Anyone think of a good reason the 1j wasn't put in USDM Supras?

[te72]

For the life of me, I can't think of one good reason that we didn't get the 1jz in our Mk3's from the factory. About the only thing I can say that I liked about my 7m more was the sound (completely a superficial thing), and how much easier it was to change the oil filter in it's stock location...

Aside from that little bit, I'm at a loss. I get better mileage for the most part, more power, and it hasn't let me down once in ~15 months of daily driving it. I've heard the "emissions" word thrown about before, but I know for a fact they can pass, so what gives?

 

[A. Jay]

Entire cars are available to JDM and not to USDM, and I also wonder the same about that.

 

[mattsplat72]

Because the 1JZ wasn't offered in the a70 chassis until 1990. Maybe Toyota didn't think that it was worth it to make it Federal ( not State) EPA compliant considering the coming model change. Seems like a lot of extra effort for two years of sales. Juice didn't match the squeeze.

 

[Flateric]

I'm also of the opinion that the coming model change and the 2jz were too close for a world wide release of a car that to be honest did not ever sell in huge scale numbers relative to your corvette's etc.

7M BTW was still superior in many ways. Produced much more torque, pound for pound from a boost stand point also produced more power, established parts and dealer networks already familiar with it (relative to a completely different and never released in this market motor...1jz).

So we got to ride it out over here until the new 2j plant and model it lived in the MKIV was released in '92.

Of course all of this is pure speculation on my part from personal opinion based on what I have seen and learned in my travels. I'm sure someone like Jeff or some other will chime in with a more accurate view of it.

(Oh and you of course realize that your leaving yourself wide open for the jokes to commence, right?)

........Because the 1J didn't have enough torque to get across the ocean and make it here!

I joke.....I joke!

 

[laotionracer101]

::hah::

........Because the 1J didn't have enough torque to get across the ocean and make it here!

I joke.....I joke!

awesome, we are not riding the short bus when it comes to displacement here (uncompared to v8's haha), true we don't rev as high but.. The roads of america are not that of japan.

 

[GrimJack]

It's purely because of displacement. Japanese executives thought - probably correctly - that marketing a smaller displacement engine in the USA was a lost cause.

 

[whitemike]

It's purely because of displacement. Japanese executives though - probably correctly - that marketing a smaller displacement engine in the USA was a lost cause.

This is what came to my mind when I read the question. We like V8's 'round here.

 

[Jeff Lange]

I'm going with displacement and the cost of getting a new engine design tested and approved for use in North America when a new model is coming in a couple of years, and no other model to put it in.

In Japan, the 1JZ was used in the Soarer, Chaser, Cresta, Supra, etc. What would they have sold it in here? The Supra for 2 years, then nothing. The 1JZ was not suited for Lexus SC customers at the time, and none of the others were sold here. It would have been a poor choice, IMO.

Jeff

 

[Dylan JZ]

It's purely because of displacement. Japanese executives though - probably correctly - that marketing a smaller displacement engine in the USA was a lost cause.

with the comments I've heard over the years on the boards, I'd say they were definitely on to something there..

I'm going with displacement and the cost of getting a new engine design tested and approved for use in North America when a new model is coming in a couple of years, and no other model to put it in.

In Japan, the 1JZ was used in the Soarer, Chaser, Cresta, Supra, etc. What would they have sold it in here? The Supra for 2 years, then nothing. The 1JZ was not suited for Lexus SC customers at the time, and none of the others were sold here. It would have been a poor choice, IMO.

Jeff

I agree with everything you said, but I have a few questions. why do you think they even bothered with the 1J in the first place? was it the taxes in Japan in relation to displacement? gas mileage? I've also heard the JZA70 received a 2.5L because they wanted to race in a certain class (same as the Skylines?). a combination of them all? or perhaps something completely unrelated?

I realize that most of this is speculation, and that I'm asking more for opinions, but that's fine.

 

[Jeff Lange]

The 1JZ and 2JZ came out at almost the same time, so I'd say they were likely developed at the same time. As for why bother with the 1JZ, having an engine with a lower displacement that can make 50hp more (than the 7M) would be hot stuff in Japan, where displacement is definitely a concern for many.

As for the racing, it's certainly possible they developed the engine with the intent to run it in a lower displacement class as well, but I can't really comment on that.

Jeff

 

[Dylan JZ]

awesome, I kept wanting to pose the question of whether or not they were designed side-by-side, but I couldn't figure out if I wanted to ask..

I always felt the 2J was not neccessarily an "upgrade" of the 1J but instead built for a separate purpose altogether.

 

[RazoE]

the Supra was supposed to be axed after 1990 anyway, when it reached the end of the 5 year-model cycle, but it latched on for 2 more years while they developed the MKIV..

There was no other car to market the 1JZ in (same way there was no other car to market the 7MGTE in), in North America, with the MKIII Supra being axed, and the Cressida (only other 7M recepient, and NA form only) being axed in favor of Lexus, with luxurious, smooth cars..

Also, in Japan you're taxed for the displacement of your engine, the bigger the engine the more you pay, which is why the Supra came with 2.0L 1G's, and the super taxed 3.0L 7MGTE (no 7MGEs were offered in Japan land in the A70), a 1JZ was just cheaper..

 

[IJ.]

Not enough Tq for real men :aigo:
(we never got em here either and we're closer and RHD)












My "guess" is the emissions certification was an issue for a single model year when the Mk4 was just round the bend with sparks to fly

 

[Poodles]

It's purely because of displacement. Japanese executives thought - probably correctly - that marketing a smaller displacement engine in the USA was a lost cause.

A more expensive smaller displacement engine as well.

Same reason the 4 banger turbo mustangs never went over well, small engine, big expense, hard to sell to people that believe "there is no replacement for displacement."

 

[mk3tattoos]

because 1jz's were just to B/A for U.S!!!!!!!!!

common there not that torqueless realy. i dont feel that much diffrence in them, to say they have no tq.

I have done many pulls in my friend chappy's 700wrhp mk4 supra here in Silverdale wa. and a 600wrhp 1jz supra in L.A ca. and they were both awesome. the 1jz not having any tq was not on my mind

 

[Poodles]

Oh, also forgot the displacement limitations in Japan depending on your license.

 

[Cz.]

I am not aware of any limitations on displacement based on your license in Japan. There are taxes based on displacement which is one of the reasons about a 1/4 of the cars I saw there were kei cars.

Seeing as the 1jz is available in many other JDM Toyota's that are not available here, I'm under the impression that Toyota simply didn't think they could compete with not just the engine but many of the other car models and thus didn't bother with any of it. Since the 7m was the only thing available when the mk3 was first available, that's what they imported the car with.

 

[te72]

Entire cars are available to JDM and not to USDM, and I also wonder the same about that.

An entire car may not meet USDM regulations (thinking safety reasons mostly), but an engine seems silly. Like why we never got any of Nissan's cooler motors for the Silvia/S13's.

(Oh and you of course realize that your leaving yourself wide open for the jokes to commence, right?)

........Because the 1J didn't have enough torque to get across the ocean and make it here!

I joke.....I joke!

Oh sheesh... I'm still pretty sure my 1j makes more torque at 12psi than my 7m did at 12psi, but that may be more to do with the attention I paid to the 1j's head.

Because the 1JZ wasn't offered in the a70 chassis until 1990. Maybe Toyota didn't think that it was worth it to make it Federal ( not State) EPA compliant considering the coming model change. Seems like a lot of extra effort for two years of sales. Juice didn't match the squeeze.

This makes a lot of sense actually, stupid juice. :nono:

A more expensive smaller displacement engine as well.

Same reason the 4 banger turbo mustangs never went over well, small engine, big expense, hard to sell to people that believe "there is no replacement for displacement."

Ahh, to be so naive to be able to blindly believe that, huh? Technology makes for a convincing argument I'd say.


All in all, it seems to boil down to a culture thing. In Japan, having a small engine is by no means a 'bad' thing at all, they find ways to make their small engines powerful. American manufacturers are just now catching onto that idea fortunately. However, in Japan, they also have better pump gas, even if it is rather expensive...

Oh well, I guess since plenty of us have them, it's not a big deal, but it does pose that "what if" question, you know? "What if" Toyota had put the 1j in the 1990 USDM Supra, and we were spanking the C4 Corvette in every respect?

 

[Satan]

I am sure that just like all "pilot" programs, Toyota looked at options, ROI, short/long-term strategy, etc. There may have even been regulation that kept it from happening at the time, or other factors we do not have any clue about. just wasn't a high priority during that time. Maybe they were already planning the newer/better Supra and did not want to invest the newer engines in older chassis, for US market anyways.

 

[Nick M]

I don't want one. And neither would all the potential new car buyers in 1990.