Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan
I hardly think that comparing these two engines defines how much power a cylinder can hold with 7 2-bolt mains vs. 5 6-bolt mains.
|
I've personally seen over 1500HP on a 2JZ... Leaving out the drivetrain loss, that's 250HP/cylinder and as the car was a 3.4 stroker, ~441HP/liter
You implied the 2JZ was in essence "crap" when it's been beating down supercars for years..
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan
Love the logic here:
Engine you like has 7 main bearings. Engine you don't like has 5. Therefore 7 mains is inherently "better" than 5.
Engine you like has 2 bolt mains. Engine you don't like has 6-bolt mains. Therefore 2 bolts per main is inherently "better" than 6.
I guess that the 2JZ would be even moar betterer with 12 main bearings with 1 bolt each!
OBVIOUSLY a V8 has 5 main bearings because having a bearing between each rod would make the engine a lot longer and heavier without giving any real benefit. Which is why you don't find any V8s with 9 main bearings. It would be stupid. How many F1 v8 engines had 5 main bearings I wonder? My bet: All of them.
It is perfectly absurd to say that an I6 having the logical number of 7 main bearings is "better" than a V8 having the only LOGICAL number of main bearings: 5.
Regarding number of main cap bolts, I don't see why having 2 or 4 or 6 is a big deal. The main caps are designed to hold the crank stable over a range of rpm and power levels with some margin. However they achieve that is fine with me. Of course a V8 crank will see large loads in the planes of the cylinders, which are at +/-45 degrees, whereas an inline engine has primarily vertical forces. Different engine architecture, different main cap solutions.
See above. Obviously, adding unnecessary length and weight to a V8 is dumb, which is why no one ever does it.
|
A lot of useless nonsense as I've never said I didn't like the LS motors (I do, I just wish GM knew how to put them into a car that was affordable that wasn't shit). V8's, just like V6's are done for packaging reasons and from a design standpoint are inherently weaker than the 3 perfectly balanced motors: I6, V12, and Boxer. This isn't a debate about what I like, it's clear and simple engine design
fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan
For me, "like a diesel" doesn't necessarily imply suitability in a sports car. I want reliable power in as small and lightweight a package as possible. Inline 6s are cool and I love them, but they are not necessarily ideal for small/lightweight sports cars, though PLENTY of great sports cars have been *built around* I6 engines. IMO far from ideal for a swap into a car built around a very short H-4 engine.
|
Yep, if you want to run an engine that long, the car should be built around it. Personally I wouldn't do either engine swap because 1) the FA20 is still young and being worked out leading me to believe by the time I want to heavily increase the power, it will all be worked out 2) if I want a 2JZ, I'll get a Supra 3) if I want an LS motor, I'll buy a vette
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan
The 2JZ is much longer and heavier (ensuring inferior F/R weight distribution for a swap in an 86) and has a higher c.g. than an LS engine, with no advantage in terms of power potential.
|
The 2JZ is narrow allowing it to be mounted farther back and still clear the steering linkage, unlike the FA20, LS, etc... Yes it's heavy, but the iron block is why it's so stout so it's a trade off. Depends on your goals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan
Personally, I don't think the 86 is a good candidate for either swap due to F/R weight distribution issues, but for sure the LS would be, *for ME*, a more logical candidate.
For others, maybe not. Which is fine. But don't pretend the 2JZ is "better", it's just another set of different compromises.
|
So we agree

I'm still waiting for someone to toss a Porsche motor in one of these cars to piss off the Porsche purists...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper
How does it sit further foreward? The fa20 is quite far away from the firewall as is. Go look at the other swap threads. @ C130NAV or @ Cross should have all the data.
|
It's mounted as far back as it can be without fouling on the steering linkage.