Can the current AT / MT handling more power / torque ?
 

Do you guys think the current AT / MT handling more power / torque? Such as adding turbo or supercharge in the future

I have read the transmission is designed for ''mid torque'' applications. I dont know exactly what this means but at some point it will need upgrading.

All i know is the MT tranny is built by the same people who made the s2000 tranny, and that thing is a monster.

Aisin is Toyota's main supplier of transmissions. Some of Aisin's products are good (AZ6), and some are not so good (w55) at handling power.

The only way to figure out the power our transmission can handle is to test it.

WTF!! w55/56/58 is the most used toyota transmission in conversions in the world, they are bolted behind everything from 3sgte's to american v8's, 13b rotors they are easily the most affordable and easy to get custom cogs for, from all the road racing/targa/street tarmac racing, and track they are the most common trans out there, countless accounts of them able to handle 450hp all day long,

the AZ6 on the other hand was a pig of a trans when it came out, it could not even handle the STOCK power of the SR20det s15 (230hp), private racing owners where changing them out for the older stock 5 speed, even later revisions of the az6 in honda mazda and altezza was limited to 350hp max, limiting it to only light boost and NA applications, so i don't really see anything new in this latest az6 unless it was total reworked with stronger forks and bearing support, thus 350hp max (waiting to be proven wrong)

edit: forgot to add torque kills transmissions, the design of the even number of gears in a 5 speed is stronger then the odd number of gears in a 6 speed, (the massive internal web reinforcement of the getreg and other high performance 6 speeds make up for this weakness,

You know, TurboKits.com specializes in Turbo Kits which run at low PSI, thus being "safe" for stock engines. They offer upgrades and whatnot, but the turbos seem to do quite well at 5-8PSI.

Running at that kind of lower PSI, do you guys think it would be detrimental on a stock engine?

Idk if turbo kits for these engines will be good or not...High Compression and Forced Induction do not get along for long

it depends on how you yourself defines detrimental,
boost and high NA modifications ALWAYS adds more stress on the motor and drive train, how much more stress is OK is subjective to the goal of the use of car,


daily driving on under 8psi should be "ok" given good fuel and more frequent service/oil change say 8000km rather then the 10,000km of factory spec, (edit: oh i see you said stock internals, well at the least change pistons for lower comp ones other wise stock will not work well)
oil cooler is a must if you add turbo to prolong the life of oil and some fragile components like rubber oil seals and bearings, that is unless you live in a very cool climate,

(my mainly track..and the odd silly day dash to the supermarket)
my fully built TODA NA 20valve blacktop 9400rpm ae86 has its service at 5000km or after every track day, just because there is that much more stress on parts that a full tear down and blueprint is needed after every 40,000km of engine life

(my road race)
3sgte 17psi ae85 has all oils changed and checked ever 6000km because there is that much more heat and stress from the turbo, i dont have to pull it down because i know the motor was turbo from factory and the components where designed to handle boost, including all the aftermarket internal parts.

Not true anymore. Most turbo cars today have direct injection (Mazdaspeed 3, GTI ect.) and they all have very hight compression. It takes well to boost because of the hight fuel pressure. Hell, people thought the same thing about the F20 in the S2000's back in the day but look at them today! My buddy just made 802 whp on 31 lbs of boost on his stock block S2000 a few weeks ago and those are a little over 11:1 compression.

I think a nice big turbo would do wonders. I'm a sucker for the big turbo setups. Progressive power output, drive like stock at low rpm. The low boost and lower torque output helps save the drivetrain from a bit of stress. I think a GT35R on this motor at 6-8psi would make a bit over 300whp rather easily I think.

Hell, my 8.5:1 SR20VE made 365whp on 10psi on a 6262 turbo on a pump 91 tune that was very conservative. Certainly a little less psi and 4 points of compression bump should help with power output.

I wonder how much you could really get away with. But the large turbine would help keep temps down quite a bit. there's no other way I'd do it on the stock engine. But hey, that's just me.

Im apparently a sucker for off topic threads

a 35r is soooo inefficient at those levels... they are designed for 20+ PSI for proper flow characteristics.

Just because the GT35r's turbine is designed around higher pressure ratios doesn't mean it is inefficient.

http://www.squirrelpf.com/turbocalc/...=1&map_sel0=42

Looks like it's running right into the efficiency range here to me. Hell, I'd go with the 6262 or a 57 over the GT35r, but they aren't as reliable. Still, the engine with a bumped rev limit to 8000rpm would work awesome with a big turbo imho. But hey, I'm used to building engines for high altitude, so my graph would look more like this:

http://www.squirrelpf.com/turbocalc/...&product_id=42

Things can change quite a bit with the turbo setup, but I wouldn't call running low boost any more inefficient than running over 20psi. I run my 6262 with a .82 at 10psi and it works amazingly well.

I could be wrong about the AZ6. I don't know. I do know the IS300 community had major issues with their W55's. Some would be good for 350whp but it was generally accepted to move on to the R154 or V160 for anything over 400whp & 400ft-lbs.

One thing is clear. We won't know the weak points until we break something.