Toyota-Mods Postings Feb 1996

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ _______ ^^^ ^^^ ,' - _ ^^^ ^^^ ________,'__________>>> - _ ^ ^^^ ^^^ , ' | ^^^ ^^^ ~I~ I~I \ / I~I ~I~ .~. _ I\/I I~I I~\ <~ ^^^ ^^^ I I_I | I_I I I~I I I I_I I_/ _> ^^^ ^^^ `---\__/----------------\__/----' ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ P O S T I N G S Feb 1996 ^^^ ^^^ --------------------------- ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 11:49:59 +1100 (EST) From: Justin Simpson To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: tyre width this one is for those fonts of facts and figures. Does anyone know the maximum tyre width toyota put on the RA 23 celica (1977) including optional mags if there were any. thanks ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~ Justen Simpson simpson@lake.canberra.edu.au CRC for Freshwater Ecology, Uni of Canberra, Australia ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 00:48:47 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: celicag@magicnet.net (Chris W. Morgan) Subject: GTS convertables Hello Everyone, Does anyone know if 1985 is the only year they made the rear wheel drive GTS Convertable?. I've seen 6 or 7 over the years and they are all 85's. I think they were only made one year. 84 would be the only other possibility beacause 83's had exposed flip up headlights instead of hidden ones like the 84 and 85. 86's were front wheel drive. Still looking for stock 20R cam specs!. Anyone?. Chris W Morgan 1979 Celica Sunchaser 1985 Celica GTS Convertable celicag@magicnet.net P.S.Anyone ever seen a turbo truck (22rte)for sale used?. Another rare breed!. $100 finders fee for anyone who leads me to one and the deal flys!. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 17:59:37 +1100 From: n.briggs@student.canterbury.ac.nz (Neil Briggs) Subject: me/mine/mods To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com ME: Neil Briggs LOCATION: Christchurch, New Zealand. MODEL: 1987 Corolla. I believe it's called the GTS in the states. Here in New Zealand it is known as a Levin. It has the AE-92 chassis. ENGINE: 4A-GE. With the T-VIS induction system. MODS: 2 1/4 Cat back exhaust. K&N air filter E-MAIL: n.briggs@student.canterbury.ac.nz xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: kca@interserv.com Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 00:34:53 -0800 Subject: Re: Flywheel To: Jack Alford Cc: Toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com >>(More accurately sheard the heads of the flywheel bolts off) > >I'm no engineer or anything, but that doesn't make sense, how is less weight >going to make the bolts any liklier to shear, seems like it would make it >less likely to shear ?? Inertia. The heavier flywheel requires more force to accelerate/decelerate it = less stress on the bolts from the clutch and smoother operation. A lighter flywheel is subject to more rapid response from clutch forces and can therefore create more instantaneous force against the retaining bolts. Following me? I'm not saying this will sheer the bolts, just how I conceive the possibility of it happening. Kip Anderson kca@interserv.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: kca@interserv.com Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 00:35:10 -0800 Subject: Re: Tires To: Marlin Bailor , On Tue, 30 Jan 1996, Marlin Bailor wrote: >Has anyone heard of the Yokohoma Nexus ultra high performance tire? I saw >an add for it in Motor Trend last fall, but haven't heard anything else >about it. > From Turbo & Hi-Tech Perf.: Yokohama Nexus- Ultra-High Performance Z-rated Unidirectional and asymetrical "responsive handling and precise cornering" "Aqua Tusks" for uncharacteristic wet weather traction? More info: Yokohama Tire Corp. 601 South Acacia Ave. Fullerton, CA 92631 or phone: (714) 870-3838 >Will a 205/55-14 work on stock (14x5.5) wheels? I've heard you need 14x7 to >keep the tire tread flat. If your goal is performance, a 7" rim would be ideal. It would allow some sidewall overlap, but the tire would deflect less than on a 5.5" under hard cornering. Kip Anderson kca@interserv.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 17:01:38 +0500 From: supra@patagonia.bellcore.com (Jon Hacker (Supra Account)) To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: RE: Dynoed Torque Increases. > >It's hp = torque x rpm/5252 > > Wait a minute. Wouldn't this mean that the HP and torque curves would > look just like each other? I know that's not the case in pretty much > every torque/hp curve comparison that I've seen. Am I missing something > here? > > Chris The second derivative of the hp curve wrt to torque and rpm is given by the partial differential equation (warning: this equation may have errors since its been a long time since I ever took a derivative! :-) dhp/drpm = k * dtorque/drpm + 1/5252 If the torque curve is flat, the hp curve will be an increasing straight line. Similarly, if the hp curve is flat the torque curve will monotonically decrease with rpm. If at a particular rpm the instantaneous slope of the torque is decreasing as the rpm increases, the hp can either increase, decrease or stay the same depending on the magnitude of the rate of change of the torque wrt to rpm. Similarly if the instantaneous slope of the torque is increasing the hp rate of change can go either way. Hence, the two curves can look quite different. Jon xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: "Gregory Chan" To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 08:17:19 EDT Subject: Re: Flywheel discussion Hi all, I would like to add my 2 cents on the subject of flywheels. First of all I would agree that a lighter flywheel helps an engine to rev faster but the OEM manufacturer made the flywheel heavy on purpose and that is to smooth out the power strokes. If the flywheel was light the car would idle like a tractor i.e. rough. Granted there are many of us on this list who don't mind having a car idling like a horseride but the general populace don't like that. they would prefer a smooth car; the smoother the better. As to the bolts I would have to agree that a lighter flywheel due to it's lighter weight and therefore greter acceleration would evert more pressure on the bolts. gchan@compserv.seneca.on.ca 85 Corolla GTS xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 08:11:26 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: cmyer@cyberauto.com (Christopher Myer) Subject: RE: Dynoed Torque Increases. >It's hp = torque x rpm/5252 Wait a minute. Wouldn't this mean that the HP and torque curves would look just like each other? I know that's not the case in pretty much every torque/hp curve comparison that I've seen. Am I missing something here? Chris xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 08:32:14 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: cmyer@cyberauto.com (Christopher Myer) Subject: Re: tyre width >this one is for those fonts of facts and figures. Does anyone know the >maximum tyre width toyota put on the RA 23 celica (1977) including >optional mags if there were any. Celica GT, 76-85, 185/70SR14 Celica ST, 78-85, 175SR14 Same tire front and back for both cars. This info from the Yokohama tire guide. Your friendly Yokohama dealer has this book--are you crafty enough to sweet talk a copy from him? He's probably got a whole huge box of them behind the counter gathering dust! Chris xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Jamie Dennis - Imonics Corporation Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 09:43:28 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: RE: Dynoed Torque Increases. > From toyota-mods-owner@CyberAuto.Com Thu Feb 1 09:14 EST 1996 > Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 08:11:26 -0500 > X-Sender: cmyer@cyberauto.com > X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 > Mime-Version: 1.0 > To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com > From: cmyer@CyberAuto.Com (Christopher Myer) > Subject: RE: Dynoed Torque Increases. > Sender: owner-toyota-mods@CyberAuto.Com > > >It's hp = torque x rpm/5252 > > Wait a minute. Wouldn't this mean that the HP and torque curves would > look just like each other? I know that's not the case in pretty much > every torque/hp curve comparison that I've seen. Am I missing something > here? > > Chris > According to that formula, the torque and horsepower curves just cross each other at 5252 rpm. Picture a flat curve of 200 ft-lbs of torque from 1000 to 6000 rpm: torque (_), hp (.) | | . 200 |__________________________________,_____ | . | . |. ------------------------------------------- rpm 1k 2k 3k 4k 5k 6k The hp curve is a straight line that passes through the following coordinates: (1000, 38), (2000, 76), (3000, 114), (4000, 152), (5000, 190), (5252, 200), (6000, 228) Not sure if it make much sense this way, and my ascii art sucks... What is significant about these curves is that peak horsepower of such a curve can vary by how the torque curve drops off after peak torque. Peak hp occurs at the point where the slope of the torque curve drops below (is steeper than) -.03 Hope this helps! Jamie Dennis '93 MR2 Turbo License: /dev/toy xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 11:32:46 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: Marlin Bailor Subject: Re: Flywheel discussion > As to the bolts I would have to agree that a lighter flywheel >due to it's lighter weight and therefore greter acceleration would >evert more pressure on the bolts. > I have to disagree, a lighter flywheel will accelerate faster, but the force from acceleration would be the same as heavy one accelerating slower. F=ma , Torque=angular accel. X moment of inertia The torque from the engine is the same regardless. Just my thoughts Marlin '85 NA xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 11:38:03 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: Marlin Bailor Subject: Nexus >>From Turbo & Hi-Tech Perf.: >Yokohama Nexus- >Ultra-High Performance >Z-rated >Unidirectional and asymetrical >"responsive handling and precise cornering" >"Aqua Tusks" for uncharacteristic wet weather traction? > >More info: > >Yokohama Tire Corp. >601 South Acacia Ave. >Fullerton, CA 92631 > >or phone: (714) 870-3838 > How does it compare with the AVS? What tread wear? Anybody know if it comes in 14" sizes? It is the coolest looking tire I've ever seen. Thanks Marlin '85 na xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: "toyota-mods@cyberauto.com" From: Tony York Subject: Wind noise Date: Thu, 01 Feb 96 10:15:33 PST I have had a problem with both of my Corolla GT's or GT-S relating to wind noise. I think it is due to the flimsy top halves of the doors. Does anyone have any ideas of a) how to stop the wind noise or b) how to stiffen up the front doors. Tony York Radstone Technology Plc Water Lane Towcester Northants NN12 6JN Tel: 01327 359444 Ext:2389 Fax: 01327 358113 Email: york@radstone.co.uk xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Gary Hong To: cmyer@cyberspace.cyberauto.com, toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: RE: Dynoed Torque Increases. Date: Thu, 1 Feb 96 10:28:43 PST From: Christopher Myer > >>It's hp = torque x rpm/5252 > >Wait a minute. Wouldn't this mean that the HP and torque curves would >look just like each other? I know that's not the case in pretty much >every torque/hp curve comparison that I've seen. Am I missing something >here? > >Chris It's a formula for an imperfect machine. :) Gary xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Thu, 1 Feb 96 12:41 CST From: pharmacy@mailhost.accesscom.net (patrick) Subject: k&n filter and Dynomaxx ultra flow muffler Dear Readers, I am interested in finding out what the actual performance gains are likely to be with the installation of a K&N filtercharger, RU 1500 and a Dynomaxx Ultra flow muffler will do for my 86 Corolla GT-S? Also, since its a street car, I wonder what other mods I can make to inprove performance without sacrificing driveability? What's the word word on Redline's motor oil, manual transmision fluids, and injector cleaners? Did I read about someone seeking information about GT-s brakes? This may help you: 1985-89 GT-S Sport Coupe/Liftback System Type, Fr/Rr Power ventilated Disc/disc Front Diameter 9.11 (231.5) Rear Diameter 9.09 (231.0) Swept Area, in sq (cm sq) 293.6 (1894) Final Differential Ratio 4.30 I doubt that you can swap factory brake parts(rear brakes) between the GT-S and SR-5 models because the the SR-5 rear brake dissc is 9.0 in in diameter whereas the Gt-S is 9.09 in in diameter. Good Luck. Information is from spec sheet toyota Customer relations - fax # 310-618-7814 Thank you Patrick xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 10:46:00 -0800 (PST) From: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" Subject: RE: GTS convertables (wants turbo truck 22RTE) To: "toyota-mods@cyberauto.com" Cc: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" , > Still looking for stock 20R cam specs!. Anyone?. > P.S.Anyone ever seen a turbo truck (22rte)for sale used?. Another rare > breed!. $100 finders fee for anyone who leads me to one and the deal flys!. Chris, I live in San Diego, CA and have seen a couple turbo trucks advertised in the Auto Trader over the years. Also seen a few on the road. Back in 1989 or so I purchased a 22RTE for $300 from a guy that had pulled it out of a truck in Texas. I have seen them advertised since then for around $1000. The idiot did not get the efi computer or air flow meter, so it still does not have efi. It's currently in my 1980 Celica without the turbo and with dual Weber DCOE carbs. Very slow without the turbo because of low compression ration (7.5:1). Also the flow of the 22R(TE) head sucks. PS. I've heard that the turbos (CT-20) do not last very long (maybe 60000 miles). So be very careful if you buy one used. There is a place in LA that sells an upgrade turbo with lower back pressure for less than what Toyota charges. I've got an article if you are interested. PSS. I might have the 20R cam specs buried somewhere. You might check with someone who does regrinds, they should have this info. Bryan Zublin bzublin@gi.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 10:48:00 -0800 (PST) From: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" Subject: Turbo truck (was Re: GTS convertables) To: "toyota-mods@cyberauto.com" Cc: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" Gary writes: >I found one but lost it :). The guy wanted $2100 or something like that for >an 86 model because it was broken in. I called about it but he told me he >sold it days ago for a measly $1700!! Arg! Wanted to put one of those in >my Celica, but according to Chris, it was probably a blessing in disguise >that I didn't buy it. Gary, What's the "blessing in disguise?" Are you referring to the short life of the CT-20 turbo? I'm interested to hear more. Bryan Zublin bzublin@gi.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Gary Hong To: BZUBLIN@cyberspace.cyberauto.com, toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: Turbo truck (was Re: GTS convertables) Cc: BZUBLIN@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Thu, 1 Feb 96 11:16:19 PST From: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" > >Gary writes: > >>I found one but lost it :). The guy wanted $2100 or something like that >for >>an 86 model because it was broken in. I called about it but he told me he >>sold it days ago for a measly $1700!! Arg! Wanted to put one of those in >>my Celica, but according to Chris, it was probably a blessing in disguise >>that I didn't buy it. > >Gary, >What's the "blessing in disguise?" Are you referring to the short life of >the CT-20 turbo? I'm interested to hear more. Bryan, I believe the cost of the parts was one of the "blessing in disguise" as well as the problems I may have had installing it in my engine and I'm sure the CT-20. Gary xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: aly abulkheir Subject: Torque Specifications Please!! To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 14:44:44 -0500 (EST) Cc: validgh!mr2-digest@ucbvax.berkeley.edu Okay, this discussion of the Torque/Horsepower formula is useless for the original subject at hand since we don't have the RPM at which these HP figures occur. Plus the fact that we don't have any Dynoed HP increases specified anyway except for maybe HKS's (if we trust their figures). Let's get back to what I am looking for here. I have an '85 MR2 Normally Aspirated. I am looking to do some modifications to boost the low end power and the power overall. When I drive the car, sometimes it just doesn't feel as fast as I want it to be. Now the supercharged MR2 has 140 lb-ft of torque at 4000 rpm, while my na motor has 97 lb-ft at 4800 rpm. What I want to know is, if I do a TRD header, HKS exhaust, K&N filtercharger with the bottom of the air box cut out, a Crane Hi-6 Ignition amp, and later, HKS 256/264 or Chris Myer's 260 Camshafts, HOW CLOSE CAN I EXPECT TO GET TO THE SUPERCHARGED MR2'S LOW END TORQUE? SINCE THE SC MR2 ACCELERATES FROM 0-60 MPH IN 6.5-7.5 SECONDS, AND MINE STOCK HITS 60 IN ABOUT 8.0-8.5 SECONDS, WITH THESE MODIFICATIONS, HOW CLOSE CAN I EXPECT TO GET TO THE SC MR2'S ACCELERATION? If anyone has done these modifications and has then tested the car on a dyno machine, it would solve everything. I would like to compare a SC MR2's power curve to the power curve expected on a NA MR2 4AGE with the modifications I have listed above. The modifications, I expect will give the 4AGE an approximate HP of 140-145. This pretty much matches the figure on a stock SC MR2, but we don't have any specs on the torque figures. The torque figures will truly tell us what we are really getting and how close we are getting to the 4AGZE's power output. With 134 HP, a NA MR2 reaches the same weight to HP ratio as a SC MR2, if you figure a NA MR2 weighs 2400 lbs (I have all the power options) and a SC MR2 weighs 2600 lbs (curb weights). So under this assumption, we may only need 134 hp to match the power of an SC MR2. Plus the fact that the NA MR2 has stronger gearing than the SC MR2 (this is another plus factor). But with out the torque figures, we don't have all the information wanted to figure this out. I am supposing that without any bottom end changes (ultimately the stroker kit at $4500 installed) the NA MR2 cannot match the low end power of a supercharged MR2, but I would like to be proven wrong on this if anyone has experience with these mods. I expect that after these mods are done I will have about 110-120 lb-ft of torque at around 4000 RPM. But again, this is just speculation. From discussion, I suppose that since the stock 4AGE doesn't have a long stroke, that not much more low end torque can be acheived without the stroker crankshaft. Again, I would like to be proven wrong about this. Remember what I stated before, I have learned by discussion and by observation that TORQUE increases and at what RPM they hit are what will make the difference in real power. ANY help on this is greatly appreciated. I look forward to discussing it with the rest of the group. Thanks, Aly, '85 MR2, Red with all options abulkh34@matrix.newpaltz.edu xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 12:44:00 -0800 (PST) From: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" Subject: RE: Torque Specifications Please!! To: "mr2-interest@validgh.com" , Aly writes: > I am supposing that without any bottom end changes (ultimately the > stroker kit at $4500 installed) the NA MR2 cannot match the low end power of > a supercharged MR2, but I would like to be proven wrong on this if anyone > has experience with these mods. I expect that after these mods are done I Sorry, I don't have direct experience, I can only theorize. For a fixed engine displacement and compression ratio there is a maximum torque value that can be achieved for a normally aspirated engine. It occurs when the cylinder is completely filled (100% volumetric efficiency). VE in excess of 100% can be achieved with ram effects or turbo/supercharging. At low rpms, volumetric efficiency is pretty good, doing engine mods (other than increased displacement, compression ratio, or turbo) is not going to gain very much. Put in a low restriction muffler, header, cams, porting, etc. and if you raise the VE from 90% to 95% at 4000 rpm, you haven't gained a whole lot at that engine speed. So trying to get a 4AGE to have the same low end torque as a 4AGZE is a futile attempt (IMHO). However, if you can increase the volumetric efficiency at the higher rpms where it starts to drop off, you will increase the torque at these rpms and will also increase the horsepower. The modified 4AGE will never feel like a 4AGZE at low rpms, but it will have more power at the higher rpms and will accelerate faster at these engine speeds. To determine if the modified 4AGE will have a lower 0-60 time than the 4AGZE, you need compare gearing and the "area under the power curve." Again, sorry I don't have any measured data. Try some of the car test software that lets you put in the stats for the car. Bryan Zublin bzublin@gi.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 10:48:07 -1000 From: Allen T Koji Kam To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Nexus Tires... - Advan Nexus Tires.... Welps...this is a little late. In Japan, Yokohama's top performance line is the Advan and the current "Hot tire" for track and street, is the Advan Nexus tire. At SEMA, i've got conflicting reports from the Yokohama dealers. They said it was comming out, but only in certain sizes and limited use. Mainly because of the "Advan" gets confused with the "Advantage" tires -boggle- Anyways... They work, the Japan Spec ones, are the ones they use on like the Racing 300Z's, they even say Advan Nexus on the tire. Friend in Japan ran um, and says they worth the money. Kennichi Tsuchiya runs them on his Skyline GTR, shouldn't you ? >=) Anyways, they are compared to a RE-71R or any other "Spirited street driving" type of tire, and they do work well in the rain. Oh, personally... I don't like the AVS Intermediates... tried um, trashed um. The AVS didn't work as they should, and for the price -boggle- -Allen T Koji Kam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 08:00:24 +1100 (EST) From: Justin Simpson To: Christopher Myer Cc: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: tyre width Thanks Chris, saved my bacon. Toyota Aus only lists 165's which makes the widest 'legal tyre' in canberra a 215, not too good as i run 225, and 235's, but 185 takes the max up to 245 which means i'm still legal. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~ Justen Simpson simpson@lake.canberra.edu.au CRC for Freshwater Ecology, Uni of Canberra, Australia ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 13:57:00 -0800 (PST) From: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" Subject: RE: Dynoed Torque Increases. To: "toyota-mods@cyberauto.com" >>It's hp = torque x rpm/5252 >Wait a minute. Wouldn't this mean that the HP and torque curves would >look just like each other? I know that's not the case in pretty much >every torque/hp curve comparison that I've seen. Am I missing something >here? It's the rpm term in the equation. With constant torque across the rpm range (ideal engine), the hp will be a straight line starting at 0 rpm. In a real engine, the hp drops off at some high rpm because the torque is falling faster than the rpm is increasing. Bryan Zublin bzublin@gi.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Tony Lanterman Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 17:43:43 -0800 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: RE: GTS convertables Yes they were a an '85 only thing. They're rare partly because they were expensive for the time at ~$15,000. For comparison my parents bought a new Jeep Cherokee that same year for $10,000 _including_ financing. I'm still searching for mine, Woodsprite ********************************************************************** * Without ice cream * 1983 Celica ST * Joe Woodsprite * * there would be * * Unsafe at any speed * * darkness and * I don't drive * * * chaos. * fast. * lantera@teleport.com * * -- * I fly low. * * * Don Kardong * * dod #1456 * * * 72 Honda CB350 * Where's Julie? * ********************************************************************** xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: aly abulkheir Subject: Re: Torque Specifications Please!! To: BZUBLIN@cyberspace.cyberauto.com (Zublin, Bryan) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 21:37:45 -0500 (EST) Cc: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com > > Aly writes: > > > I am supposing that without any bottom end changes (ultimately the > > stroker kit at $4500 installed) the NA MR2 cannot match the low end power > of > > a supercharged MR2, but I would like to be proven wrong on this if anyone > > has experience with these mods. I expect that after these mods are done I > > Sorry, I don't have direct experience, I can only theorize. For a fixed > engine displacement and compression ratio there is a maximum torque value > that can be achieved for a normally aspirated engine. It occurs when the > cylinder is completely filled (100% volumetric efficiency). VE in excess of > 100% can be achieved with ram effects or turbo/supercharging. At low rpms, > volumetric efficiency is pretty good, doing engine mods (other than > increased displacement, compression ratio, or turbo) is not going to gain > very much. Put in a low restriction muffler, header, cams, porting, etc. > and if you raise the VE from 90% to 95% at 4000 rpm, you haven't gained a > whole lot at that engine speed. > > So trying to get a 4AGE to have the same low end torque as a 4AGZE is a > futile attempt (IMHO). However, if you can increase the volumetric > efficiency at the higher rpms where it starts to drop off, you will increase > the torque at these rpms and will also increase the horsepower. The > modified 4AGE will never feel like a 4AGZE at low rpms, but it will have > more power at the higher rpms and will accelerate faster at these engine > speeds. > > To determine if the modified 4AGE will have a lower 0-60 time than the > 4AGZE, you need compare gearing and the "area under the power curve." > Again, sorry I don't have any measured data. Try some of the car test > software that lets you put in the stats for the car. > > Bryan Zublin > bzublin@gi.com > Dear Bryan, Once again, your responses to my questions were excellent and very helpful. I will admit, I like the power curve of the 4AGE in that it is very free revving and that the power doesn't fade until around 7000 rpm. I like what you are saying about the fact that you can't match the 4AGZE's low end, but that you can surpass its higher RPM output with these mods on a 4AGE. I suppose ultimately that this will mean a faster 0-60 and 1/4 mile time than that of a stock 4AGZE. One question: I noticed that a lot of articles on the '85 MR2 from 1985 magazines list the car as having a first gear ratio of 3.17. The February ? '85 issue of Car & Driver lists the first gear ratio as 3.56. If this is true, would you have any idea how to tell which ratio my car has? My car is an April '85 model. Thank you, Aly, '85 MR2, Red with all options abulkh34@matrix.newpaltz.edu xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 21:41:40 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: celicag@magicnet.net (Chris W. Morgan) Subject: Turbotruk Shopping Hello everyone! I've done some checking on the availibilty of the turbo pickup. According to Edmunds its a 2 year production run. 1987 NEW WHOL. RET. SR5 X-tra cab Turbo pkup $12,488 $3450 $4975 4WD Turbo pkup $11,238 $3775 $5375 1988 SR5 X-tra cab Turbo pkup $11,518 $4425 $5950 So it seems the Turbo Truck is indeed a rare find! That's the reason I am very interested in buying one. I am not concerned with how long the turbo will last or the price of parts. I would like to buy one as original as possible and restore it to showroom condition. Any help in aquiring one is worth a c note. Anybody had a A40D auto trans rebuilt or worked on. I think mines about to go with only 80k on the clock. If you have, how much was the rebuild and what parts did they replace?. Thanks for any help! Chris W Morgan 1979 Celica Sunchaser 1985 Celica GTS Convertable 1984 Celica GT celicag@magicnet.net xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 14:47:34 +1100 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: bilzilla@zeta.org.au (Bill Sherwood) Subject: Torque and other strange beasts. Hiya everyone, As usual the discussion on torque/horsepower is a bit of a storm in a teacup. A few _general_ rules - Horsepower gives you top speed, and torque gives you acceleration. Revs give you horspower, cylinder (air) filling gives you torque. Cam duration gives you revs, cam lift gives you torque. (_Very_ general rule) Most importantly, an engine is not aware of any supposed formula's that tell it what to do. It's just an elegant machine that responds to the laws of physics that we poor humans are still trying to get a full grasp of. What works for one engine may not work for another, so there are only a few of ways to get the numbers you want out of an engine - 1. Join Cosworth/Renault/BMW/Ferrari/Honda engine developement teams, and learn all you can, 2. Spend a truckload of bucks blowing engines and swapping parts getting what you want until you get it right, 3. Ask someone RELIABLE who has done exactly what you want before, 4. Set less exotic standards, eg, don't be radical. With our 'modern' 4AG's, etc, there is a practical limit as to what you can do. You can get 220+hp, but the low end power will of course suffer. You can get good low end power, but at the expense of ultimate power. It's very difficult to get around this problem - Supercharging is a good fix, but has its own problems. Turbocharging more often makes the problem worse, though not always. Variable cam timing is a fair band-aid. Some of you may remember the Lancia Group B rally weapons of the 80's - they had 2.0L, with a supercharger to give low end power, and at a certain point a turbo took over to give top end. It worked very well, but the overall system is a tad complex for everyday use. Ok, now pay attention - for all you 4AG (and all small, eg, <3 litre engine) owners - IT'S ONLY BLOODY 1600cc, WHAT ON EARTH DO YOU EXPECT!!!!!! If you want to blow V-8's away, it can be done - but don't expect a smooth idle, good fuel economy, and a stump-pulling bottom end. You can get a compromise (without resorting to boosting the engine), but don't try for it all, cause you're in for a disapointment. Good torque can be had from the 4AG, but you must remember - it'll be good torque for a 1600. Aly Abulkheir wrote in with a few questions regarding this very subject, so I'll use his questions to give some examples of my version of the truth. >Now the supercharged MR2 has 140 lb-ft of >torque at 4000 rpm, while my na motor has 97 lb-ft at 4800 rpm. What I want >to know is, if I do a TRD header, HKS exhaust, K&N filtercharger with the >bottom of the air box cut out, a Crane Hi-6 Ignition amp, and later, HKS >256/264 or Chris Myer's 260 Camshafts, HOW CLOSE CAN I EXPECT TO GET TO THE >SUPERCHARGED MR2'S LOW END TORQUE? SINCE THE SC MR2 ACCELERATES FROM 0-60 >MPH IN 6.5-7.5 SECONDS, AND MINE STOCK HITS 60 IN ABOUT 8.0-8.5 SECONDS, >WITH THESE MODIFICATIONS, HOW CLOSE CAN I EXPECT TO GET TO THE SC MR2'S >ACCELERATION? > You can get a naturally aspirated 4AG to perform about the same as a SC 4AG. When I did my 14.9 sec 1/4 mile, I was running against my friends 4AGZE powered KE-20. Both cars weigh about the same (930kg + 90kg for the drivers), and his engine is standard apart from having no intercooler and a bigger pulley to give more boost (don't know how much more) Using 8500 rpm, I did 14.92 sec @ 145 kph. My friend Jason used 6000 rpm and did a 14.3 @ 147 kph. Another few hundred metres and I reckon I could have reeled him in. (The 4AGZE has restrictive cams and there is no point in using more than 6000 rpm) I've had a couple of rides in Jason's car, and the bottom end power is just fantastic - far, far better than mine. The top end power, however, is not that much different from memory - hence Aly, yes, you can get a n/a 4Ag to get near the performance of a 4AGZE, but there is no way to keep a strong bottom end. My 4AG is ok down low, but only has as much as a standard 4AC single cam and as I've written a few times idles like a hotted up rotary. There are other combinations of cams, etc, that will give you good low down grunt, but at the expense of the other end. > With 134 HP, a NA MR2 reaches the same weight to HP ratio as a SC >MR2, if you figure a NA MR2 weighs 2400 lbs (I have all the power options) >and a SC MR2 weighs 2600 lbs (curb weights). So under this assumption, we >may only need 134 hp to match the power of an SC MR2. Plus the fact that >the NA MR2 has stronger gearing than the SC MR2 (this is another plus >factor). But with out the torque figures, we don't have all the information >wanted to figure this out. > Ok, maybe 134 hp _is_ enough. But the 4AGZE will always have more torque and because of that will always out-accelerate you unless you drive around above above 4500 rpm all the time. Point taken? > I am supposing that without any bottom end changes (ultimately the >stroker kit at $4500 installed) the NA MR2 cannot match the low end power of >a supercharged MR2, but I would like to be proven wrong on this if anyone >has experience with these mods. > Quite correct, though the stroker crank should help a lot. (Is a supercharger kit more than $4500?) >I expect that after these mods are done I >will have about 110-120 lb-ft of torque at around 4000 RPM. > Yep, easily - it you do it right. >From discussion, I suppose that since the stock 4AGE >doesn't have a long stroke, that not much more low end torque can be >acheived without the stroker crankshaft. > The stroke is 77mm - 0.8mm longer than a 302 Ford V-8! :) (How about a 3K - 66mm!) Cop you later, Billzilla ...... Grrrr......... P.S. Would a 3SG fit into the MR2? It reckon I could get 240 hp+ without any trouble at all. P.P.S. Was reading some other mail on this subject - there was mention of volumetric efficiency. Any four-valve in a reasonable state of tune should be up around 100% at certain rpm's. The F1 boys are up to 130% odd, so that's our target! xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 22:13:29 -0600 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: toy4x4@ro.com (Jack Alford) Subject: Re: Turbotruk Shopping I know someone who has a 22RTE, not sure if he wants to sell it or not, as a matter of fact, he used to be on this list ... email me and I'll give you his address ... oh yeah, he says he has the engine but doesn't have the computer ... - jack alford ==> toy4x4@ro.com --> Decatur, AL > Hello everyone! > I've done some checking on the availibilty of the turbo pickup. According >to Edmunds its a 2 year production run. > 1987 NEW WHOL. RET. >SR5 X-tra cab Turbo pkup $12,488 $3450 $4975 >4WD Turbo pkup $11,238 $3775 $5375 > 1988 >SR5 X-tra cab Turbo pkup $11,518 $4425 $5950 > So it seems the Turbo Truck is indeed a rare find! That's the reason I am >very interested in buying one. I am not concerned with how long the turbo >will last or the price of parts. I would like to buy one as original as >possible and restore it to showroom condition. Any help in aquiring one is >worth a c note. > Anybody had a A40D auto trans rebuilt or worked on. I think mines about to >go with only 80k on the clock. If you have, how much was the rebuild and >what parts did they replace?. Thanks for any help! > >Chris W Morgan >1979 Celica Sunchaser >1985 Celica GTS Convertable >1984 Celica GT >celicag@magicnet.net xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Golf1par@aol.com Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 23:21:42 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: me/mine/mods Name : Dave Aucott Location: Berkley, Michigan (North of Detroit) Model : 1986 MR2, Silver Engine : 4AG-E Mods : Airbox removed, TRD header, HKS exhaust, KYB dampers, Susp Tech bars (soon), Cams (soon) email : golf1par@aol.com (anytime) OR daucott@e-mail.com (daytime) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: kca@interserv.com Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 21:37:08 -0800 Subject: Misfiring cylinder To: mr2-announce@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Cc: Toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Well here it is: my car has developed a misfire in one of the cylinders. It started out mild and produced a slight stumble at idle and then ran relatively smoothly with adequate power up until about 7 psi of boost. Then the engine sputters as the flame is apparently going out in one of the cylinders (1 or 4 - whichever is next to the timing belt). I have changed out the plugs (one was bad) and checked spark into every cylinder, but the problem is not electrical. Only now the problem has intensified. To repeat: the ignition system is fine. There are no apparent symptoms of any mechanical damage. I.e. no rattling, knocking, backfiring. A visual inspection through the spark plug hole showed nothing amiss. Is this a fuel injection problem? The temperature around here has been in the 20s for several days, but even with the engine warmed up the problem persists. The car has become undriveable, and the shop can't even check it out until monday afternoon. Does this sound like an injector failure? If so, is it as much of a pain in the butt to replace as it appears to be? Any help, comments, or suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks. Kip Anderson 91 MR2 Turbo kca@interserv.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: kca@interserv.com Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 21:49:48 -0800 Subject: Re: Flywheel discussion To: Marlin Bailor , On Thu, 01 Feb 1996, Marlin Bailor wrote: > >> As to the bolts I would have to agree that a lighter flywheel >>due to it's lighter weight and therefore greter acceleration would >>evert more pressure on the bolts. >> >I have to disagree, a lighter flywheel will accelerate faster, but the force >from acceleration would be the same as heavy one accelerating slower. >F=ma , Torque=angular accel. X moment of inertia >The torque from the engine is the same regardless. > Just my thoughts But drop the clutch hard and the flywheel speed is changed much more quickly while the torque of the engine continues to try to accelerate it. Something has to absorb/fight this torque -> enter the flywheel bolts. Kip Anderson kca@interserv.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Andrew M J Pike To: "'Toyota Mod Mail List'" Subject: RE: Flywheel discussion Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 08:35:46 -0500 > As to the bolts I would have to agree that a lighter flywheel >due to it's lighter weight and therefore greter acceleration would >evert more pressure on the bolts. > >I have to disagree, a lighter flywheel will accelerate faster, but the force >from acceleration would be the same as heavy one accelerating slower. >F=ma , Torque=angular accel. X moment of inertia >The torque from the engine is the same regardless. > Just my thoughts I agree but would love to hear from someone else who could prove otherwise. The main point to a lighter flywheel is to reduce the moment of inertia and therefore increase the angular acceleration. However between the two flywheels the loading on the bolts will occur at different rates, with the lighter flywheel the load placed on them will occur very fast whereas it will occur more slowly with the heavier wheel. The increase in the speed the load is applied would increase the stress/strain of the bolt which may cause it to fracture, even though the force is the same. The main reason that manufactures use a heavier flywheel is to allow the driver to engage the clutch without judder more easily and the engine less likely to stall during the clutch pick-up. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 04:03:10 +1100 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: bilzilla@zeta.org.au (Bill Sherwood) Subject: RE: The (Final!) flywheel discussion. Hiya all, Being as polite as I possibly can - FOR GOD'S SAKE WHAT'S THE PROBLEM!!!!! Are you building an engine to rev or to break?? It's very simple - for racing you only need enough flywheel to hang the clutch & ring gear off, and for road use enough flywheel to smooth the idle. For road use the original standard bolts are fine, though if you have any doubts about the bolts, spend a few bucks (maybe a total of $20 or so) and some brand new ones. For racing or high performance use 'Unbrako' or 'ARP' or some such animal. That was fairly painless, wasn't it? Billzila..... Grrrrrrrrrr.......... xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 2 Feb 96 10:48:58 -0800 From: leslie@cadence.com (Leslie C. Fong) To: supras@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: coolant basics, water wetter Cc: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com alan auerbach F (aauerbac@mach1.wlu.ca) writes: > On Thu, 1 Feb 1996, Christopher Jensen wrote: > > > > Water wetter is a product which improves the thermal conductivity of the > > 'water' in your radiator. I use it since it supposedly will lower the head > > temp slightly. Anything I can do to prevent the head gasket from going. I > > think it's at its max running at 15psi. So you try and do whatever you can > > to lower the temp even a few degrees. > > Wouldn't it be easier to leave the rad cap loose, so as to not pressurize > the cooling system? Isn't the purpose of pressurization to let the rad > get hotter? Al. This is all based on Physics, which for me is fuzzier by the day... The transfer of heat out of the engine, or for that matter any system, is (in part) determined by the delta in the temperatures... If you reduce coolant pressure, you reduce the maximum temperature the system can be run at without boiling away; results are heat transfer thru the radiator will be less and the temperature inside the engine (where it counts alot) will be higher! Higher coolant to air temperature differences == greater heat flow to the air. BTW, pressure alone doesn't affect the heat flow (in simplistic theory; fluid pressure can have a significant positive effect on even coolant distribution through the passageways!) Water "wetter" must work by increasing the thermal conductivity property of the coolant mix. This causes the coolant to draw heat faster from the engine, given similar temperature diffs. So the engine metal temperatures are lower given the same coolant operating temperature. This is especially useful when engine temperatures want to rise from the stress of turbo-boost/WOT/RPMs. On the other side, the radiator will become more effective too, although you have to consider the limitations of the air flow. It's been claimed that ethylene glycol (antifreeze) coolant mix has actually worse conductivity than plain H2O. It's used all the time though because of its other properties (lubrication/anti-boil/ anti-freeze/anti-corrosion?). Hence we have coolant "wetter". The actual temperature of the engine coolant should be controlled by the thermostat, assuming no other limiting factor has been reached, such as lack of cooling air, or evaporization. I apologize for my lack of using the correct scientific terms, symbols, and eqns (and gross errors), but it's been a while since Physics 101... In short, if you run pressureless, you (1) loose coolant, and (2) have hotter engine (internal) temperatures. This is confirmed via direct experience with a defective cap. Which do you want hotter, the engine or the radiator? The last time I wanted to try some of this water weter stuff, my local retailer was sold-out. Any downsides to it besides cost? Leslie '87 Supra turbo, targa, 5sp, HKS EAC-T (TEMS), leather, ONLY 180K miles! xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: aly abulkheir Subject: Re: 4AGZE's - How much in Aus. To: bilzilla@cyberspace.cyberauto.com (Bill Sherwood) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 15:44:33 -0500 (EST) Cc: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Dear Bill, Regarding your letter about being able to get a 4AGZE for $1100 US dollars in Australia, is this for a used engine? From a wrecking yard? Or for a new or rebuilt one? Imported from Japan directly? I would love to hear more on this and about any of this availability for us in the United States. Oh and one more thing, does the price include the 4AGZE ECU (computer) or does this cost extra and how much extra? Thanks, Aly, '85 MR2, Red with all options abulkh34@matrix.newpaltz.edu PS, If the price is this low, I may reconsider putting a 4AGZE in my '85 even though I much prefer the "simplicity" of a normally aspirated motor. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1996 14:56:00 -0800 (PST) From: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" Subject: Re: Torque Specifications Please!! To: "toyota-mods@cyberauto.com" > One question: I noticed that a lot of articles on the '85 MR2 from > 1985 magazines list the car as having a first gear ratio of 3.17. The > February ? '85 issue of Car & Driver lists the first gear ratio as 3.56. If > this is true, would you have any idea how to tell which ratio my car has? > My car is an April '85 model. Aly, Some Toyota's list the final ratio on the label in the engine compartment (my 1980 Celica does). The newer MR2s have codes that indicate (among other things) whether the car has limited slip or not. Try posting to the MR2 list, someone there probably has the answer. I guess you could always lift one rear wheel and turn the engine with the transmission in first gear and do the measurement. This will give you the overall ratio, you'll need to know the final drive ratio to calculate the transmission ratio. Also, with one rear wheek fixed, does the other spin twice as fast? Another correction factor.... Bryan Zublin bzublin@gi.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 21:00:16 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: cmyer@cyberauto.com (Christopher Myer) Subject: An idea for kicking around... I was just wondering if it might be time to break TM up a little bit somehow. Here's what I'm thinking. I'm sure that there are some 4AG folks out there that just get bored to death when they see these long winded posts about 22R pointers. Vice-Versa, I'm sure that the same sort of thing is true when the 4AG guru's get going. My concern is that there are a lot of "quiet" folks that are probably hesitant to jump in with their thoughts and ideas when we have such a huge bunch of guru's who are always ready to jump in with their $.02 (me being a guilty party, of course.) I get mail from time to time from folks I've never seen post on TM that say "I've been lurking..." and then go on to list all of the wonder modifications that they've done but have never posted. Ok, I'm up late, gotta get up at 0400 for Natural Guard, so I can't expound on this any further. Please give this idea a few good kicks and let me know what you think. There are a number of ways we could implement this, using side-groups, digests, etc. Maybe a 20R guru would want to be a regular member of a TM-20R group, but a digest-only member of a TM-4AG group. We could keep the TM group for more "general" info. (If you don't like this idea, you are responsible for flaming it to death...) Chris xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 17:07:43 -1000 From: Allen T Koji Kam To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: RE: An Idea kicking around >=) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 21:00:16 -0500 From: cmyer@CyberAuto.Com (Christopher Myer) Subject: An idea for kicking around... Chris... It might be a good idea, however, there are several mailing lists out there all Toyota Related. Such as the Toyota 4x4 list Toyota MR-2 list Toyota Supra list Toyota list and even the more then famous...its "in"famous Toyota-WOB group >=) Tis might be a good idea -shrug- I need more email anyways >=) Specialization is kewl... -Allen T Koji Kam 1988 Toyota FX-16 1988 Turbo Supra with T-04 Garret Turbo (if deal goes through) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 00:11:48 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Buhr Subject: Re: Attention AAron To: Sevan Davitian Cc: Toyota Supras Mailing List , On Fri, 2 Feb 1996, Sevan Davitian wrote: > If the carb on your new car is one of the variable venturi jobs DO NOT > SPRAY ANY CLEANERS INTO IT AND DO NOT PUT ANYTHING FUNKY IN THE GAS TANK > !!!! exuse the shout, and the space consumption, but Aarons had enough > trouble, and want to save him extra. The slider on those carbs has a special > coating which is dissolved by many cleaners, and which once it is gone the > carb is a good paper weight. > > P.S. there was a recall on them for a while ! Hmm... I'm starting to have a bad feeling. The engine was running a bit rough, so I dumped a bottle of Chevron Techron cleaner in the gas tank, and now it's running a lot rougher. :( It idles really rough and sputters at higher rpms. I've been telling myself that it's just an ignition problem that will go away when I change the plugs, wires, distributor cap and rotor this weekend, but from the sound of this maybe not. How do I further determine what the problem is with the rough running, and if the carb is having problems what's the next step? *sigh* I think I must have pissed off the Car God in some previous life. Help. Aaron B. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 23:27:23 -0600 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: toy4x4@ro.com (Jack Alford) Subject: RE: An Idea kicking around >=) > >Such as the Toyota 4x4 list Where is there a Toyota 4x4 list ?? - jack xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Golf1par@aol.com Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 01:35:56 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Oh... do I need a clutch! Hello everyone! I've been reading all the comments on the flywheel bolts, and it got me thinking about how bad my clutch is getting. It's a stock 1986 4AG-E clutch with roughly 106K miles and it's ready for a change! Here's the deal -- I plan on doing some serious running with this car and I want SOLID lockup when I launch it. I'll be autocrossing and generally treating this clutch like hell, and I will also have the car on the street, though not my daily driver. I've heard some suggestions from some "experts," but I'll keep that to myself for now. I'm interested in hearing any comments you have on metallic vs. ferodo, stock pressure plate vs. some performance ones (Centerforce, etc.), stock flywheel vs. light, and anything else you feel applies. Any recommendations from someone who's done it? Dave 1986 MR2 -- no airbox, TRD header, HKS pipe, cams (soon) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Golf1par@aol.com Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 01:35:59 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: An idea for kicking around... >I was just wondering if it might be time to break TM up a little bit >somehow. > >Maybe a 20R guru would want to be a regular member of a TM-20R >group, but a digest-only member of a TM-4AG group. We could >keep the TM group for more "general" info. I've only been subscribed to the TM list for a few days now, and I've been "lurking" to get a flavor of the whole deal (guilty as charged!). Since I expect to have my mailbox pummelled with comments on this idea I thought I'd get my thoughts in... I personally enjoy reading the comments people have on other engines. I'm always trying to learn more about the benefits of different mods, and I think many comments, although perhaps not specifically written for the 4AG, are useful in understanding the concepts. General questions on cams, torque, hp, brakes, gearing, whatever are always helpful and certainly have a place in TM-4AG, TM-20R, and TM-digest. This brings me to a peculiar scenario... Suppose I have a comment on torque vs. hp. Do I post that to TM-4AG? TM-20R? TM-digest? What I don't want is to get the same note posted in several different areas that I'm subscribed to, yet I don't want to miss the "good stuff." I get enough mail already without having to weed through "repeat" mail. With that said, I'll defer to the comments of the "old timers" that have had to endure these "long winded posts" on the 20R... (come on, are they really that bad?) :):):) Dave 1986 MR2 -- Look for future comments on my mods... Golf1par@aol.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: kca@interserv.com Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 22:40:41 -0800 Subject: Cylinder misfire To: mr2-digest@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Cc: Toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Ok here's the latest on my cylinder miss on boost and at idle: In hopes and as suggested by others I tried to reset the engine computer by disconnecting power. Supposedly this will work if it is a problem with the fuel mapping. No dice. Next I tried a bottle of octane booster with injector cleaner plus a bottle of straight injector cleaner in the same tank of gas. 35 miles later - no improvement whatsoever. Contrary to what I reported earlier the cutout does not occur at 7psi of boost in the manifold. This is the pressure at the turbo. Instead I noticed tonight that it cuts out as soon as the factory gauge indicates boost in the manifold. I.e. if I'm not running a vaccum, I'm getting the miss. I'm still leaning toward the injector failure theory, but I don't know of a way to check the operation of the injector without removing it. Supposedly the injector will show a resistance of 2-4 ohms when it is good, but this doesn't necessarily mean that it works correctly. I measured mine at 3.4 ohms. The signal from the EFI is apparently constant, but the engine wasn't stumbling at idle after I checked this. I did find a hose off of a VSV, but replacing it made no difference. I guess unless anyone has any better ideas, it's time to get some error codes. Thanks again to those who responded. Kip Anderson kca@interserv.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: aly abulkheir Subject: An idea for kicking or something To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 02:51:07 -0500 (EST) I agree with Dave. I like this toyota-mods list being about all of our different engines and models. If I only liked MR2's, I'd be limiting myself. I agree that even though someone may be talking about another engine, you can still apply the idea to your engine and car. This has happened many times to me. And besides, we discuss all of the cars I'd love to own if I had the money and the money to pay for the insurance. These include my '85 MR2, an '89 MR2 SuperCharged, an '86 Celica GTS, an '89 Supra Turbo, a black '85 4x4 Xtra Cab pickup with a nice roll bar please, a '91 MR2 Turbo, a '94 MR2 Turbo, etc....I could go on and on, but I don't want to bore you guys....The bottom line: Let's leave the list the way it is. I like it a lot. Aly, '85 MR2, Red with all options abulkh34@matrix.newpaltz.edu xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: aly abulkheir Subject: Re: 4AGZE's - How much in Aus. To: phantom@cyberspace.cyberauto.com (Travis Morien) Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 03:00:11 -0500 (EST) Cc: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com > I considered putting a turbo in my 1988 MR2, but ditched the idea when I > realised that the market price of an MR2 SC is about the same as a MR2 > NA, at least in Perth. One day I will just sell my NA and get an SC for > not very much more money. See if you can find an SC in a car dealership, > for a few hundred bucks he might just swap the thing. > > Of course if you have already upgraded your NA with all sorts of > aftermarket goodies, you might not want to do this, but this is just what > I have been thinking. > > I have decided not to modify my NA for just this reason, I am waiting for > a good clean SC to come along so I can trade up, of course I have > considered getting a supra or GT4 instead, but I am still deciding. > > Cheers, > Travis. Dear Travis, I agree that this would be a logical step to take. But the reason I would not do it is because I prefer the rest of the '85 MR2 compared to an '88-'89. I prefer the body color keyed interior (my black and red seats), the door panels are easier to work with for a nice sound system, the automatic climate control system (not available on ANY MR2 after '85), and a few other things as well. I may buy an '89 SC MR2 someday, but I would not want to give up my '85 for it. Besides, the 4AGE is simpler without all the supercharger hardware (even though the under hood appearance of a SC MR2 is simply beautiful). Thanks for the ideas, Aly, '85 MR2, red with all options abulkh34@matrix.newpaltz.edu xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Gary Hong To: cmyer@cyberspace.cyberauto.com, toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: An idea for kicking around... Date: Sat, 3 Feb 96 3:41:40 PST How about grouping the 2xR[ET] (ie: 20R, 22R, 22RE, 22RET) together? Also, I wouldn't mind a 2xR[ET] and the M engines (ie: 5M, 7M ). Gary xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 09:31:49 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Buhr Subject: Re: An idea for kicking around... To: Toyota Modifications Mailing List On Fri, 2 Feb 1996, Christopher Myer wrote: > I was just wondering if it might be time to break TM up a little bit > somehow. Here's what I'm thinking. I'm sure that there are some 4AG > folks out there that just get bored to death when they see these long > winded posts about 22R pointers. Vice-Versa, I'm sure that the same I like reading about cars and engines that I don't have. Quite often information about other engines will give me a better understanding about engines in general. I would suggest that if people really don't like reading about cars/engines that don't apply to them, we should adopt a convention of putting the car/engine in the subject line, such as "[7MGTE] Running lean?" or "[Supra] Strut tower braces". That way folks that aren't interested can just delete the message without having to read it to see if it applies to them. Aaron B. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: kca@interserv.com Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 09:35:49 -0800 Subject: Re: An idea for kicking around... To: Golf1par@cyberspace.cyberauto.com, toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com >What I don't want is to get the same note posted in several different areas >that I'm subscribed to, yet I don't want to miss the "good stuff." I get >enough >mail already without having to weed through "repeat" mail. > >With that said, I'll defer to the comments of the "old timers" that have had >to endure these "long winded posts" on the 20R... (come on, are they >really that bad?) :):):) I honestly don't think there is a need for multiple lists. Whenever I see 20R, 22R, or 4AG something or other in the subject line I just hit the delete key. Kip Anderson 91 MR2 Turbo, 3s-GTE equipped kca@interserv.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Sat, 3 Feb 96 10:51:21 PST From: geoff@softy.softwords.bc.ca (Geoff Seeley) To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: An idea for kicking around... I agree with Aaron, I like to read about other modifications to different engines and cars. I've picked up quite a bit of information from this as well... I also like Aarons suggestion about the subject lines (even though I read and archive everything anyway :-) as it makes scanning and searching though your mail folder for the info you want to read NOW. I vote for leaving the list as is. Geoff '91 MR2t, 163,300km http://mr2.com/ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 03:41:19 -0500 From: mdowe@wchat.on.ca To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Torque, ps. >P.S. Would a 3SG fit into the MR2? It reckon I could get 240 hp+ without any trouble at all. I assume you mean a first generation MR2. I suspect that it could be done, as I have seen a picture of an AE101 with a 3SG in it. The car was in a TRD Japan brochure, and apparently used only ' off the shelf' parts for the installation.The reasoning here is the similarities between the engine bays in the two cars. The only question I have is regarding parts availability for the 3SG. Pistons are easy to come by, but cams and springs are difficult to find. Are you aware of any suppliers, or anyone who has built up one of these motors? I have blocks and heads avaliable, so this makes it a desirable project. Mike Dowe xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 08:53:42 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: celicag@magicnet.net (Chris W. Morgan) Subject: Re: An idea for kicking around... >To: halfbreed >From: celicag@mailhost.magicnet.net (Chris W. Morgan) >Subject: Re: An idea for kicking around... > >>To: cmyer@CyberAuto.Com (Christopher Myer) >>From: celicag@mailhost.magicnet.net (Chris W. Morgan) >>Subject: Re: An idea for kicking around... >> >>>I was just wondering if it might be time to break TM up a little bit >>>somehow. Here's what I'm thinking. I'm sure that there are some 4AG >>>folks out there that just get bored to death when they see these long >>>winded posts about 22R pointers. Vice-Versa, I'm sure that the same >>>sort of thing is true when the 4AG guru's get going. My concern is >>>that there are a lot of "quiet" folks that are probably hesitant to >>>jump in with their thoughts and ideas when we have such a huge bunch >>>of guru's who are always ready to jump in with their $.02 (me being >>>a guilty party, of course.) I get mail from time to time from folks >>>I've never seen post on TM that say "I've been lurking..." and then >>>go on to list all of the wonder modifications that they've done but >>>have never posted. >>> >>>Ok, I'm up late, gotta get up at 0400 for Natural Guard, so I can't >>>expound on this any further. Please give this idea a few good kicks >>>and let me know what you think. There are a number of ways we could >>>implement this, using side-groups, digests, etc. Maybe a 20R guru >>>would want to be a regular member of a TM-20R group, but a digest-only >>>member of a TM-4AG group. We could keep the TM group for more "general" >>>info. >>> >>>(If you don't like this idea, you are responsible for flaming it to >>>death...) >>> >>>Chris >>> >>> Hello All, >> As far as I'm concerned I'll be more than happy to spark the blow torch on this idea!. >> I've been on this list since the beginning of december and have yet to hear from any 20R guru's. Maybe this isnt long enough. I've looked through all the archived posts and dont remember seeing much about the R series motors. >> Let's take a look at the title of this list: Toyota-mods. TOYOTA to me means ALL Toyotas!. My loyalty lies with the name Toyota and all vehicles produced by that company. I dont want to limit myself to a particular make or model. I want to hear about ALL motor types, ALL models, and ALL modifications to them!. >> Some people post, some dont. I chalk it up to different personalities. Some are introverts (no posts), some are extroverts (always post), my wife calls me a pervert, but thats a different mailing list. The point is you are offered the whole ball of wax here, take what you want and leave the rest. Get familiar with your DELETE key if you are not interested it really does work!. If you want to limit your technical knowledge of other motors and models feel free, I dont!. >> That's my dollars worth, thanks for your time! >> >>Chris W Morgan >>1979 Celica Sunchaser (possibly the first factory convertable) >>1984 Celica GT >>1985 Celica GTS Convertable >>celicag@magicnet.net xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: ARacer@aol.com Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 15:21:00 -0500 To: cmyer@cyberspace.cyberauto.com, toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: An idea for kicking around... To: "'toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com'" Subject: '91 Cressida Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 10:04:25 -0600 This is from off of http://cyberauto.com/toyota-mode/engines.txt: Cressida 79 4M Cressida 80 4M-E Cressida 81-82 5M-E Cressida 83-86 5M-GE does anyone know what the Cressida's beyond that have? (yes, I could just wait til I got home and look under the hood, but I'm impatient!) I am looking for specs on this engine, I remember the dealer saying "It's the same engine they use in supras" but I know it's not a 5M engine in the '91, and I really don't think it's a 7M either. cartest lists the '89 Cressida as having: Disp: 2954 cc. Loc:FRONT Type:NORM Horsepower: 190 bhp @ 5600 rpm Torque: 185 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm Comp Ratio: 9.2:1 Redline: 6500 rpm Transmission: 4 speed AUTOMATIC Gear ratios 1st: 2.80:1 4th: 0.71:1 2nd: 1.53:1 5th: :1 3rd: 1.00:1 6th: :1 Final drive ratio: 3.91:1 Driving wheels: REAR but the '91 is definitly a 4sp auto with OD (I could call this a 5sp auto, but that's not exactly accurate) Anyone have any more detailed specs on the '91 Cressida? - Mike -- Michael Kronvold, Network Administrator, Addison Machine Engineering (708) 543-9191 424 Interstate Road Addison, Illinois 60101 USA Toyota Supra Turbo, anything else is just transportation. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Michael Kronvold To: "'supras@vicor.com'" , Subject: Technical Reading on Reciprocating Engine Theory and Design Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 10:54:44 -0600 My brother is looking for textbooks on engine theories and design. Something like what you would get if you were going to school in this field. (are there any univ's or whatnot that have a major in something this specific? I have noticed that most schools will push you through mechanical engineering and give you maybe one or two classes in IC engines at the most, if you beg) We are not looking for "Hot Rod Manuals" as that's what he already knows... now he wants to know why changing the charge temp will cause fuel to burn a certain way over a lower or higher temp. Some more "how does it work" info on things like: exhaust tune length and wave pulses modifying the shape and size of the squish area (quench band?) etc etc. I realize that much of this is typically learned through experimentation or learned through the experiences of others who have already done this kinda of experimentation before you. But there has to be some more formalized education available, whether it be dedicated schooling at a university or specialty tech. school, or a "learn at home" program, or maybe just a matter of finding the right books to read and understand. My brother was never much for school... barely made if out of high school. But one day everything changed and he was off to MMI to become a Harley Technician, and ya know what? he passed. I got daily calls from him talking about all the things he learned that day, things like the above (exhaust pulses and squish area) and he just oozed with excitement. Now that he is out of school, and working in a Harley performance shop (tho small), he has a lot of things he wants to play with. But before he goes off and starts cutting away at his head or making radical loop-de-loops in his exhaust, he wants to know why making mods does what it does, and exactly what affects does it have on, basicly, Everything. Anyhow, someone out there has to be in this field professionally and knows many of these things. What I wanna know is how did you learn it? Where did you learn it? Did everyone learn it by word of mouth? Working with the pro's? Or is there a path of formal training he can look forward to? This is kindofa now or never thing, if I can get him going on this, he might actually turn out to be an excellent engineer. - Mike -- Michael Kronvold, Network Administrator, Addison Machine Engineering (708) 543-9191 424 Interstate Road Addison, Illinois 60101 USA Toyota Supra Turbo, anything else is just transportation. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 12:03:14 -0500 (EST) From: alan auerbach F Subject: Re: Technical Reading on Reciprocating Engine Theory and Design To: supras@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Cc: "'supras@vicor.com'" , Have your brother contact what Canadians call community colleges and what the Brits call polytechnics. These are post-secondary institutions that aren't universities but focus on trade training. Don't know what they're called in the US, maybe colleges as opposed to universities. Incidentally, my squish area used to ooze with excitement too, some time back. Al. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 10:12:00 -0800 (PST) From: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" Subject: RE: Technical Reading on Reciprocating Engine Theory and Design To: "toyota-mods@cyberauto.com" Michael Kronvold writes: > My brother is looking for textbooks on engine theories and design. There is a two volume set on the internal combustion engine. I don't recall the title, but it is pretty technical. Check in the Motorbooks International catalog. Also, get on the literature mailing list of the Society of Automotive Engineers. You will get catalogs and fliers on a regular basis. The SAE also sells the book referred to above. Bryan Zublin bzublin@gi.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bconnelly@vnet.ibm.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 96 14:46:01 EDT To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Flywheel I wish I had never asked that original question about 4ag flywheel weights,not only didnt I ever find out how heavy the original 4AG unit was I was treated too bad memory's of University with discussions of angular momemtum. Now guys I have an honours degree in Physics but I need an imperical 'seat of the pants' answer here. 1. Is an 11KG 4AG flywheel driveable? Is the standard backing plate good enough for 155BHP and the HKS flywheel? Do I need to replace the flywheel and/or the clutch bolts? In the case of the 2TG the answer was, 11KG is too heavy, standard clutch is good to 170, CRANE high tensile bolts were no stronger than standard and you only broke the bolts when you used them to often and over torqued them. Bruce Connelly xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: ARacer@aol.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 15:20:15 -0500 To: kronvold@cyberspace.cyberauto.com, supras@cyberspace.cyberauto.com, Subject: Re: Technical Reading on Reciprocating Engine Theory and Design >My brother is looking for textbooks on engine theories and design. Mike, The Society of Automotive Engineers now seems to be known, for some purposes, as: SAE International: The Engineering Society for Advancing Mobility Land Sea Air and Space 400 Commonwealth Drive Warrendale, PA 15096 They offer their engineering books under this name, anyway. Telephone given on book order form: 412 776-4970. Fax: 412 776-0790. 'Hope this helps. Ed Pitts Oceanside, Calif. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Matti Kalalahti Subject: Re: '91 Cressida To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com (Toyota-Mods mailing list) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 01:05:42 +0200 (EET) > This is from off of http://cyberauto.com/toyota-mode/engines.txt: CHRIIIIS! When will you update that one or replace it with a link to my engines.html! http://proffa.cc.tut.fi/~k124476/dataBySubject/engines.html is the place to check, with 20 times more info. > Cressida 79 4M > Cressida 80 4M-E > Cressida 81-82 5M-E > Cressida 83-86 5M-GE > > does anyone know what the Cressida's beyond that have? (yes, I > could just wait til I got home and look under the hood, but I'm > impatient!) I am looking for specs on this engine, I remember > the dealer saying "It's the same engine they use in supras" but > I know it's not a 5M engine in the '91, and I really don't think > it's a 7M either. uncomplete, but helps some: 79 US 4M 80 US 4M-E 81-82 US 5M-E 82- FI RX60 21R, 2L-T, L 82 JP M-TEU, 1G-EU, 13T-U 83-88 US 5M-GE 86 JP 1G-GTEU, 5M-GEU, 1G-GEU, 1G-EU, 21R-U, 1S-U, 2L-T, 2L 89-90 US 7M-GE > cartest lists the '89 Cressida as having: > > Disp: 2954 cc. Loc:FRONT Type:NORM > Horsepower: 190 bhp @ 5600 rpm > Torque: 185 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm > Comp Ratio: 9.2:1 Redline: 6500 rpm True, except comp.ratio may be 9.2 (not sure about this, both versions exist). > Transmission: 4 speed AUTOMATIC > Gear ratios 1st: 2.80:1 4th: 0.71:1 > 2nd: 1.53:1 5th: :1 > 3rd: 1.00:1 6th: :1 > Final drive ratio: 3.91:1 > Driving wheels: REAR > > but the '91 is definitly a 4sp auto with OD (I could call this > a 5sp auto, but that's not exactly accurate) Do 5-spd automatics exist (in Toyotas) ? Anyway, the above ratios were used in at least eariler 7M-GE engines. -- Matti Kalalahti | Toyota Carina Coupe GT-T TwinCam Turbo '82 k124476@ee.tut.fi | RWD * IRS * LSD * 3T-GTEU * 195+-10hp@4200-6700rpm A Huge Evergrowing WWW Home Page * http://proffa.cc.tut.fi/~k124476/ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 18:17:14 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: Marlin Bailor Subject: water wetter >> > Water wetter is a product which improves the thermal conductivity of the >> > 'water' in your radiator. Waterwetter reduces the surface tension of water so that it can better coat the water jackets in the engine, hence the better cooling. Surface tension is what gives water a meniscus in a glass. At certian hot spots in many engines the water/coolant mixture actually boils, (next to the jacket walls) making very small bubbles that greatly reduce thermal conductivity. Waterwetter helps keep these bubbles moving, and makes them smaller. I read this in a Mustang book, heaven forbid! Marlin '85 NA xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Michael Kronvold To: "'Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)'" , Subject: RE: Technical Reading on Reciprocating Engine Theory and Design Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 17:18:37 -0600 >> My brother is looking for textbooks on engine theories and design. >There is a two volume set on the internal combustion engine. I don't recall >the title, but it is pretty technical. Check in the Motorbooks >International catalog. sounds great! never heard of it... Where do I get the motorbooks int'l catalog? >Also, get on the literature mailing list of the Society of Automotive >Engineers. You will get catalogs and fliers on a regular basis. The SAE >also sells the book referred to above. oh, guess I should have read the whole thing before replying... How do you get in contact with SAE? thanks for the lead... - Mike -- Michael Kronvold, Network Administrator, Addison Machine Engineering (708) 543-9191 424 Interstate Road Addison, Illinois 60101 USA Toyota Supra Turbo, anything else is just transportation. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Michael Kronvold To: "'ARacer@aol.com'" , Subject: RE: Technical Reading on Reciprocating Engine Theory and Design Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 17:21:44 -0600 >>My brother is looking for textbooks on engine theories and design. >The Society of Automotive Engineers now seems to be known, for some purposes, as: okay, lesson number 2 for today is, read ALL your new mail THEN reply... - Mike -- Michael Kronvold, Network Administrator, Addison Machine Engineering (708) 543-9191 424 Interstate Road Addison, Illinois 60101 USA Toyota Supra Turbo, anything else is just transportation. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Tony Lanterman Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 16:58:28 -0800 To: ambuhr@cyberspace.cyberauto.com, toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: An idea for kicking around... > I would suggest that if people really don't like >reading about cars/engines that don't apply to them, we should adopt a >convention of putting the car/engine in the subject line, such as >"[7MGTE] Running lean?" or "[Supra] Strut tower braces". > >Aaron B. Great idea. I've enjoyed learning the bits about cars I don't own. This gives the option of focusing on what you "need" to know on those days when you're short on time, and saving the rest for later. Woodsprite ********************************************************************** * Without ice cream * 1983 Celica ST * Joe Woodsprite * * there would be * * Unsafe at any speed * * darkness and * I don't drive * * * chaos. * fast. * lantera@teleport.com * * -- * I fly low. * * * Don Kardong * * dod #1456 * * * 72 Honda CB350 * Where's Julie? * ********************************************************************** xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bconnelly@vnet.ibm.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 96 11:29:19 EDT To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Flywheel To the list, Roger Smith's last note to me was very informative but highlighted a difference between ALL of my engines and some of you guys in the US. It appears you guys dont use solid plate metalic clutchs.....why? The very first thing I did when I put in my 4AG was to put a solid metalic clutch in it. It costs so little and pays for itself as you just resurface them. There is NO clutch shudder, no slip and no undesirable traits. You just give the rebuilder an old Toyota centre and $90 Aus and two days later it is done. Therefore I cant see why HKS would not recommend this for the road. Bruce Connelly xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bwiencek@kcnet.com Date: Tue, 06 Feb 96 14:50:30 -0600 Subject: me/mine/mods To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Name : Brian Wiencek Location : Kansas City, MO Model : 1984 4wd. Xtra cab Pickup - sr5 - Solid Axle! Engine : 22r (Early model- pre '85) Mods : Downey Header & Mid-range Cam, NWOR distributor re-cuve kit, Soon to have webber carb, accel 3000+ Ignition system. Truck is running 5" suspension lift, 35" dunlop Radial rovers, 5.29 gears, stainless brake lines, Polyurathane bushings all-around, & a detroit locker in the rear. email : bwiencek@kcnet.com * anyone used the trik products or marlin crawler transfer case gearsets??? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: toy4x4@ro.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 15:46:52 -0600 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: me/mine/mods > >* anyone used the trik products or marlin crawler transfer case gearsets??? TRIK went out of business. Marlin just came out with new gearsets for that replace the current gearset for a much lower gear range without having to lenghthen the front drive shaft and shorten the rear shaft ... He still sells the Dual transfer case kit and in fact in his truck he has the dual t-cases with twin sticks and has the low gears in BOTH t-cases for a final drive of 400:1 if he wants it ... it'd be nice to have 20 forward gears ... Folks in his club say, when he's in LOW, LOW, LOW gear, you can't even tell that the truck is moving ... how cool would that be !! To build the greatest truck all you have to have is $$$$$$$$$ ...... - jack alford ==> toy4x4@ro.com --> Decatur, AL xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 19:41:36 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: Marlin Bailor Subject: MK1 wheels Does anybody have a clean set of stock mk1 alloy wheels they want to sell for a reasonable price? I live in central Pennsylvania, the closer the better. Thanks, Marlin '85 NA xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: "Gregory Chan" To: kca@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 21:34:41 EDT Subject: Re: Cylinder misfire Cc: Toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Hi Kip, If you have checked everything else and everything is OK, I would suggest running a compression check as I once had a Nissan 200SX Turbo blow the head joint on me with symptoms similar to what you have described. gchan@compserv.senecac.on.ca 85 Corolla GTS xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 22:06:40 -0600 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: toy4x4@ro.com (Jack Alford) Subject: (22r) A/C at idle ? Just seeing someone post about an A/C problem reminded me of one of my own. When my engine is warm and the A/C is on, the engine rev's up and down, up and down, someone mentioned before if the compressor was cutting on and off, I've tried to tell, but with the engine revving up and down, I can't hear anything ... I've looked through my factory repair manuals and aftermarket repair manuals for any mention of what controls this and have found nothing. I'd apprecite anyone who even has the tiniest(sp?) idea of what my problem might be speaking up before I end up getting reamed at the Toyota place... Oh yeah, I have a factory carbed 22R ... Thanks - jack alford ==> toy4x4@ro.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 22:09:48 -0600 (CST) From: Chris Hilliard To: Toyota List Cc: Toyota Mods Subject: Why did they go and do that? Hey folks, I was changing my battery cables on my '77 2T-C Corolla today because they were cruddy on the battery side, have been cleaned 4 million times, and just needed replacing. I looked down at the starter side to yank that end off after I did the battery end and "oh my gosh!", Why in 'da heck did they have to put the starter in there so dang snug with everything else? I couldn't see the starter leads or even get my hand on them. I ended up having to take off the exhaust manifold to get to it. That sucked! All was not lost though, I did find a 10mm craftsman socket and a 1/4" extension lost by the previous owner down amongst there. :) Oh well....... **************************************************************** * |\/\/\/| ___________________ * | | / \ * | | ____________ / Catch this airhead \____ * | (0)(0) / \ / at \ * C _) / \/ cxh6989@jackson.freenet.org | * | ,___| < AYE CARUMBA!!! \ / * | / \ / \ "I didn't do it, / * /====\ \____________/ \ Nobody saw me, ------------ */ \ \ You can't prove a thing!!! / ***************************************\____________________________/ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 09:10:43 +0500 From: supra@patagonia.bellcore.com (Jon Hacker (Supra Account)) To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: (22r) A/C at idle ? > Just seeing someone post about an A/C problem reminded me of one > of my own. When my engine is warm and the A/C is on, the engine > rev's up and down, up and down, someone mentioned before if the > compressor was cutting on and off, I've tried to tell, but with > the engine revving up and down, I can't hear anything ... > > I've looked through my factory repair manuals and aftermarket > repair manuals for any mention of what controls this and > have found nothing. I'd apprecite anyone who even has the > tiniest(sp?) idea of what my problem might be speaking up > before I end up getting reamed at the Toyota place... If you look at the A/C compressor pulley you can tell if the mag clutch is engaged or not. WHen it is engaged the entire pulley and hub rotates. When it is disengaged the pulley will free wheel on the stationary hub. Just point a light down there when its running and you will be able to tell if the compressor clutch is cycling on and off. Jon xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: kca@interserv.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 21:15:38 -0800 Subject: Re: Which handles best? To: n.briggs@cyberspace.cyberauto.com (Neil Briggs), On Wed, 07 Feb 1996, n.briggs@student.canterbury.ac.nz (Neil Briggs) wrote: >Does anyone have any opinions which should handle best out of say, a >sedan/coupe design or a shorter more compact hatchback. An example of this >might be between the corolla GTS coupe and the FX-16 hatch, or any two cars >with the same model chassis/engine combination. Any opinions? Ideally for auto-x and high performance handling you want to have a car with as much weight as possible between the wheels, not outside them. The primary reasons for this: 1. Polar Moment of Inertia - A more tightly packed center of mass has a low polar moment of inertia. This means that it requires less force to rotate the car into and out of a turn since a greater angular momentum can be achieved with less energy input. A long car is great for dirt tracking because the high polar moment of inertia makes the car more stable and slow to pivot. With a longer car it is also better to have as little overhang on the ends as possible (hence the trend toward "cab forward" designs). The reason for this is momentum induced oversteer. E.g. a car with lots of rear overhang will tend to understeer going into a corner, then oversteer on exit because of the momentum of the rear of the car toward the outside of the curve. The low polar moment of inertia of MR2s due to the mid-engine design is part of what makes them such able handlers. If quick turn-in and exit cornering is your goal, think short. Kip Anderson 91 MR2 Turbo kca@interserv.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 16:50:37 +1100 From: n.briggs@student.canterbury.ac.nz (Neil Briggs) Subject: Which handles best? To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Does anyone have any opinions which should handle best out of say, a sedan/coupe design or a shorter more compact hatchback. An example of this might be between the corolla GTS coupe and the FX-16 hatch, or any two cars with the same model chassis/engine combination. Any opinions? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Tue, 6 Feb 96 23:57:06 PST To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: Brett Fraser Subject: Re: (22r) A/C at idle ? At 10:06 PM 2/6/96 -0600, you wrote: >Just seeing someone post about an A/C problem reminded me of one >of my own. When my engine is warm and the A/C is on, the engine >rev's up and down, up and down, someone mentioned before if the >compressor was cutting on and off, I've tried to tell, but with >the engine revving up and down, I can't hear anything ... Hmm .. its a shame thats only happening with the AC on as thats exactly what is happening with a friends NA 87 MR2 .. mainly noticed it at warm although it may happen at cold .. the revs will typically bounce in a methodical pulse between 1000-1250 or 1500 or so .. and sometimes they'll bounce downwards from 1500-1000 so .. its really erie (sp?) (damnit that word really doesnt look right..) .. Any ideas anyone?.. We just replaced the fuel filter (didnt look like it hadb been done in the 190,000km the car has on it ) for a heavy stuttering .. seems to have cleared that up a fair bit .. but the rev prob persists. Brett xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 07:13:24 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: cmyer@cyberauto.com (Christopher Myer) Subject: Re: CAM timing and A/C On fuel injected cars, the idle-up is simply a little solenoid that leaks air into the intake manifold. Anybody want to speculate on the effect of doing something like this on a carb'd car? Obviously, you'd have to do some sort of a balanced setup on the dual side-draft setup. Another option would be adding a very small fuel injector. You could simply wire it up to open when your AC comes on, then play with the fuel pressure until your idle-up is right. The only problem that comes to mind here is that you're going to have to replumb your filtration system so that all of your air flow into the 4 bbls. goes through one place where you could inject the fuel. (Obviously, place the injector between the filter and carbs.) If you wanted to get really fancy, HKS sells Additional Injector Controllers! (Just kidding, way overkill.) Chris xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 07:45:15 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: cmyer@cyberauto.com (Christopher Myer) Subject: Re: (22r) A/C at idle ? >Just seeing someone post about an A/C problem reminded me of one >of my own. When my engine is warm and the A/C is on, the engine >rev's up and down, up and down, someone mentioned before if the >compressor was cutting on and off, I've tried to tell, but with >the engine revving up and down, I can't hear anything ... Jack: On my 22R 4x4, the A/C doesn't even come on until the idle is above 1000 rpm--kind of a reverse idle-up concept. This means at traffic lights on hot summer days I sit there with my left foot on the brake on the right foot holding the rev's right at 1000 rpm. ;-) You might have a problem where your idle is set high enough that the A/C comes on, but the load pulls it below the lower limit and it then shuts off. There is about 500 rpm between the turn on and cut off, but I could see this happening. Chris -- Christopher P. Myer Cyberspace Automotive Performance www.cyberauto.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 07:50:32 -0500 From: "ROGERS" To: LIBURD I <91557593@cyberspace.cyberauto.com>, Subject: Re: Starlet Actually Fred's my uncle! The Body kit I have on my starlet, and the same as on the yellow starlet whose picture was on the toyota mods server (Is this server still around?) Was made by a company in Barbados. Do you have a 2 door or 4 door starlet? The price worked out to about $US 1000, and included replacement front fenders, front bumper, rear wheel arches, side skirts, and an adjustable rear wing (sierra cosworth style). However I didn't worry with the wing as it was a bit to "loud" for my conservative lifestyle ;-) The only other comercially available body kit I have seen for these early model starlets, was in a RipSpeed (London U.K) catalog. Not as nice as mine (IMHO) and was more money to boot. Roger Smith Gold Disk Inc. _______________________________________________________________________________ Subject: Starlet From: LIBURD I <91557593@mmu.ac.uk> at Internet Date: 2/7/96 12:20 PM Please can you sent me any information you have on Toyota Starlet Body Kits. (I believe the man in the know is Fred Smith) UK Manchester xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 09:24:06 -0500 To: toyota-l@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: fmarsh@helix.nih.gov (Frederick Marsh) Subject: Jacobs Energy Pak Cc: Toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com I know that some of you tm'ers don't believe in ignition systems, so I can probably guess what your response would be to the following.. I was wondering if anyone has had bad experiences with the Jacobs Ign. Sys. I live in Md. and over the past few days it's been 20 deg and below. My '85 Celica would not start. I couldn't figure it out, but I just recently traced it to the Jacobs. Whenever I would bypass the system, the car would start. If I immediately turned the car off, hooked it back up, then the car would start! The Jacobs would not start the car on a cold start (2hrs. or more in 20 deg.). I also noticed that when I bypassed the system my car would accelerate smoother. When I hooked it back up, let it idle, and stomp on the gas, it would sputter before revving up. Bypass it and do the same, it would rev up smooth. This may explain why my gas mileage has been suffering, even after the header and X-haust system. I don't know if it's the secondary trigger failing or what. I plan on calling the company today so they can tell me what _I_ am doing wrong (yeah right). Does anyone have one of these systems and notice a significant improvement like the kind Jacob's advertises. If noone has seen better gas mileage, quicker accel., or any of the sort, then I might have to chuck it. Thanks for your responses, and no bashing, -frederick. '85 Celica GT-S Convertible xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: bconnelly Cc: toyota-mods From: "john.limcangco" Date: 7 Feb 96 9:31:39 Subject: CAM timing and A/C Hi, My car idles fine when the A/C is off, but when I turn the A/C on it almost stumbles. I raised the idle to 1,500 - 1,750 rpms with the A/C off just to compensate. With the A/C turned-on, it drops to 1,000 rpms. Is this a CAM timing problem or something else? I have stock CAMs. Follow-up question, is there a way to install and 'idle-up' circuit with twin side-drafts? Thanks, John Limcangco Manila, Philippines 79 Cressida 18RG ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ To: toyota-mods @ cyberspace.cyberauto.com @ internet cc: (bcc: John Limcangco) From: bconnelly @ VNET.IBM.COM @ internet Date: 02/07/96 11:46 PM Subject: CAMS (4AG) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ You MUST obey the HKS data sheet for EFI CAM timing if you dont want to stall when you put the A/C on. Bruce connelly xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bconnelly@vnet.ibm.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 96 10:46:18 EDT To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: CAMS (4AG) To those that asked about 3SG injectors, The Australian 4AG's have a MAP sensor and no airflow meter, so did the Jap ones. This applies to all the small crank engines. There is no recalibration necessary other than to the spark when using 3SG injectors and small CAMS, for the spark you advance it as much as possible until it pings (at least 25 before top). I have seen pictures of the US engines in the TPH and some have the OZ setup and some have an airflow sensor. If you have airflow I would be tempted to adjust the sensor as it says in TPH and then insert the CAMS and the injectors. If the CAMS are larger (280 and above) I have heard reports of low vacuum for braking, Chris is shipping me a 270 so I can try 270/264 with 3SG injectors and factory box, I am confident this will work as I have already tried 272/272 in another car with good results accept at idle. Idle for MAP sensor cars is VERY critically defined by the overlap. You MUST obey the HKS data sheet for EFI CAM timing if you dont want to stall when you put the A/C on. Bruce connelly xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bwiencek@kcnet.com Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 08:50:40 -0600 Subject: 22r Timing chain & compression ratio. ?'s To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Hello, I am in the process of getting a webber setup for my 22r, and cleaning up the head and intake. In the process I have thought of milling the head about .020 in. (the machine shops here don't talk metric too well.) in order to raise the compression a little, and clean it up. Any Ideas? Or should I find a set of 10:1 pistons to put in for $400+ a set (If they were around $200 that wouldn't be an issue.) Also I am Replacing the timing set and have heard the late model (86-up) has a double row chain that can be swapped in if you get the timing chain cover from a newer motor? Are there any other parts I should look for with it? Or is a new timing set (chain, sprockets, guide & tensioner) and the cover all I need? Any other suggestions for improvement while I am in this far? Thanks, Brian Oh yeah, the subject is an '84 4x4, 22R, Downey Header, Downey Mid-range Cam, NWOR dist. re-curve, soon to have webber 38 or 40 DPS, and accell 3000+ ignition. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bwiencek@kcnet.com Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 09:21:03 -0600 Subject: Re: Jacobs Energy Pak To: fmarsh@cyberspace.cyberauto.com (Frederick Marsh), Cc: Toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com In my search for an Ignition system, I have heard so many negative things about the Jacobs from people who have actually owned & used them - about 70% of the ones I caontacted have returned them at least once if not perminantely... Not a real good track record. The few who said they got them working properly, really like them, but I decided to stay away from them for the number of initial problems. I do believe a Hotter / Fatter spark does help and have run MSD systems, and accell super coil (on old points type cars) with good results. I am currently looking in to the accell 3000+ ignition system, it's functin is similar to the MSD, but uses newer electronic technology, and is a little smaller. How old is the unit? Is it the all-in-one or the separate coil & module? - Brian On Wed, 7 Feb 1996, fmarsh@helix.nih.gov (Frederick Marsh) wrote: >I know that some of you tm'ers don't believe in ignition systems, so I can >probably guess what your response would be to the following.. > >I was wondering if anyone has had bad experiences with the Jacobs Ign. Sys. >I live in Md. and over the past few days it's been 20 deg and below. My >'85 Celica would not start. I couldn't figure it out, but I just recently >traced it to the Jacobs. Whenever I would bypass the system, the car would >start. If I immediately turned the car off, hooked it back up, then the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 10:35:55 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: stuart.banks@gsfc.nasa.gov (Stuart Banks) Subject: me/mine/mods Name : Stuart Banks Location : (Washington, DC /USA ) Model : (1984 4runner SR5) Engine : (22R) prior to 7/84 Mods : (Weber 32/36 DGAV carburetor Offenhauser Dual Port intake manifold 1 mm oversized intake and exhaust valves Mallory Unilight distributor L.C. Street Performer cam Dual roller timing chain 93 mm pistons Tri-Y headers 2.25" exhaust w/ Dynomax Super Turbo muffler NWOR 2" lift Braided stainless brake lines RS 9000 shocks LA Locker in the rear 31X10.5 BFG MT) email : stuart.banks@gsfc.nasa.gov I think I sent this to the wrong address the first time, if this is a repeat, sorry ****************************** * stuart.banks@gsfc.nasa.gov * * Stuart Banks * * NASA GSFC Code 713 * * Greenbelt, MD 20771 * * (301)286-5934 * ****************************** xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: LIBURD I <91557593@mmu.ac.uk> To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 15:48:00 GMT Subject: me/mine/mods Name :Isaac Liburd Location : Manchester, England Model :Toyota Starlet 1983 Engine : Factory supplied 1.2litre Mods : Standard email :: 91557593@mmu.ac.uk I am in the process of converting my Starlet to the four wheel drive running gear of a 2 litre Ford Sierra Cosworth (204 bhp) model. This conversion includes the engine as well. I am currently sourcing the parts that I require for this conversion and I will keep you posted on the developments. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: LIBURD I <91557593@mmu.ac.uk> To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 15:53:53 GMT Subject: Starlet Please can you sent me any information you have on Toyota Starlet Body Kits. (I believe the man in the know is Fred Smith) UK Manchester xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: toy4x4@ro.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 10:15:37 -0600 To: Toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: Jacobs Energy Pak >I was wondering if anyone has had bad experiences with the Jacobs Ign. Sys. >I live in Md. and over the past few days it's been 20 deg and below. My Yes, I ate the $37.50 restocking fee and got the rest of my money back, I adjusted my timing about 300 times, gapped, re-gapped and re-re-gapped my plugs, my engine never stopped knocking, I got worse gas mileage ... this was with an Omni-Pak ... I think Jacobs sucks in general, but makes a decent set of plug wires, which I still have and like ... ymmv - jack alford ==> toy4x4@ro.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: toy4x4@ro.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 10:26:20 -0600 To: Toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: me/mine/mods Way cool ... Two guys with 4x4's joined the list in the same week ! How do you like that Intake, Stuart ?? At 10:35 AM 2/7/96 -0500, you wrote: >Name : Stuart Banks >Location : (Washington, DC /USA ) >Model : (1984 4runner SR5) >Engine : (22R) prior to 7/84 >Mods : (Weber 32/36 DGAV carburetor > Offenhauser Dual Port intake manifold > 1 mm oversized intake and exhaust valves > Mallory Unilight distributor > L.C. Street Performer cam > Dual roller timing chain > 93 mm pistons > Tri-Y headers > 2.25" exhaust w/ Dynomax Super Turbo muffler > > NWOR 2" lift > Braided stainless brake lines > RS 9000 shocks > LA Locker in the rear > 31X10.5 BFG MT) > >email : stuart.banks@gsfc.nasa.gov > >I think I sent this to the wrong address the first time, if this is a >repeat, sorry > >****************************** >* stuart.banks@gsfc.nasa.gov * >* Stuart Banks * >* NASA GSFC Code 713 * >* Greenbelt, MD 20771 * >* (301)286-5934 * >****************************** xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: "'toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com'" From: Tony York Subject: me/mine/mods Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 08:57:15 PST Name : Tony York Location : Northampton, England, UK. Model : '86 Corolla GT Twin Cam (GT-S) Engine : 4A-GE Mods : JR Clamp on air filter, lots of polish. Soon : Suspension, lowering, alloy change (Cosmetic mainly), Can't afford engine mods at the moment. Email :york@radstone.co.uk I think I've probably sent this info before but I couldn't remember and someone went and cleared all my previous mail GRRRR!!! If anyone has any cheap engine mods for the GT-S please let me know. Tony York Radstone Technology Plc Water Lane Towcester Northants England NN12 6JN Tel: 01327 359444 Ext:2389 Fax: 01327 358113 Email: york@radstone.co.uk xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 12:09:07 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: fmarsh@helix.nih.gov (Frederick Marsh) Subject: Re: Jacobs Energy Pak >Yes, I ate the $37.50 restocking fee and got the rest of my money back, >I adjusted my timing about 300 times, gapped, re-gapped and re-re-gapped >my plugs, my engine never stopped knocking, I got worse gas mileage ... >this was with an Omni-Pak ... I think Jacobs sucks in general, but makes >a decent set of plug wires, which I still have and like ... ymmv Sounds all to familiar. However, I just called Jacobs, and they said they would send me a new secondary trigger and distributor wire that would eliminate the use of the 7to8mm adapters. They attributed the no starting problem to the cold increasing resistance in the power wire to the OmniPak. They suggested I put in a 30A relay that would allow the full 12V to go to the pak. They also suggested that I replace the Bosch Platinum Plugs with the straight Autolite Coppercore and regap them .002 beyond recommended gap. Before they were supposed to be regapped to .055. I will try this out because truthfully, when I first got the thing I can't quite recall any problems off the bat. They only developed after a while. Will post update w/ or w/o warning to potential buyers. -frederick. '85 Celica GTS Convertible xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: toyota-mods From: Steven Jackson/CAM/Lotus Date: 7 Feb 96 12:13:23 EST Subject: Re: Which handles best? Uh, well, which handles better between the Corolla GTS and the FX-16? That would be the MR2 :). Okay, handling? Handling means somewhat different things to different folks, but I'll work off of some assumptions. The MR2, if you don't need the car to be very spacious, is achitected the way of all very fast cars. This proper platform starts by putting the engine in the middle of the car (and there are front mid-engined cars, and rear mid-engined cars), and then driving the rear wheels or all-four wheels, never just the front wheels. This is a bit academic, in fact, for most of us running our road cars. In the realm of mere mortal road cars, there're certainly some fast front wheel driver cars out there. And just because a car is mid-engined and rear-wheel drive doesn't ensure that the chassis is necessarily very competent. But the MR2 does have competition-demonstrated world-class chassis performance. A new generation MR2 Turbo won the SCCA Solo II nationals in A-Stock this year, beating out some very pricey competition. At the SCCA Solo II National Tour event that came through Boston last summer, MR2s took first and second places in C-Stock, with a new generation car and an '85 car in those positions respectively (though the Miata R is the car for C-Stock). Of course, above all, they were driven well, and also prepared well. Of course, in SCCA Showroom Stock road racing, the MR2s are very competitive, as is the Miata, but the new Dodge Neon ACR racing car is just downright faster. If you want to do development beyond stock, the MR2 is the platform of choice for doing something really crazy. It's just the right achitecture. Any generation will do. I'd suggest taking a simpler, lighter first generation car, drop in a Formula Atlantic motor, tweak the hell out of the chassis, and go crazy . Of course, affording an Atlantic motor might be an issue, it would be for me, but maybe you'll come across somebody who's looking to get out of Atlantic really cheap and has a bunch of spare Toyota Atlantic motors just lying around... . I don't know much about the Corolla GTS. But I thought at one time that the FX-16 might just be a sleeper. A few of the local SCCA folks had them and I watched the FX-16s run and talked with their drivers about them. Unfortunately, it isn't, or perhaps it's better said wasn't, a successful car in the hands of some pretty competent folks, and they weren't pleased with platform. - Steven n.briggs @ student.canterbury.ac.nz (Neil Briggs) 02/07/96 04:50 PM To: toyota-mods @ cyberspace.cyberauto.com @ INTERNET cc: (bcc: Steven Jackson/CAM/Lotus) Subject: Which handles best? Does anyone have any opinions which should handle best out of say, a sedan/coupe design or a shorter more compact hatchback. An example of this might be between the corolla GTS coupe and the FX-16 hatch, or any two cars with the same model chassis/engine combination. Any opinions? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 09:18:00 -0800 (PST) From: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" Subject: Re: CAM timing and A/C (18RG) To: "toyota-mods@cyberauto.com" >On fuel injected cars, the idle-up is simply a little solenoid that leaks >air into the intake manifold. Anybody want to speculate on the effect >of doing something like this on a carb'd car? Obviously, you'd have to >do some sort of a balanced setup on the dual side-draft setup. Don't the 18RG and 18RGU stock intake manifolds have a balance tube connecting the four intake ports together? I remember seeing this in the Haynes repair manual (1978-1981 Celica). I think this exists in order to generate a stable vacuum for the distributor advance. This balance tube would be ideal to let additional air into for an idle up function. Since the additional air is bypassing the carb, the air/fuel ratio will lean out a bit. But it is probably running rich anyways at idle, so it might be OK. Bryan Zublin bzublin@gi.com PS. The Haynes manual that I mentioned above is sold in the US for the US spec Celicas (20R). It also includes the 18R and 18RG engines, since this manual originates in the UK. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bconnelly@vnet.ibm.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 96 13:23:39 EDT To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: CAM timing and A/C (4AG) All the 4AG's I have seen have electric idle up circuits. Check this circuit, it has a knob on top to control the air intake. If if is working ok I think the air valve is faulty, it is the valve on the bottom of the trottle body and has two hoses to it. Check the hoses for restriction, if ok replace the valve with a new one. If your motor dates from 1985-1987 it is almost certain to be the valve. It is possible to fit idle up circuits with Webbers but it is difficult, you must drill holes in the manifold and fit a valve controlled by the idle up A/C circuit which is s small steel box on top of the factory ECU. Bruce xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: Brett Fraser , From: Tony York Subject: Re: (22r) A/C at idle ? Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 09:25:00 PST At 10:06 PM 2/6/96 -0600, you wrote: >Just seeing someone post about an A/C problem reminded me of one >of my own. When my engine is warm and the A/C is on, the engine >rev's up and down, up and down, someone mentioned before if the >compressor was cutting on and off, I've tried to tell, but with >the engine revving up and down, I can't hear anything ... Hmm .. its a shame thats only happening with the AC on as thats exactly what is happening with a friends NA 87 MR2 .. mainly noticed it at warm although it may happen at cold .. the revs will typically bounce in a methodical pulse between 1000-1250 or 1500 or so .. and sometimes they'll bounce downwards from 1500-1000 so .. its really erie (sp?) (damnit that word really doesnt look right..) .. Any ideas anyone?.. We just replaced the fuel filter (didnt look like it hadb been done in the 190,000km the car has on it ) for a heavy stuttering .. seems to have cleared that up a fair bit .. but the rev prob persists. Brett ============================== Hi Brett, I had problems with my Corolla GT Twin Cam ((GT-S)4A-GE) idling/ revving up and down. I later discovered that it was all due to air in the cooling system. Bleeding the system cured the problem. It was revving between 900rpm and 2000rpm.The temperature sensor was sensing the difference in temperature and adjusting the idle speed accordingly. Could be air !? Tony York Radstone Technology Plc Water Lane Towcester Northants England NN12 6JN Tel: 01327 359444 Ext:2389 Fax: 01327 358113 Email: york@radstone.co.uk xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 09:39:00 -0800 (PST) From: "Zublin, Bryan (SD-MS)" Subject: Re: Jacobs Energy Pak To: "toyota-mods@cyberauto.com" >eliminate the use of the 7to8mm adapters. They attributed the no starting >problem to the cold increasing resistance in the power wire to the OmniPak. >They suggested I put in a 30A relay that would allow the full 12V to go to >the pak. They also suggested that I replace the Bosch Platinum Plugs with This sounds like bullsh*t. The resistance of copper wire (and probably most other metals as well) will *decrease* with decreasing temperature. Bryan Zublin bzublin@gi.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: aly abulkheir Subject: These Ignition Amps To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 13:25:13 -0500 (EST) Hello Toyota owners, Well, this discussion of Jacobs Ignition systems being troublesome is interesting. I have never owned an upgraded ignition system, but I have been planning to put one in this summer. So the bottom line is: What do the majority of people on this list believe to be the best ignition amp to go with? I suppose the top choices would now be the MSD, Accel, or Crane. I see that the MSD has a good reliability record. And that good things have been said about the other two. Anyone consider one to stand out as the most reliable and best performing one out of these three? This info would be very helpful in making my decision. Thanks, Aly, '85 MR2 abulkh34@matrix.newpaltz.edu xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bwiencek@kcnet.com Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 14:20:50 -0600 Subject: 20R head on 22R To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Hello, I have another question, this time it's about putting a 20R head on a 22R engine. (better flow, more compression, etc.) Are there any mods that need to be done to the head? and also, will my Downey cam work with the 20R head, or will I have to replace that also? Thanks, Brian xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: John Red-Horse Subject: Re: 20R head on 22R To: bwiencek@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 15:38:57 -0500 (EST) Cc: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com bwiencek@kcnet.com wrote: > > Hello, > > I have another question, this time it's about putting a 20R head on a > 22R engine. (better flow, more compression, etc.) Are there any mods that need > to be done to the head? and also, will my Downey cam work with the 20R head, or > will I have to replace that also? > This subject comes up from time to time and I think that it's probably a good idea to remind people that this switch is not possible for 85 1/2 and later 22r's. cheers, john xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 15:51:09 -0500 To: Toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: stuart.banks@gsfc.nasa.gov (Stuart Banks) Subject: Impression of the Offy Howdy, Since I put the 32/36 DGAV in at the same time as the Offy it's hard for me to give a fair impression of the Offy. However after I purchased the Offy I started to hear a lot of unfavorable things about it (poor flow) so I'm planning on swapping in the original manifold (with the holes in the plenum machined out) and using Downeys velocity stack adapter. Once this is done I will let you know what I think. If anyone else has experience with this manifold I'd like to know what you think. Also I would like to get some feedback on going to a 38 DGES I am sure that the 32/36 is small for this engine at the mid. and top end but I'm worried about the 38s affect on the low end especially when starting in deep mud with 31X10.5 BFG MT and the stock 4.11:1 R&P. any thoughts? Thanks much Stuart >Way cool ... Two guys with 4x4's joined the list in the same week ! > >How do you like that Intake, Stuart ?? > >At 10:35 AM 2/7/96 -0500, you wrote: >>Name : Stuart Banks >>Location : (Washington, DC /USA ) >>Model : (1984 4runner SR5) >>Engine : (22R) prior to 7/84 >>Mods : (Weber 32/36 DGAV carburetor >> Offenhauser Dual Port intake manifold >> 1 mm oversized intake and exhaust valves >> Mallory Unilight distributor >> L.C. Street Performer cam >> Dual roller timing chain >> 93 mm pistons >> Tri-Y headers >> 2.25" exhaust w/ Dynomax Super Turbo muffler >> >> NWOR 2" lift >> Braided stainless brake lines >> RS 9000 shocks >> LA Locker in the rear >> 31X10.5 BFG MT) ****************************** * stuart.banks@gsfc.nasa.gov * * Stuart Banks * * NASA GSFC Code 713 * * Greenbelt, MD 20771 * * (301)286-5934 * ****************************** xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: toy4x4@ro.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 15:08:05 -0600 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: 20R head on 22R > > I have another question, this time it's about putting a 20R head on a >22R engine. (better flow, more compression, etc.) Are there any mods that need >to be done to the head? and also, will my Downey cam work with the 20R head, or >will I have to replace that also? The Dec. or Jan Issue of FOURWHEELER went all out with a 20R head, I posted to this list what all they did to the head, maybe some kind soul who saved it will send it to you ?? To the list for that matter ... In this months issue(March 96) they put the engine all back together, they claim ~30% gains, they measured rear wheel horsepower on their 84 22R at 65hp before the swap , after the 20R intake/head and 32/36 weber, they measured 85 horsepower at the rear wheels ... - jack alford ==> toy4x4@ro.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: toy4x4@ro.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 15:56:15 -0600 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: 20R head on 22R > >This subject comes up from time to time and I think that it's probably a >good idea to remind people that this switch is not possible for 85 1/2 >and later 22r's. Why is not possible ?? I happen to know of one 22RE with a 20R head on it ... - jack xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 10:17:30 +1100 (EST) From: Justin Simpson To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: RA 23 wheels Chris, what size rim did those 185's come out on for the RA 23, and while on the subject of wheels can anyone tell me where a vehicles track is measured from. Is it from the outside of the rim, the centre of the rim or maybe the face of the hub. I'm fairly sure it's the first but i want to make sure before i get an engineers for my 8" wheels. Thanks ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~ Justen Simpson simpson@lake.canberra.edu.au CRC for Freshwater Ecology, Uni of Canberra, Australia ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Matti Kalalahti Subject: Re: RA 23 wheels To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com (Toyota-Mods mailing list) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 02:09:30 +0200 (EET) > Chris, what size rim did those 185's come out on for the RA 23, and while > on the subject of wheels can anyone tell me where a vehicles track is > measured from. Is it from the outside of the rim, the centre of the rim > or maybe the face of the hub. I'm fairly sure it's the first but i want > to make sure before i get an engineers for my 8" wheels. From the middle of the tyre or rim. -- Matti Kalalahti | Toyota Carina Coupe GT-T TwinCam Turbo '82 k124476@ee.tut.fi | RWD * IRS * LSD * 3T-GTEU * 195+-10hp@4200-6700rpm A Huge Evergrowing WWW Home Page * http://proffa.cc.tut.fi/~k124476/ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 17:22:31 -0700 From: Steve Alexander To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: Which handles best? kca@interserv.com wrote: > > On Wed, 07 Feb 1996, n.briggs@student.canterbury.ac.nz (Neil Briggs) wrote: > >Does anyone have any opinions which should handle best out of say, a > >sedan/coupe design or a shorter more compact hatchback. An example of this > >might be between the corolla GTS coupe and the FX-16 hatch, or any two cars > >with the same model chassis/engine combination. Any opinions? > You might want to consider 2 factors: Weight, and Chassis stiffness. Less weight for the same power is ALWAYS desirable. In some cars (i.e Honda CRX vs. Si model of regular 3 door Civic) people claim that the regular car is stiffer, making it handle better! xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Gary Hong To: bwiencek@cyberspace.cyberauto.com, toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com Subject: Re: 22r Timing chain & compression ratio. ?'s Date: Wed, 7 Feb 96 16:54:15 PST From: bwiencek@kcnet.com > >Hello, > > I am in the process of getting a webber setup for my 22r, and cleaning >up the head and intake. In the process I have thought of milling the head about >.020 in. (the machine shops here don't talk metric too well.) in order to raise >the compression a little, and clean it up. Any Ideas? Or should I find a set of >10:1 pistons to put in for $400+ a set (If they were around $200 that wouldn't >be an issue.) > > Also I am Replacing the timing set and have heard the late model (86-up) >has a double row chain that can be swapped in if you get the timing chain cover >from a newer motor? Are there any other parts I should look for with it? Or is >a new timing set (chain, sprockets, guide & tensioner) and the cover all I need? The early 22r's have the double row timing chain which you can swap into the later models. LC sells a kit for this. Gary xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bwiencek@kcnet.com Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 19:06:29 -0600 Subject: Re: 20R head on 22R To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com I think you are talking about the tall deck blocks that were made in 85 only. there are a lot of specific parts for the year, and in 86 they 'fixed' some of the problems with the 85 and went back to a lower deck height. - Brian On Wed, 7 Feb 1996, toy4x4@ro.com wrote: >> >>This subject comes up from time to time and I think that it's probably a >>good idea to remind people that this switch is not possible for 85 1/2 >>and later 22r's. > >Why is not possible ?? I happen to know of one 22RE with a 20R head on >it ... > > - jack xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 20:21:05 -0500 To: toyota-mods@cyberspace.cyberauto.com From: cmyer@cyberauto.com (Christopher Myer) Subject: Re: Jacobs E