FRS FA20 turbo vs FRS lsx/2jz

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Car has better weight distribution with an ls than it does with an fa20. Already been proven.

Link? I am highly dubious that a heavier engine that sits further forward will move weight aft... LS swap into the FD moves weight about 1-1.5% forward.

[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.

[Reaper]

Fd is rotary l. No shit.

[Cross]

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.

Mine is a little less informative probably for the same reason @AZFA20 has said some but not a ton.

For me I have a machinist making the swap kit and he will then be willing to sell the pieces needed at a much lower cost mainly because of my notice that a full RX7 FD Swap is around 3000-4000 and they want 8000 for theirs and it's considerably less included. But this is besides the point.

As for weight we have compared this, both @AZFA20 and myself have done the Forced Induction FA20 route although I only did the Prototype STS kit (Turbo) no Supercharger although I almost did.

The car as an FA20 boosted is just not reliable to me now. I had an excellent tuner (@Moto-Mike) was on E85, had it setup to be more safe than fast and I ran into an issue that even @AZFA20 is watching and we have more than 280 documented cases of here on the forums. There has even been a TSB on it since 2012.
The fact that with 17k and every safety in place along with me not going for max power I am disappointed that my FA20 bent the valves and obviously went down.
Even built @nelsmar ended up having issues although I don't know the complete extent and I hope with all the work he put in it turned out to not be serious.
However it was clear the reliability of a built FA20 was not guaranteed. Some can do great, some just don't take it.

The reliability of a 2JZ is so well known you would have to be an idiot not to know. However given the Straight 6 setup, I was more concerned with how it would effect weight and because it seems to normally be an Iron bottom end. Plus I am also not a purist. I like the car who cares if something is different. Half of what we put on them is different so these arguments have always been nothing more than pointless bickering because someone doesn't like it and wants to argue about it.

The reliability of the LS Platform is just as well known and frankly it is one of the most popular engines to swap into any vehicle. It is also a common swap that raises the value of the vehicle's it's done on. (Although the one I saw for sale last was ridiculously priced)
The LS has a bigger aftermarket than the 2JZ, is easy to get parts for from a junk yard to the dealer and many times you can pull a used one apart and it will be in excellent condition even with less than stellar maintenance.
I do have a ton of experience with these, My Vette's and Prior F-Bodies make this clear. My current one is a 408 Stroker (Vette) and the motor for the FRS is currently a modified LS1 but I am currently picking up a 383 Stroker for it instead so long as the seller (A good friend) does not decide to keep it. The options NA with these are more plentiful than FI kits for the FA20 currently.

Then there is the Twin Turbo LS Swapped FRS/BRZ (I can't remember which it was) so the turbo options as well as supercharged for this motor just make even more power available. Tuning them it much easier and much more user friendly as is the ability to secure parts for much better prices.

Frankly there is no argument in any of those area's that supports the LS or 2J being unreliable, ineffective or more costly. Nor that a built FA20 will be more reliable, it's always going to be hit or miss and the minute you add boost to a motor built or not it's life expectancy decreases.

As for the cost to do the swap, I hate to tell you but the thoughts of this costing 15-20k are only if you are not able to do it yourself and buy things well above the value you need to.

As an example right now with my current modified LS1 and Stage 2 T56 I am at less than 4300 for all of it including harness, pcm, spec clutch, tick clutch master, clutch slave with speed bleeder (Brand New) and so much more. I could have gone even cheaper but I like to buy things that will really last. The 383 should add 1000 to that price tag if the deal goes through as it appears to be.

If I hit 10k I would be annoyed. I bet 7k will be my area upon completion because at this point the rest is all handled because I know or can do it myself. My time is only worth something to me so trying to include it is frankly impossible because then you have to include my time on the Prototype turbo kit and everything else I have done.
My goal from here forward will be to provide people with a much cheaper option and a write up of what they need to know and how to do it. I will not become a vendor, I will not be doing the swap for others mainly because I am getting older and want more time to do other things. But I do want to share it with the community to help everyone who might want to do this.


I have gotten a little more in depth on things than needed but well my mind is distracted as we lost a puppy tonight so I apologize for being a little long winded on this.

At the end of the day the car will change somewhat in handling but extremely or to the point it's just the look of an FRS on something else is completely inaccurate and wrong. Yes somethings will change but no it's not suddenly going to change to a Corvette body or F-Body design just because you change the K-Member, motor and trans.

As for the Diff taking it, talking to WGP it seems this diff is not quite weak but there is already an 8.8 upgrade.
The axles is an unknown but at this point I am going to see what happens as are those already running them. There are options but I will choose the one that will best suit long term reliability. (Which is why the intention is to stay NA with the swap only adding nitrous possibly if I really need it)

As for the body, I have not seen a lot of concern over it taking it but I will again be going beyond and adding some bracing to ensure things are what I feel is perfect. Why because I like to over do things in the name of doing it right. Needed or not I don't want to revisit this later.

At the end of the day I wanted to keep my FRS and be able to trust it. FI I do not feel I could trust it, built or not. I felt I could trust it NA but I want 300+ and that's not happening NA on a FA20.
Do I need 500? No I have more than that in my Corvette, but it is a ton of fun. Personally I think 380-440 in the FRS is going to be more than enough for me. But then as you get used to things you do start thinking about wanting more. That's how modding goes.

Should I buy a different car to get what I want? Obviously since I own a Corvette that's built and my wife has a built Camaro SS I not only know this will not satisfy me but I know how they all feel.
The FRS to me is a car I have been looking for for a very long time. I love all the car's i have had over the years and the ones I have now but it has been a long time since I enjoyed a car the way I do the FRS. So for me I choose to do this swap and keep the car I want.
My Vette has it's purpose, the Camaro has it's purpose and neither of those satisfy the point of having the FRS. They can all do the things an FRS does, some better than others but they would not replace the FRS for me.

I think I have touched on most everything, but it was a long thread with talk about main's and other irrelevant banter that was not useful in proving anything one way or the other.

If you do not like the swap I doubt anyone dislikes you for it. If you like it that's great to. However telling other's they shouldn't, that it's stupid or making up opinions and trying to claim they are fact without actual proof has no place in these types of conversations. It's ignorant and never helpful.

OP I hope the information given really helps you decide and I wish you luck.
@AZFA20 I look forward to seeing your's done at this point you are ahead of me clearly. It will be great to have to LS Swaps in AZ but I have to admit I am slightly jealous you will be done first

[Poodles]

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..

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.

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

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.

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...

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.

[civdaddy]

Originally Posted by Poodles

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..



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.



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



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.



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...



It's mounted as far back as it can be without fouling on the steering linkage.

Flat 4 boxers aren't perfectly balanced. I think the flat sixes are. But just because it's a boxer, it doesnt mean its balanced in the scientific ways I don't understand, that inline sixes and v12's are.

[C130NAV]

Twin turbo LS7 Brz baby thats where its at :-)

[Poodles]

Originally Posted by civdaddy

Flat 4 boxers aren't perfectly balanced. I think the flat sixes are. But just because it's a boxer, it doesnt mean its balanced in the scientific ways I don't understand, that inline sixes and v12's are.

Yeah, I've seen differing opinions on this and I'll say I just plain don't know. I know a boxer 2 cylinder sure runs better than an inline or V, but it's rarely used because of packaging again.

[Cross]

Originally Posted by Poodles

Yeah, I've seen differing opinions on this and I'll say I just plain don't know. I know a boxer 2 cylinder sure runs better than an inline or V, but it's rarely used because of packaging again.

If you really think an Iron Block is what makes it strong then it's great to know the even cheaper versions of the LS are Iron Block and come in 4.8L, 5.3L, 6.0L... see a pattern yet? They are cheaper too! You can have a 6.0L with harness, PCM etc for about 1000-1200. A 5.3L is around 800 with everything.

If you think the LS will mount further forward when comparing Flat 4 vs V8... I wonder how easy it will be to handle the Intake Manifold, Valve Cover, etc of that Straight Six if it's so much further back....

Either way this is all semantics, I don't have enough information on the 2JZ and it's swap to completely confirm what I think and frankly I don't think you have enough information on either swap to even advise Wikipedia. (Especially given your misconceptions regarding piston slap, power and reliability on the LS Series and ignorance regarding the difference between getting a stock block to take 500 reliability and owning a reliable built FA20... Oh and stock LS Block's have no problem going over 800 quite often)
http://ls1tech.com/forums/forced-ind...end-lsx-s.html

[Poodles]

Originally Posted by Cross

If you really think an Iron Block is what makes it strong then it's great to know the even cheaper versions of the LS are Iron Block and come in 4.8L, 5.3L, 6.0L... see a pattern yet? They are cheaper too! You can have a 6.0L with harness, PCM etc for about 1000-1200. A 5.3L is around 800 with everything.

Yes I'm fully aware of the truck motors, but if you're spending that much money on a swap, why would you go for the detuned versions?

Originally Posted by Cross

If you think the LS will mount further forward when comparing Flat 4 vs V8... I wonder how easy it will be to handle the Intake Manifold, Valve Cover, etc of that Straight Six if it's so much further back....

I never said the V8 would sit farther forward than the flat 4, I said vs an inline motor because it will clear the steering linkage easier as there is nothing on that side of the block really (at least on the LHD car).

Originally Posted by Cross

Either way this is all semantics, I don't have enough information on the 2JZ and it's swap to completely confirm what I think and frankly I don't think you have enough information on either swap to even advise Wikipedia. (Especially given your misconceptions regarding piston slap, power and reliability on the LS Series and ignorance regarding the difference between getting a stock block to take 500 reliability and owning a reliable built FA20... Oh and stock LS Block's have no problem going over 800 quite often)
http://ls1tech.com/forums/forced-ind...end-lsx-s.html

So one that admits he has no knowledge on the subject is saying someone else doesn't know... LS motors have their weaknesses like all over motors, sorry if I interrupted the LS motor circle jerk...

[C130NAV]

Just to add a little info for those that want to do the swap. You can go with an LS1 but it does not have an electronic TB. So in order to get around this you should use a LS2 or newer intake manifold and TB unless you want to go through the troubles of running a TB cable and link.

[Mikem53]

Originally Posted by Poodles

So one that admits he has no knowledge on the subject is saying someone else doesn't know... LS motors have their weaknesses like all over motors, sorry if I interrupted the LS motor circle jerk...

Lol... You just can't stand the fact that MORE people prefer and think the LSx is a better engine, especially for this application.. Get over it.. Toy fanboy..
Go count your bearing caps..

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Reaper

How does it sit further foreward? The fa20 is quite far away from the firewall as is.

And an LS engine is a lot longer than the stock flat-4. C.g. of the LS will indeed be further forward than the c.g. of the FA20, unless the firewall is cut out pretty extensively...

Go look at the other swap threads. @C130NAV or @Cross should have all the data.

I don't see weight numbers for a done, functioning, driving swapped car...

Originally Posted by Reaper

Fd is rotary l. No shit.

How is the FA different as far as weight and location go? Both are very short engines. I would guess that the FD's stock rotary with twin turbos weighs about the same as the FA20.

If anything, weight will move further forward swapping into an 86 than it does in the FD, because the engine placement is already so much further forward. In the FD, the V8 sits ~85% behind the front wheels. On the 86, it's gonna be about centered on the front wheels. An LS/T56 swapped into the FD puts the shifter about where it should be relative to the driver, actually a little *aft*. In at least one LS/T56 swap into an 86 (with the engine shoved back as far as possible with the stock firewall) the shifter was WAY forward of the hole in the tunnel. They had to resort to an "XL" version with the shifter moved 5.5" aft to get it to fit. That's how much further forward the FR-S/BRZ layout forces the engine in the chassis.

I'm not against the swap, but no one should be under any illusions that the weight distribution will improve without a TON of additional mods.

I think the *myth* of an LS swap moving the c.g. rearward is due to a builder claiming they could get similar results to what they get with swaps into BMW E36s. But that car is built around a very long and heavy inline 6. The LS is a *shorter* engine and about the same weight, so c.g. moves aft. The 86 is a completely different ballgame. LS is a *longer* engine, and also significantly heavier, so c.g. moves forward (unless other drastic measures are taken).
See previous conversation on the subject from this thread (see pages 10 and 11):
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...weight&page=11

From one of my posts from that thread:

Originally Posted by me

OK, found the Vorshlag build thread:
http://www.vorshlag.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8275

This is perfectly reasonable, the same thing applies to S30 Zcar swaps. Replace a fairly heavy and LONG iron-block inline 6 with a much shorter LS V8, and weight gain is minimal and weight distribution moves rearward, as the V8's center of mass is well AFT of the inline-6's.

Weight gain may be in the ballpark, but the weight *distribution* ramifications are totally different. The BMW is built around a LONG and heavy inline-6, as correctly noted. Swap in an engine that weighs about the same (maybe less) but with its c.g. several inches aft, and of course weight distribution moves aft.

But the FR-S is built around a very short H-4. Even if it's mounted a bit further forward than they could have mounted it, the much longer V8 will have its c.g. situated further forward in the car even if shoved as far back as possible. And while the LS engine is no heavier (maybe lighter) than a BMW iron-block I-6, it is certainly heavier than the FR-S' aluminum H-4. Significantly heavier engine, placed somewhat further forward:


There is no way c.g. is moving aft unless ballast is added to the rear. Hopefully it can come in at my previous guesstimation of 2800-2850 lb. and 56/54 weight distribution, but that might be optimistic.

Regardless, it looks like a fantastic build, and the car will be one BAMF and a HOOT to drive, no doubt! Looking forward to seeing it run

[Cross]

Originally Posted by Poodles

Yes I'm fully aware of the truck motors, but if you're spending that much money on a swap, why would you go for the detuned versions?

I never said the V8 would sit farther forward than the flat 4, I said vs an inline motor because it will clear the steering linkage easier as there is nothing on that side of the block really (at least on the LHD car).

So one that admits he has no knowledge on the subject is saying someone else doesn't know... LS motors have their weaknesses like all over motors, sorry if I interrupted the LS motor circle jerk...

Actually I said I do not know enough, I have tuned Supra's with aftermarket PCM's. (Yes I mean the last generation with the 2JZ) However I have not gotten seriously in depth but considering I praise the motor and all you have done is try to make assurtations that hold no fact.
Here is another quoted above about the tuning. I am sorry but it costs 100 for the credits to tune any LS Motor. So again why would anyone buy a motor to leave it stock? Since your going to be doing cam, heads, other modifications why wouldn't you tune it unless your incompetent?
How did you even think this was going to be a negative?

So carry on with crying about someone pointing out you really don't know about the engines your talking about. The difference was I admitted that while I have tuned Supra's using AEM's I have not completely built one myself so while I like the 2JZ and it's abilities are well known I will not jump into a game of semantics with someone who clearly doesn't know much about the swap topic of either motor or LS motors for that matter.

Originally Posted by ZDan

And an LS engine is a lot longer than the stock flat-4. C.g. of the LS will indeed be further forward than the c.g. of the FA20, unless the firewall is cut out pretty extensively...

I don't see weight numbers for a done, functioning, driving swapped car...


How is the FA different as far as weight and location go? Both are very short engines. I would guess that the FD's stock rotary with twin turbos weighs about the same as the FA20.

If anything, weight will move further forward swapping into an 86 than it does in the FD, because the engine placement is already so much further forward. In the FD, the V8 sits ~85% behind the front wheels. On the 86, it's gonna be about centered on the front wheels. An LS/T56 swapped into the FD puts the shifter about where it should be relative to the driver, actually a little *aft*. In at least one LS/T56 swap into an 86 (with the engine shoved back as far as possible with the stock firewall) the shifter was WAY forward of the hole in the tunnel. They had to resort to an "XL" version with the shifter moved 5.5" aft to get it to fit. That's how much further forward the FR-S/BRZ layout forces the engine in the chassis.

Oh my god here we go again with disinformation.

First the rotary has iron housings. A 13btt is 410lbs, and LS3 is 440 I believe.
Not to mention the lack of parts, reliability, housings as Mazda stopped making them and so much more but hey just keep talking about things you have no idea on.

One out of two companies so far doing the swap used the XL, where as the other does not... But hey let's quote only what we like so it supports our argument.
I too am using the F-Body T56 built, I am not using the XL. There are no problems so far but thank you for implying there will be because you read the build of another company who is not even finished yet compared to one who is and has been doing the swaps for others for some time now.

The weight of swapped FRS and BRZ's has been posted for some time your just to lazy to look so you make up posts. Even corner weights are posted.
Since you cannot do it yourself let me go find it for you.