4000GT - MKIV Supra 1UZ turbo - update

[JBrady]

4000 GT, Outstanding effort! Looks clean and well thought out. I look forward to your driving impressions. 313rwhp is substantial power. What is your impression after the swap? IIRC the 2jz-gte is possibly heavier than the 1uzfe. With your turbo system the total may be close. YEARS ago I did a V8 swap on my 1987 TBird Turbocoupe, stock was turbo inline 4. After the swap the car felt completely different even going straight. Probably only added 100 pounds but definitely felt it.

thats the NON vvti... the VVTI came out in 98 to 00 in the 1uz, then after 01 to present or 05 or 06 it was a 3uz. His 1uz is ideal for a non built motor to run boost as those rods are thick as hell, the VVTI sacraficed the strength for more power making it closer to 300 or right at 300bhp so that NA is about all you'd want to do.

CAUTION: the top on the engine indicates a 1995-1997 1uzfe. While not VVTi I am almost certian it has the WEAK rods. I had one in my previous 1996 LS400. Lexus made multiple changes from 94 to 95 and the engine actually made its rated 260hp/270tq (earlier engines were over-rated)

Be careful boosting those skinny rods (unless I missed something and you have already upgraded). I am fairly sure the crankshaft is lighter (but still plenty strong) and the pistons are lighter which may be less tolerant than early engines (1990-1994).

 

[lowboost]

Oh I thought he had a 89 to 94 1uz... yeah theres a thread showing the different years on this forums (great information too!). thanks Jbrady

4000 GT, Outstanding effort! Looks clean and well thought out. I look forward to your driving impressions. 313rwhp is substantial power. What is your impression after the swap? IIRC the 2jz-gte is possibly heavier than the 1uzfe. With your turbo system the total may be close. YEARS ago I did a V8 swap on my 1987 TBird Turbocoupe, stock was turbo inline 4. After the swap the car felt completely different even going straight. Probably only added 100 pounds but definitely felt it.



CAUTION: the top on the engine indicates a 1995-1997 1uzfe. While not VVTi I am almost certian it has the WEAK rods. I had one in my previous 1996 LS400. Lexus made multiple changes from 94 to 95 and the engine actually made its rated 260hp/270tq (earlier engines were over-rated)

Be careful boosting those skinny rods (unless I missed something and you have already upgraded). I am fairly sure the crankshaft is lighter (but still plenty strong) and the pistons are lighter which may be less tolerant than early engines (1990-1994).

 

[spf_lexus]

Thats right, how did lexus squeeze 10hp out of an engine that had nothing really refined? Figure by shaving off some of the rotating assembly it scavenges 10hp from the "dead weight" but us modders love that dead weight!. At the same time this is perfect for dailies but not so good for projects. Still one helluva engine

 

[lowboost]

yeah true, but in my case it doesnt matter to me, I'm keeping mine NA and 4.0 liter vvti on the slushbox getrag 6spd. Just aiming for 300whp or so... we will see.

 

[JustenGT8]

4000 GT, Outstanding effort! Looks clean and well thought out. I look forward to your driving impressions. 313rwhp is substantial power. What is your impression after the swap? IIRC the 2jz-gte is possibly heavier than the 1uzfe. With your turbo system the total may be close.

The 2JZ is definitely heavier and substantially so. The UZ is equivalent in weight to the 1G found in the IS200 and even there the better weight distribution from the shorter V8 configuration gives noticeably better balance.

In a JZA80 a UZ would improve handling substantially......the big turbo hanging off the front isn't doing Andrew any favours but he's still going to be way ahead of a 2J for weight distribution.

You don't see many (any?) 2Js being raced at the circuit eh :wink1:

 

[JBrady]

Thats right, how did lexus squeeze 10hp out of an engine that had nothing really refined? Figure by shaving off some of the rotating assembly it scavenges 10hp from the "dead weight" but us modders love that dead weight!. At the same time this is perfect for dailies but not so good for projects. Still one helluva engine

Actually I have stated many times that I believe the TRUE output of the 90-94 1uzfe is more like 230hp... IOW... 20hp or so less than its 250 rating. The 95-97 LS400 rated at 260hp is IMO accurate so the gains are closer to 30hp. The early engines typically dyno around 175rwhp whereas the 95-97 dyno around 200rwhp and the 98-2000 rated 290hp-300hp dyno around 225-235rwhp.

In addition to lighter internals the engines get a compression bump from 10-1 to 10.4-1, slightly more camshaft timing and better exhaust manifolds (LS400 only). The 95-97 LS400 was slightly lighter but a full second quicker 0-60mph than the 90-94 models.

 

[JBrady]

The 2JZ is definitely heavier and substantially so. The UZ is equivalent in weight to the 1G found in the IS200 and even there the better weight distribution from the shorter V8 configuration gives noticeably better balance.

In a JZA80 a UZ would improve handling substantially......the big turbo hanging off the front isn't doing Andrew any favours but he's still going to be way ahead of a 2J for weight distribution.

You don't see many (any?) 2Js being raced at the circuit eh :wink1:

Yeah, the longer iron block and longer crankshaft do not help the 2jz weight total or distribution. I DEFINITELY defer tracking questions to you my friend. That said... what do you think of the performance of the Supra and Skyline in the following video?

BTW definitely watch the whole video to see the stock looking Skyline !!!!

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/amuse-powerhouse-supra-vs_129468.htm

 

[lowboost]

Actually I have stated many times that I believe the TRUE output of the 90-94 1uzfe is more like 230hp... IOW... 20hp or so less than its 250 rating. The 95-97 LS400 rated at 260hp is IMO accurate so the gains are closer to 30hp. The early engines typically dyno around 175rwhp whereas the 95-97 dyno around 200rwhp and the 98-2000 rated 290hp-300hp dyno around 225-235rwhp.

In addition to lighter internals the engines get a compression bump from 10-1 to 10.4-1, slightly more camshaft timing and better exhaust manifolds (LS400 only). The 95-97 LS400 was slightly lighter but a full second quicker 0-60mph than the 90-94 models.

I believe your right, the reason they "claimed" its 250bhp is because the 300 line (sc300/gs300/supra NA) 3.0 6cylinder was making 220bhp. And those make around 175whp on a dyno.... so yeah unless theres something wrong here I believe what you mean. I think they HAD to claim it made more power to help sales and the upper line V8 over the inline 6...

 

[stevechumo]

Actually I have stated many times that I believe the TRUE output of the 90-94 1uzfe is more like 230hp... IOW... 20hp or so less than its 250 rating. The 95-97 LS400 rated at 260hp is IMO accurate so the gains are closer to 30hp. The early engines typically dyno around 175rwhp whereas the 95-97 dyno around 200rwhp and the 98-2000 rated 290hp-300hp dyno around 225-235rwhp.

In addition to lighter internals the engines get a compression bump from 10-1 to 10.4-1, slightly more camshaft timing and better exhaust manifolds (LS400 only). The 95-97 LS400 was slightly lighter but a full second quicker 0-60mph than the 90-94 models.

I drove the 95 LS400 and it's definitely quicker than my 95 SC400, although the LS is heavier, I believe.

 

[MitchP]

My SC400 put down 230 wheel horsepower on a Mustang dyno when the car was stock with about 205k on it. Don't know if factory hp rating was at flywheel or wheels.

 

[lowboost]

not unless its a 98 or 00 model thats 290bhp.... otherwise the dyno was off.

 

[cribbj]

My SC400 put down 230 wheel horsepower on a Mustang dyno when the car was stock with about 205k on it. Don't know if factory hp rating was at flywheel or wheels.

Mitch, was that with the OEM ECU, or with an AEM that you'd tweaked?

 

[JBrady]

My SC400 put down 230 wheel horsepower on a Mustang dyno when the car was stock with about 205k on it. Don't know if factory hp rating was at flywheel or wheels.

Mitch, you are a well respected AEM tuner BUT... stock!!!! Never, ever EVER heard anything close. I honestly cannot think of a single STOCK 1st gen SC400 even reporting to crack 185rwhp stock.

Even if the stock AFM was so worn out that it signaled eroneously and the car was running 14.5-1 afr... and the computer eroneously advanced timing and the thing was making power off detonation... even then... hard to figure.

Factory rating of the 1st gen 1990-1994 1uzfe is 250hp/260tq is engine. I have never seen a car rated from the manufacturer at the wheels.

Again, I say the 1st gen 1uzfe is in reality a 225-230hp engine stock. This alignes with virtually every 1st gen dyno of LS400s and SC400s. When the engine was redone in 1995 and re-rated to 260hp/270tq the LS400 dropped from over 8 seconds to 7 seconds flat for 0-60 and from 16.5 down to 15.5 in the 1/4 mile. 10hp did not explain this improvement. Dynos went to 200rwhp (gain of 25rwhp). The SC400 did not get this engine until 1996 and never got the improved dual tube exhaust manifolds not even with the 290hp VVTi engine in 1998. BTW, 230rwhp is typical of the 300hp/310tq 1998-2000 GS400 which runs 5.7 seconds 0-60 and mid 14s in the 1/4.

 

[MitchP]

The car's powertrain was completely stock when I dyno'd it. (Had wheels, tires and coilovers on it)

You always have to take dyno measurements with a grain of salt. Dyno readings always vary from dyno to dyno, even if they are from the same manufacturer. I've seen variations of 25% between different dynos with the same car on the same day. Therefore, you can only really look at percentage comparisons - different modifications to the same car (as done when ECU tuning or parts swapping) or different cars - on the same dyno.

I will re-dyno my car and provide a comparison to a different vehicle on the same dyno. I will be tuning a B18 CRX this Saturday so I will see if I can get my car on the dyno for a couple pulls and compare it to a stock STi, EVO or something common that they have dyno'd there recently. That should provide insight into how much my car is really making.

I currently have some powertrain mods but they are pretty minor and shouldn't effect power output considerably - maybe +/- 5-10hp from stock. I have a custom 3.5" cold air intake and have replaced the rear mufflers with 2.25" AL straight pipes from the rear axle flanges back. The car compared to stock does not feel much different powerwise but the sound is much more pleasing and catches many fellow motorists off guard.

 

[JustenGT8]

Yeah, the longer iron block and longer crankshaft do not help the 2jz weight total or distribution. I DEFINITELY defer tracking questions to you my friend. That said... what do you think of the performance of the Supra and Skyline in the following video?

BTW definitely watch the whole video to see the stock looking Skyline !!!!

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/amuse-powerhouse-supra-vs_129468.htm

As expected really and 4 secs a lap on a 1 minute lap time is a HUGE difference. Supra's aren't shabby by any means and as a fast street car i'd happily own one.....as a track car with 2J though, the basic dynamics just don't do them any favours.

enough thread hijacking now me thinks

 

[4000GT]

4000 GT, Outstanding effort! Looks clean and well thought out. I look forward to your driving impressions. 313rwhp is substantial power. What is your impression after the swap? IIRC the 2jz-gte is possibly heavier than the 1uzfe. With your turbo system the total may be close. YEARS ago I did a V8 swap on my 1987 TBird Turbocoupe, stock was turbo inline 4. After the swap the car felt completely different even going straight. Probably only added 100 pounds but definitely felt it.



CAUTION: the top on the engine indicates a 1995-1997 1uzfe. While not VVTi I am almost certian it has the WEAK rods. I had one in my previous 1996 LS400. Lexus made multiple changes from 94 to 95 and the engine actually made its rated 260hp/270tq (earlier engines were over-rated)

Be careful boosting those skinny rods (unless I missed something and you have already upgraded). I am fairly sure the crankshaft is lighter (but still plenty strong) and the pistons are lighter which may be less tolerant than early engines (1990-1994).

Thanks mate, the NA Auto Supra is a pig of a car... total junk. the NA 1UZ manual is a worthy sway on its own, transforms the car but lacks that pull an extra couple of hundred HP give.

The car feels pretty responsive and have put money into suspension and wheels / tyres so it should!

 

[drifty325i]

I want to see it again mate where are you at these days? Mine going well

 

[4000GT]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2AhcB8S55g

 

[4000GT]

Went back to dyno... 456WHP at 13.Xpsi... unopened motor.

 

[cribbj]

Nice number and at such low boost! Let's see the dyno chart.