woah, crazy. I was also looking at all of the other cars, insane.
Ok, so I was off but that means the real question is, will the 2.0L fit into the Elise? Is there more aftermarket mods for the 2.0L since it was in the MR2 and Celica? More support usually means more possibilities to build an awesome ride.Originally posted by Ryan'sTc@Jan 25 2006, 02:28 PM
The Lotus Elise model is a 1.8l 2ZZ-GE. That engine was a 2.0l 3SGTE engine. That engine was made famous from the mr-2 turbo and celica all-trac.
The 3S-GTE is Toyota's "racing" engine, it was never installed in an economy car. Ever. It comes in a few flavors, some of which are not commonly available. Garden varieties are well known to make between 500 and 600 hp with the right turbo and internals.Originally posted by AlmosN8kd@Jan 25 2006, 06:39 PM
1000HP at the crank or the wheels? Not to sound skeptical, but I find it a bit hard to belive that much power is coming out of a 2.0L economy designed engine; that's 250Hp per cylinder which is quite insane. Guys haven't broken the 1000HP at the wheels for my platform (3.0L performance designed engine) yet but they are getting very close (up to nearly 900 HP at the wheels by Ray Pampena in Long Island, NY; there is approximately a 25% drivetrain loss for my vehicle type). I don't know, perhaps it's because the Toyota engines were more widely use and have much more aftermarket support that will allow them to build that much power. Or, it's from a crazy large turbo that doesn't spool until 4k. Either way, if it's real then it is very significant.
Thanks for the update on the Toyota 2.0L; I really had no idea that it had that much potential. Is that kind of power being put down with C16 or 100 octane?Originally posted by lo bux racer+Jan 25 2006, 08:54 PM-->QUOTE (lo bux racer @ Jan 25 2006, 08:54 PM)<!--QuoteBegin-AlmosN8kdThe 3S-GTE is Toyota's "racing" engine, it was never installed in an economy car. Ever. It comes in a few flavors, some of which are not commonly available. Garden varieties are well known to make between 500 and 600 hp with the right turbo and internals.@Jan 25 2006, 06:39 PM
1000HP at the crank or the wheels? Not to sound skeptical, but I find it a bit hard to belive that much power is coming out of a 2.0L economy designed engine; that's 250Hp per cylinder which is quite insane. Guys haven't broken the 1000HP at the wheels for my platform (3.0L performance designed engine) yet but they are getting very close (up to nearly 900 HP at the wheels by Ray Pampena in Long Island, NY; there is approximately a 25% drivetrain loss for my vehicle type). I don't know, perhaps it's because the Toyota engines were more widely use and have much more aftermarket support that will allow them to build that much power. Or, it's from a crazy large turbo that doesn't spool until 4k. Either way, if it's real then it is very significant.
If you don't know how to make 1000 hp with 2 liters, you're behind. F1 was doing 1500 hp out of 1.5 liters in the late 80's. There have been Honda guys making 1000 hp with even less than 2 liters. Spikey? Sure, but if you can drive it, the power is there.
I know guys haven't broke 1000 hp for VR4s. There's a reason I own a Supra, not the smallest reason is the '91s breaking their cranks because they failed to radius the journals at the factory. Very rookie mistake for a company like Mitsu, and very expensive for them and their owners. It was enough for me to say I'll wait for the Toyota. Not to mention the viscous coupler in those things are notorious for dying with no inexpensive solution, and the gearbox parts for your Getrags are ridiculously expensive. Lots of reasons to choose a different route. [/b]
That car was good for one thing: it forced Toyota to step up and build the MkIV Supra. There is no fair comparison between them. I could go on and on about the differences that make the MkIV a superior ride, but I'll just put it this way: Nissan played their hand first, Toyota trumped them all in '93. The only fair challenge to the Supra was the FD RX-7 because it is much lighter and handles better than any of these other three cars we've mentioned.Originally posted by JDangle@Jan 26 2006, 01:22 AM
mehh, i perfer my 300zxTT over both![]()
its all godd bro, im just bustin your balls. there all great cars that most wish they had, but only few actually have and that are still good! atleast 3 that are on this board! lolOriginally posted by lo bux racer+Jan 28 2006, 12:22 AM-->QUOTE (lo bux racer @ Jan 28 2006, 12:22 AM)<!--QuoteBegin-JDangleThat car was good for one thing: it forced Toyota to step up and build the MkIV Supra. There is no fair comparison between them. I could go on and on about the differences that make the MkIV a superior ride, but I'll just put it this way: Nissan played their hand first, Toyota trumped them all in '93. The only fair challenge to the Supra was the FD RX-7 because it is much lighter and handles better than any of these other three cars we've mentioned.@Jan 26 2006, 01:22 AM
mehh, i perfer my 300zxTT over both![]()
No car in history has been as easy and reliable to mod for power as the MkIV Supra, including any of the domestics. [/b]