwhp. As stated I believe the actual installed flywheel HP on these year engines was closer to 230hp.
1995-1997 LS400 (96-96 SC400) 1UZFEs are rated at 260hp and dyno around 200rwhp. 1998-2000 VVTi 1UZFEs are rated 300hp in the GS400s (290 in LS and SC) and dyno around 230hp.
All these put drivetrain loss around 22%.
A manual truck probably looses around 15%. 235 - 200 / 235 = 15%
stevechumo
Active Member
As I read from several sources, having a true dynoed number for the 1UZ-FE is hard due to the computer retarding the timing for lack of air...etc? I don't remember exactly what else. However, 180 up to 187 rwhp is normal for dynoed 1UZ-FE. But as a common sense, losing too much from 250 hp crank to 180 rwhp is something not right. It should be around 210 rwhp.WDoherty said:
WDoherty said:
Drivetrain loss is effected by many things including the weight of the drivetrain and the type of transmission. Do the Tundras that are dynoing around 200-210rwhp have manual or auto trannies?
Also, the drivetrain isolators (rubber and other absorbtion devices) designed to make a quieter smoother ride actually absorb some power. Drivetrain loss is also a function of each gear and transition interface.
All the above said, typical 1990-1994 1UZFE engines dynojet around 175-180rwhp. As stated I believe the actual installed flywheel HP on these year engines was closer to 230hp.
1995-1997 LS400 (96-96 SC400) 1UZFEs are rated at 260hp and dyno around 200rwhp. 1998-2000 VVTi 1UZFEs are rated 300hp in the GS400s (290 in LS and SC) and dyno around 230hp.
All these put drivetrain loss around 22%.
A manual truck probably looses around 15%. 235 - 200 / 235 = 15%
turboandrew
Member
There are no manual 2UZ trucks. I doubt the drivetrain loss is much different, but perhaps the solid axle could make a slight difference. Either way, I'd bet the 2UZ does make more actual power.
turboandrew
Member
I suspect 2UZvvti version has plently of top end. 280 HP I think. That is certainly more powerful that 1-2nd gen 1UZ motors 
What kind of gear box is the H151F? 5 speed? Seems like that would be the easiest way to get a manual tranny on a 1UZ.
What kind of gear box is the H151F? 5 speed? Seems like that would be the easiest way to get a manual tranny on a 1UZ.
I drove a 2001 sequoia the other day with similiar miles to my sc400 and i couldn't believe the power it had. It was responsive and just plain fast, it felt faster than my car. Note this is not the vvt-i version , just the standard 2uz. I'm still boggled by this, and i think it may have something to do with cams, but the sc400 cams are so mild in the first place, they should have good low end torque. If anyone has specs on the 2uz cams versus 1uz that would be helpful. Any way the toyota site states curb weight of a sequoia at 5090. I know sc400's are supposed to be 3500 or so, but i had mine weighed and it came in at 3780 and this will make the comparison more fair. This puts the sequoia at 1082 pounds per liter of displacement and the sc at 945 pounds per liter. Also i beleive they have the same 4 speed automatic, but the sequoia had much lower rpm at highway speed than my car, so that is either a higher rear end ratio, or the same with larger tires. Once again this would put the sc in favor of responsiveness and acceleration in theory. So why does the sequoia feel so powerful and fast and sc underpowered and underponsive in the low end. Note the sequoia also felt this way at high speed on the highway, so i'm confused. Do we know differences in the heads, valves sizes, and specs on cams? Has anyone else who owns a lexus 1uz and driven a 2uz truck or sequoia and feel what i'm talking about.
stevechumo
Active Member
Wow! That surprised me, too. I've test driven a Sequoia once but didn't pay much attention to its power because I didn't think it's that fast. It could be that I didn't have my SC400 at that time for comparison. However, I don't think my SC400 is that fast either, except at high speed with the ECT on, and it's a lot different without it. The reason that you felt the Sequoia faster could be its torque is much higher, which is at 300 lb-ft while the '95 SC400 (my car) has a torque of only 260 lb-ft. If from '96 and newer models, the SC400 should have from 260 lb-ft, and 290 lb-ft for '98. So I don't know if these newer models have a lot in differences. But the weight of the Sequoia is so heavy so it's kind of surprised me just as you. Even an addition of a passenger with 150 lbs could make a difference in acceleration.
Orion ZyGarian
New Member
There's almost a liter more displacement..I'd be surprised if it DIDNT have more power
I bet you can take the crank out of a 2UZ and stroke your UZ to 4.7L.
I bet you can take the crank out of a 2UZ and stroke your UZ to 4.7L.
makaveli200369
New Member
Yeah but is the 2UZ block cast iron? That'll make it alot heavier. As far as an engine swap point of view
makaveli200369
New Member
Yeah but is the 2UZ block cast iron? That'll make it alot heavier. As far as an engine swap point of view
cjsupra90
New Member
ok guys, kinda off subject, but it was stated that the 2uz came with a manual trany, if so then that should solve flywheel fitment problems. I have not seen anyone say anything about a factory flywheel being availible to make manual swaps easier. If anyone knows anything more about them, please PM with any info that you have.
Peewee
New Member
Toyota flywheels are known for being heavy, add to that its in a big 4WD, and you'll find its an extremely heavy flywheel.
Not really ideal for many conversions.
Plenty of places do custom flywheels anyway.
I can think of at least 4 places in Aust that I can just pic up the phone and order one from.
There will be places in America that do the same. Its just a matter of finding them.
Not really ideal for many conversions.
Plenty of places do custom flywheels anyway.
I can think of at least 4 places in Aust that I can just pic up the phone and order one from.
There will be places in America that do the same. Its just a matter of finding them.
slow camry
New Member
Similar threads
Wanted
2UZ Heads
