Why doesnt Toyota make its own motor for the FT-86??

[246bees]

Better have at least 210 - 220 hp and 180 lb torque or it's a pass for me. I know the good, smart people building this car know this, but let it be said - you cannot create a sex-on-wheels machine like this and give a "needs Viagra" engine. I will be sorely disappointed if a base Civic coupe (or -gasp- worse the new Kia "Koup") beats this car off the line.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by Chemist

So, the question becomes: What is the REV limit going to be placed at? Additionally, has there been any talk about using variable valve lift technology (similar to the 2zzge)?

Now days boxer engine has I-Active (VVT intake side). Just old ones don't

[Motoki]

Two reasons: it's more different than what he already has; it makes more torque while maintaining its high revving nature. Just my opinion. The f22 is still an amazing motor and I would love to have it in my ft or any other small car

Interesting... some people wanna put a Honda engine in a Toyota... Have you heard of KTech tuned Honda engines like F20C and K20A? They can rev all the way up to 14000rpm! It is one of the best Honda engines around, if someone could drop this into the Hachiroku would be awesome!

http://www.maroon.dti.ne.jp/k-tech/complete.html

More info in Japanese:

(starting from the 2nd half of the video)

(continue)

[Matador]

Happy with 220hp/180ft-lbs. Will accept anything over 200hp/165ft-lbs.

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

Happy with 220hp/180ft-lbs. Will accept anything over 200hp/165ft-lbs.

I'll accept anything lightweight, RWD, no a roadster, good handling characteristics.....oh, yeah the hp thing

180 would make me very happy.

[White Comet]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

I'll accept anything lightweight, RWD, no a roadster, good handling characteristics.....oh, yeah the hp thing

180 would make me very happy.

[Chemist]

246bees, MatadorRacing_F1, how can you expect that kind of torque output from a 2.0L engine without using forced induction?


Torque, at most, will probably be around 160 ft-lbs. With your standard 7,000 RPM redline that at most amounts to ~213 hp.

However, estimates (rumors) have suggested 200 hp which, when combined with a standard 7,000 RPM redline, should give a solid 150 ft-lbs of torque.

[jay4prez]

Originally Posted by Chemist

246bees, MatadorRacing_F1, how can you expect that kind of torque output from a 2.0L engine without using forced induction?


Torque, at most, will probably be around 160 ft-lbs. With your standard 7,000 RPM redline that at most amounts to ~213 hp.

However, estimates (rumors) have suggested 200 hp which, when combined with a standard 7,000 RPM redline, should give a solid 150 ft-lbs of torque.

I just wanna know 200hp at what rev? range? anyone have any specs of where the current boxer makes most of its power? peak power? n/a model of course

EDIT:

Looked up some specs for the JDM EJ20, 190hp@7200RPM? seems kinda high? near the rev limit i suppose? also read that the redline is approx 8k, Well all in all, that only equates out to be about 140lbft.


Found some more interesting info,

so lets say it would be 200hp at 5600 rpm, that would work out to be about 187lbft, way over the estimate, but then lets say we have 150tq at 5600rpm that would net us approx 160hp seemingly more reasonable.

I'm just going off a bit of math here trying to make sense of things.

If anyone has benchmarks on the 2.0 n/a engine, and or like info of similar 2 liter n/a boxers we can work out some numbers.

[NESW20]

with the direct injection they should be able to increase compression ratio, giving more torque throughout the rev range. i'm going to use the K20Z3 found in the new Civic Si for comparison's sake. it has a CR of 11.0:1.

the K20 has a max HP of 197 @ 7800rpm. torque peak is 139ft.lbs @ 6100. torque at 7800 is --> 197*5252/7800 = 132.6ft.lbs

now let's go to a slightly higher CR (maybe 11.3 or 11.5:1, allowed by DI), and hope for a torque peak of 150ft.lbs. the K20 dropped 5% torque at its HP peak. if we drop 5% of 150, we're left with 142.5ft.lbs. using the same peak HP RPM, we get 142.5 * 7800 / 5252 = 211hp.

i will happily take 210hp, 150ft.lbs, and an 8000rpm redline. honestly, if the engine behaves similarly to the K20Z3, i will be very happy. i've driven a couple new Si's (stock) and enjoyed them thoroughly.

-Mike

[ddoouugg]

Mike I think you are the closest to a good estimate here. For this motor to make over 200 hp the rev limiter would have to be about 8000 with peak power occurring in the high 7k's. This requires a very good flowing head with great vvt technology. I don't believe Subaru or Toyota has any heads this good at the moment, but I may be wrong. For an output of well over 200 hp (~230 hp) it will need a redline in the high 8k's. The key is the head and the vvt. I haven't seen anything even close to Honda's Vtec in this price segment. Hopefully Toyota/Subaru are working on something entirely new to make this output possible.

[jay4prez]

Originally Posted by ddoouugg

Mike I think you are the closest to a good estimate here. For this motor to make over 200 hp the rev limiter would have to be about 8000 with peak power occurring in the high 7k's. This requires a very good flowing head with great vvt technology. I don't believe Subaru or Toyota has any heads this good at the moment, but I may be wrong. For an output of well over 200 hp (~230 hp) it will need a redline in the high 8k's. The key is the head and the vvt. I haven't seen anything even close to Honda's Vtec in this price segment. Hopefully Toyota/Subaru are working on something entirely new to make this output possible.

so what would they call that, avcs-i or fo shits and giggles VAVCSL-I? for Variable Active Valve Control System with Lift (dont know where the I fits now, it could go before :P)

I agree with your statement though, but generally, peak tq happens well before peak hp in most cases, so lets say for arguements sake that max tq happened at 6800rpm, that would give us a hp of 195 give or take, given that, it would mean that the power band of this car would be in the mid/high rpms and generally would last til about the redline.

The more I think about it, the more I want this car, not that I didnt already but I just want to hear that engine screaming out at those revs while in its powerband

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by jay4prez

If anyone has benchmarks on the 2.0 n/a engine, and or like info of similar 2 liter n/a boxers we can work out some numbers.

Hm... sad that I have .5 liter extra boxer engine, so can't help you out on that...

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Chemist

246bees, MatadorRacing_F1, how can you expect that kind of torque output from a 2.0L engine without using forced induction?


Torque, at most, will probably be around 160 ft-lbs. With your standard 7,000 RPM redline that at most amounts to ~213 hp.

However, estimates (rumors) have suggested 200 hp which, when combined with a standard 7,000 RPM redline, should give a solid 150 ft-lbs of torque.

Peak hp rarely comes at the same place as peak tq.

Really, I'm not expecting 180 ft-lbs, that'd be setting myself up for disappointment, as 180ft-lbs from a 2.0 engine that isn't NA or a diesel is pretty hard. I did say what would make me happy didn't I?

I do however expect at least 165ft-lbs, ~140-150 being the market standard and ++the compression ration w/ direct injection ought to net a pretty decent torque improvement.

[NESW20]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

Peak hp rarely comes at the same place as peak tq.

Really, I'm not expecting 180 ft-lbs, that'd be setting myself up for disappointment, as 180ft-lbs from a 2.0 engine that isn't FI or a diesel is pretty hard. I did say what would make me happy didn't I?

I do however expect at least 165ft-lbs, ~140-150 being the market standard and ++the compression ration w/ direct injection ought to net a pretty decent torque improvement.

i know what you meant, just wanted to clarify that for everyone else.

for a very conservative estimate, i ran some numbers using Ford's Duratec 2.0L they use in their new Focus as a base.

if we say 145ft.lbs @ 5500rpm and a 10% torque loss @ peak HP at 7000rpm, we get 174hp. like i said, a conservative estimate. i'm just going off of other 2.0L na engines, using some basic math, and applying a little bit of logic. i really think my K20 analysis will be closer to FT86 numbers.

here are some more:
corolla 1.8L: i used a linear torque multiplication going from 1.8L to 2.0L, which gives a peak of 142ft.lbs. 10% drop at HP peak gives 170HP @ 7000rpm. again, i think we can assume numbers will be higher due to the (hopefully) increased compression and direct injection. really, it's looking more and more to me like 150ft.lbs and 200hp is pretty reasonable.

subaru 2.5L: i was kind of surprised by this one. noted a 12% torque dropoff at peak HP rpms. anyway, dropping from the 2.5L back to a 2.0L gave 136ft.lbs and using the 12% drop, 160hp @ 7000 rpm. let's keep in mind that the 99-00 Civic Si had less torque and the same HP, similar weight (we hope) and FWD, yet it's still a fun car to drive.

one very important thing to keep in mind is what kind of fuel is being used. the K20 requires premium, while the Ford, Toyota, and Subaru engines i used all run on 87 octane. i will happily pay for premium if the performance lines up with the K20 as opposed to the others.

-Mike