You've got to see this GTR.
- Thread starter siman
- Start date
Thats not what I'm saying, I'm saying when you do downshift you still have to rev it to make power...torque pwns joo
Orion ZyGarian said:
huh? downshift. that puts the car in its powerband. whats this "revving to make power thing" torque dont mean jack after 5252. if the motor can keep spinning higher and the turbo can keep moving air then it will continue to keep making power in higher revs
you think i have to "rev to make power"? only time i have a problem with "torque" is in first gear at like 5mph. thats it. anywhere else all i have to do is downshift if my RPMs are too low...
I'm not saying 1JZs are torqueless, I'm saying cars with torque dont need to rev to 8000 to make peak power. Cars with more torque tend to spool the turbo sooner..I think no matter what size the engine, as long as the turbo is the ideal one, you always have the same amount of usable turbo in the powerband
I have that same problem, I absofuckinglutely hate first gear.....
I have that same problem, I absofuckinglutely hate first gear.....
Because the average car is too heavy to have only 140 foot lbs of torque at 4000 RPM. Accelleration is what makes a car so fun IMO...
Anyways I just hate first gear because it tops out at like 10 mph, making it completly useless. If 2nd was a bit shorter, I'd have no need for first gear.
Of course, this is all just for daily granny driving...if I were to launch it, theres quite a difference
Anyways I just hate first gear because it tops out at like 10 mph, making it completly useless. If 2nd was a bit shorter, I'd have no need for first gear.
Of course, this is all just for daily granny driving...if I were to launch it, theres quite a difference
like i said. who cares where the the engien makes power as long as it makes it. if 4000 RPM is not where your engine makes power, then dont expect it to. put the car in its RPM range where it does make power
...exactly why honda puts extremely small and tight gearing on their performance cars......s2000, RSX-S, NSX, Civic Si......keeps it in the powerband....
our supra's are torquey.....they did not need super close gearing. The Mk4 Getrag just has an extra "overdrive" gear...nothing more.
our supra's are torquey.....they did not need super close gearing. The Mk4 Getrag just has an extra "overdrive" gear...nothing more.
yes, its for the cam timing. Its a retard or advance mechanism....and a CPS all in one I believe.
-Jonathan
-Jonathan
Three points I feel compelled to make.
In the long run, displacement will always win. If you can make a 4.8L engine put out 4000hp, (referring to the 4 cylinder Integra funny car: http://www.turbomagazine.com/tech/0202tur_extremeedge/ ) then you can make a 7.2L engine put out 6000hp. This really shows that even 2.6L is more than sufficient for any streetcar needs.
Secondly, do not doubt the 7M engine. There are people well over 1000hp on this engine - the HKS drag car, the privately run drag car in Japan, and the rail dragster that fellow over in Gibraltar ( ? somewhere over there, anyhow) put together.
Why don't people use the 7M for their high performance buildups anymore? Simple. The JZ series of engines is tougher out of the box, newer, and the price is the same or less. You can buy a completely assembled 2JZ shortblock from Toyota for less than you can get a 7M shortblock, and it comes with better components.
Remember, torque moves cars, horsepower sells them. From a rolling start, virtually all high horsepower cars are the same. From a dead stop, higher torque per pound wins.
In the long run, displacement will always win. If you can make a 4.8L engine put out 4000hp, (referring to the 4 cylinder Integra funny car: http://www.turbomagazine.com/tech/0202tur_extremeedge/ ) then you can make a 7.2L engine put out 6000hp. This really shows that even 2.6L is more than sufficient for any streetcar needs.
Secondly, do not doubt the 7M engine. There are people well over 1000hp on this engine - the HKS drag car, the privately run drag car in Japan, and the rail dragster that fellow over in Gibraltar ( ? somewhere over there, anyhow) put together.
Why don't people use the 7M for their high performance buildups anymore? Simple. The JZ series of engines is tougher out of the box, newer, and the price is the same or less. You can buy a completely assembled 2JZ shortblock from Toyota for less than you can get a 7M shortblock, and it comes with better components.
Remember, torque moves cars, horsepower sells them. From a rolling start, virtually all high horsepower cars are the same. From a dead stop, higher torque per pound wins.
I always thought the JZ to be a bit more pure race / endurance oriented that focus' only on HP and is great at it. By having a square engine, you could also have as much torque if you wanted to, maybe a bit less
IMO, the 7M is the all around perfect engine though. A bit undersquare for the yummy gobs of torque, but otherwise almost all of the advantages of the JZ engine. Perfect tone too! The JZ engines cannot have existed without the M series IMO. I assume that the 1JZ was just a 7M with the bore/stroke switched (I know they arent exactly the same!
) and had all the minor points revised, although also a MHG
The M series should've lived forever. Desending all the way from the 2000GT and beyond, this engine has always been remarkable...from a carbed N/A setup (not in the 2000GT though) to a turbo EFI and beyond.
Long live the 7M!
IMO, the 7M is the all around perfect engine though. A bit undersquare for the yummy gobs of torque, but otherwise almost all of the advantages of the JZ engine. Perfect tone too! The JZ engines cannot have existed without the M series IMO. I assume that the 1JZ was just a 7M with the bore/stroke switched (I know they arent exactly the same!
) and had all the minor points revised, although also a MHG The M series should've lived forever. Desending all the way from the 2000GT and beyond, this engine has always been remarkable...from a carbed N/A setup (not in the 2000GT though) to a turbo EFI and beyond.
Long live the 7M!
The 2000GT was a carb'ed N/A setup, unless you were trying to say something else.
Either way, the JZ series was a new start for Toyota to put what they had learned from the 25 year old M series into a brand new design. Suffice it to say, it went pretty well IMO, lol.
Not quite. The V160 only has a single overdrive gear, and it is good for a lower top speed than the R154. It just 1st - 4th are much different than the R154, and the final drive gearing changes it all around. (3.27:1 instead of 3.91 or 3.73:1). 5th on the V160 and 4th on the R154 are both 1.00:1.
Either way, the JZ series was a new start for Toyota to put what they had learned from the 25 year old M series into a brand new design. Suffice it to say, it went pretty well IMO, lol.
Not quite. The V160 only has a single overdrive gear, and it is good for a lower top speed than the R154. It just 1st - 4th are much different than the R154, and the final drive gearing changes it all around
. (3.27:1 instead of 3.91 or 3.73:1). 5th on the V160 and 4th on the R154 are both 1.00:1.
I thought the 2000GT was the first EFI Toyota to hit the North American shores...perhaps it was the concept then?
We're talking about a car from 1965. It was not EFI, nor were any of versions of it.
The first Supra was the first Toyota to get EFI, with the 4M-E, in 1979.
The first Supra was the first Toyota to get EFI, with the 4M-E, in 1979.
Ah, right, nevermind it was the 79 Supra that was the first Toyota with EFI, you're right (surprise!)
Although I promise my next car will be JZ powered, 7M for life!
Although I promise my next car will be JZ powered, 7M for life!