Why ft-86 is interesting?

[nate89]

Originally Posted by Chemist

No, the Celica does not push 190 hp. I have the same engine (2zzge) in my car and we push around 170 hp (less to the wheels). In practice the Celica and XRS engines are very similar in peak horsepower. Rev limit is also around 8400 RPM so this engine screams.

My argument is not that it cannot attain 200 hp, it's that it will probably need either forced induction or a higher rev limit to do so. Here, I whipped up a graph for the torque/rpm requirements to produce 200 hp to give everyone an idea:

^ Makes no sense... Where did you get/make that graph?

[WingsofWar]

HP = TQxRPM / 5252

^ if this statement is true for this particular engine, then giving a very reasonable RPM limit of 7500 it will ONLY take 140lb of TQ to generate 200 peak HP.

Given the nature of the flat 4 which doesn't have a problem generating torque, by increasing compression ratio to 9:1 or even 10:1 for a higher peak RPM limit, we could see a larger HP number than the given 200 across the powerband.

in addition to speculated items such as;
D4-S Sequential Direct injection, Yamaha/Toyota Heads, Balanced Performance Crank, some form of VVT, Sophisticated ECU mapping.

200hp is conservative for a engine built of that caliber.

-------------
Contrast w/ EJ204 with Subaru VVT (AVCS) found in todays Legacy BP chassy

Pumping out 190hp on that 2.0 flat-4 N/A was not a difficult feat for subaru.

[70NYD]

so what your saying is that this engine wont produce lets say 175 @ 6000 or 150 @7000 ? r u serious?
what makes you say that?? what makes you say any of those targets are unacheivable?
and btw if this engine produces 200 ft-lb of torques at 5252 rpm then it will produce a hell of a lot more hp than 200 at 6000 or 7000 or more, its not like its just gonna suddenly run out of puff at 5000 rpm lol
your graph, while very nice and summative of what torque is required at what rpm to give 200 hp at that rpm, in theory, but what does it explain in relationship to this or any car? torque flutters with rpm.. torque drops with revs, but hp increases since the multiplier.. so what point were you trying to get across? that its not possible to have peak torque at lets say 5000 rpm of 175 (hypotheticaly speaking) which drops to 162 by 6500rpm giving you 200hp?

[Snaps]

^It's a graph of how much torque is required at a certain rpm to achieve 200hp

Meaning, for example, if the engine made around 180ft/lbs of torque (on average, or roughly around that), then the rev limiter would only need to be at 5500rpm for Toyota to achieve their goal of 200hp (which would occur AT 5500rpm if the engine made peak torque at 5500rpm). This doesn't meant they couldn't end up with a higher hp by increasing the rev limiter, it's just showing the MINIMUM amount of torque required at a certain rpm to achieve 200hp.

[WingsofWar]

Originally Posted by 70NYD

so what your saying is that this engine wont produce lets say 175 @ 6000 or 150 @7000 ? r u serious?
what makes you say that?? what makes you say any of those targets are unacheivable?
and btw if this engine produces 200 ft-lb of torques at 5252 rpm then it will produce a hell of a lot more hp than 200 at 6000 or 7000 or more, its not like its just gonna suddenly run out of puff at 5000 rpm lol
your graph, while very nice and summative of what torque is required at what rpm to give 200 hp at that rpm, in theory, but what does it explain in relationship to this or any car? torque flutters with rpm.. torque drops with revs, but hp increases since the multiplier.. so what point were you trying to get across? that its not possible to have peak torque at lets say 5000 rpm of 175 (hypotheticaly speaking) which drops to 162 by 6500rpm giving you 200hp?

I think the relationship he was talking about was that no run of the old mill 2.0l flat4 n/a will pump out that much TQ or that much power without some help. Which i agree whole hardily, but to jump out and claim that the prospective engine WILL NOT attain 200hp is bogus. With so many technical advancements involved in the production of this car, its safe to say that this is no run of the old mill engine.

Chemists is very ignorant at the advancement of Sequential Direct Injection (D4-S), meaning 2 injectors per cylinder, meaning 8 injectors, meaning more fuel can be provided at a much efficient, much higher rate, and be delivered and burned cooler. If you know anything about fuel tuning, this is what most stand alone ECUs hope to achieve with larger injectors or the addition of patch secondaries. Chemists has no faith in Toyota or Subaru in providing a quality made engine in a very able sports chassy.

^^Refer to my previous post ^^

[70NYD]

No I get what the graph is but no car has a decaying torque curve like that so i dont get what he was trying ti accomplis. I understand the relationship between torque and power, i learnt about it quite some time ago in my 1st year (im a mechanical and automotive engineer btw) and 6000 rpm is by far not free revving.. My 323 (Same engine as a miata 1.8) redlined at 6500 and goes good till 8000.. STOCK so I don't get why 200bhp would be hard to achive with new technology on this proposed engine. Afterall this isn't the ej20.. It's a NEW engine, with NEW heads with NEW technology in relations to current boxer
160 @ 6500 shouldn't be a problem realistically speaking..

[WingsofWar]

Originally Posted by 70NYD

No I get what the graph is but no car has a decaying torque curve like that so i dont get what he was trying ti accomplis. I understand the relationship between torque and power, i learnt about it quite some time ago in my 1st year (im a mechanical and automotive engineer btw) and 6000 rpm is by far not free revving.. My 323 (Same engine as a miata 1.8) redlined at 6500 and goes good till 8000.. STOCK so I don't get why 200bhp would be hard to achive with new technology on this proposed engine. Afterall this isn't the ej20.. It's a NEW engine, with NEW heads with NEW technology in relations to current boxer
160 @ 6500 shouldn't be a problem realistically speaking..

..decaying TQ curve? ...the curve i see on that graph (the line Drawn) is Rotational Horsepower. The Entire Line drawn is 200 peak hp across the RPM range.

[70NYD]

Again, i understand.. If you read what i said i was reffering to values from the chart, like the 160 at 6500
I was typing this on the phone and fucked it up slightly.. I meant the torque curve doesn't decay, it stays fairly flat in a na application but yeah my bad

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Chemist

No, the Celica does not push 190 hp. I have the same engine (2zzge) in my car and we push around 170 hp (less to the wheels). In practice the Celica and XRS engines are very similar in peak horsepower. Rev limit is also around 8400 RPM so this engine screams.

My argument is not that it cannot attain 200 hp, it's that it will probably need either forced induction or a higher rev limit to do so. Here, I whipped up a graph for the torque/rpm requirements to produce 200 hp to give everyone an idea:

In Lotus tune, the 2ZZ makes 190hp. In TRD sport M trim, 210 and in TRD sports pro trim 230.

You don't even have to look that far though, as the 2.0 3S Beams engine made 207hp @ 7600 RPM. 7600 RPM IMO is not "high".

Also, as Wings of war already mentioned the EJ204 already has pushed 190hp, and IIRC, that is *without* Direct injection.

Man, the way some of you talk you would think that 200hp needs a 12.5:1 compression ratio, 9000rpm, 4.0L engine.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Snaps

^It's a graph of how much torque is required at a certain rpm to achieve 200hp

Meaning, for example, if the engine made around 180ft/lbs of torque (on average, or roughly around that), then the rev limiter would only need to be at 5500rpm for Toyota to achieve their goal of 200hp (which would occur AT 5500rpm if the engine made peak torque at 5500rpm). This doesn't meant they couldn't end up with a higher hp by increasing the rev limiter, it's just showing the MINIMUM amount of torque required at a certain rpm to achieve 200hp.

The graph is totally theoretical. To many variables, such as compression ratio, rod/stroke ratio, fuel injection type and combustion efficiency com into play.

It's also ass backwards, because hp depends on Torque, not the other way around.

[70NYD]

like and like
what car has the 4L 12.5:1 9000RPM engine? sounds exotic :p

[Midship Runabout]

Originally Posted by 70NYD

its not like its just gonna suddenly run out of puff at 5000 rpm lol

Reminds me of a 5SFE

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

Man, the way some of you talk you would think that 200hp needs a 12.5:1 compression ratio, 9000rpm, engine.

I call that, "The Naturally Aspirated B16 Theory".

[Chemist]

Woah people, I see a lot of misinterpretation and misunderstanding here.

1. I'm not saying this engine can't attain 200 hp, I was simply blasting the persistent rumor that it's expected to arrive with 200 hp, a number that has never to my knowledge been released by Toyota.

2. The graph is sound: It only pertains to a value of 200 hp- it simply shows what combination of torque and rotational speed are required to produce such power.

3. The 1.8L 2zzge engine (my favorite comparison, since it too was a high-output Yamaha/Toyota engine of similar displacement) with bolt-ons and properly tuned has been shown to produce upwards of 200 wheel horsepower (check out 9thgencorolla.com). With high-comp pistons and other fun items the hp jumps even higher. The problem with all this is that FT-86 was tasked with being affordable, which usually means car makers don't maximize the engine power. Heck, I even remember reports (rumors?) of Toyota having "environmental" plans for this engine, which I remember was interpreted as lowering the output of the engine.

4. You also need to take into account that an engine's peak hp is not usually at the redline which seems to be an assumption some of you are making. A engine with 140 ft-lb @ 7500 RPM will probably have a redline around 8k+. That puts it somewhat into the higher revving category which would require additional engineering. Of course, as we all hope, the direct injection feature of this engine should increase torque enough that it makes 200 hp without resorting to high-RPM engineering (or in my dreams a high torque/high revving Boxer monster).

A lot of my arguments arose from earlier times in other discussion threads- mainly that the FT-86 would attain peak hp at somewhere less than 7k RPM (AKA armchair discussions). For instance, say someone announced that they suspected the engine would make peak HP at 6500 RPM but that is still would make 200 hp. Looking at the graph that means it will have to produce a minimum of 162 ft-lbs of torque. That seems pretty high for a 2.0L N.A. mass-produced engine even with "cutting edge technology".


I guess it all winds down to this: Can this engine make 200 hp? Of course. Can it do it without revving over, say, 6.5k RPM? That's a little less clear. Will it arrive on the market with 200 hp? Who knows, Toyota hasn't told us yet. Do I want it to make 200 hp? Hell yes.

No hard feelings among anyone here.

[Snaps]

70NYD, the graphs IS IN NO WAY a dyno graph of an engine, it DOES NOT show the torque curve of an engine.

What the line represents is how much torque is required at a specified rpm to achieve 200hp. As the rpm increases, you need less torque to achieve 200hp - or on the other hand, as torque increases you need less rpm to achieve 200hp.

Chemist, I agree with the majority of your points, except the last one. I think 6500rpm is a very low rev limit for a 2.0L 4 cylinder. For example, the 4AGE in the Toyota Trueno/Levin revs to ~8000rpm, and that's beggining to be an old engine, I'm sure they could push this one to at least 7500rpm, which would require quite a low torque to achieve 200hp. This is why I think this engine will be over 200hp and will be dissappointed if it's anything under 200.