Yaris GR engine into an 86

[salty_91]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

It is a low displacement 3 cylinder, so it is high strung to get to that power/torque, which means it likely doesn’t have as much overhead for more power. Think about it.

I think I'd be fine with the output this 3 cylinder already has. Considering it's being more lightweight than a boxer the car's overall power to weight ratio would be somewhat close to that of Alpine A110, which sounds like a real deal.

And I also think it to be fairly durable since it was designed specifically for motorsport purposes:

"The 1,618 cm3 12-valve engine meets the World Rally Championship’s Rally 2 (formerly R5) regulations, following Toyota’s negotiations with the sport’s governing body to allow a three-cylinder format. Atsunori Kumagaya, who led the development project, explained: “We preferred this engine due to its light weight and compact size making it simple to install, while the lack of exhaust gas interference made it easier to obtain power.”"

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

It has a larger bore and stroke than the FA20 and longer stroke than the FA24, which is likely why the redline is lower, besides the potential extra piston/rod weight.

Not exactly. FA24 has longer stroke and bigger displacement per cylinder overall (and much bigger compression ratio). Here are the full specs:

Type 3 in line cylinders
Valve mechanism DOHC 12-valve with VVTi
Fuel system D4S - Direct & indirect injection
Supercharging Turbo
Displacement (cm3) 1.618
Bore x stroke (mm) 87.5 X 89.7
Compression ratio (:1) 10.5 : 1
Max. power (DIN hp/ kW) 261/192
Max. torque (Nm) 360
Emissions level Euro 6d Temp

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by salty_91

I think I'd be fine with the output this 3 cylinder already has. Considering it's being more lightweight than a boxer the car's overall power to weight ratio would be somewhat close to that of Alpine A110, which sounds like a real deal.

And I also think it to be fairly durable since it was designed specifically for motorsport purposes:

"The 1,618 cm3 12-valve engine meets the World Rally Championship’s Rally 2 (formerly R5) regulations, following Toyota’s negotiations with the sport’s governing body to allow a three-cylinder format. Atsunori Kumagaya, who led the development project, explained: “We preferred this engine due to its light weight and compact size making it simple to install, while the lack of exhaust gas interference made it easier to obtain power.”"



Not exactly. FA24 has longer stroke and displacement per cylinder overall (and much bigger compression ratio). Here are the full specs:

Type 3 in line cylinders
Valve mechanism DOHC 12-valve with VVTi
Fuel system D4S - Direct & indirect injection
Supercharging Turbo
Displacement (cm3) 1.618
Bore x stroke (mm) 87.5 X 89.7
Compression ratio (:1) 10.5 : 1
Max. power (DIN hp/ kW) 261/192
Max. torque (Nm) 360
Emissions level Euro 6d Temp

I’m sure the engine in this would be well received, but I would rather have the 2.4L. I think the NA platform is something they should stick to, and those that want more power have more potential with the 2.4L.

The actual engine in the WRC car is modified:

Modifications allowed to crankshafts, con rods, pistons, cylinder linings, valves and camshafts.

https://www.wrc.com/en/championship/...pecifications/

Incorrect. The specs: The FA20 is 86x86 which is a shorter bore and stroke than the Yaris motor. The FA24 has the same 86mm stroke as the FA20, so the stroke is shorter than the Yaris, but it does have a larger bore of 94mm. The point is the Yaris has an extra 4mm of stroke, which means piston speeds are higher for any given RPM. The bore is larger on the FA24, but the Yaris could have heavier pistons considering the specific output of the Yaris engine is higher than the FA24, and each cylinder has to manage much more . Think about it. The Yaris is making more hp with less cylinders, so each rod and piston is working harder. If they bother were tuned for 400hp, the Yaris would be dealing with 133hp per cylinder, but the FA24 would be dealing with 100hp per cylinder—about 30% less. At 400hp, the Yaris would be putting out 250hp per liter. The FA24 would be putting out 167hp per liter—about 33% less stress per liter. If the FA24 put out 250hp per liter it would be making 600hp.

Three cylinder engines also have a power stroke every 120 degrees vs 90 degrees of crankshaft rotation, and they are less balanced, so they require more balancing shafts.

Considering the strength needed in the powertrain, the extra stroke and the engine imbalance, the rpms are lower. Because there is less cylinders, each cylinder sees higher pressures per hp. Because there is less displacement, the engine has to work harder to attain the same output like a short man having to lift the same weight as a big man. For all these reasons, I would rather have the FA24.

I get why some would want that engine. It is lighter, it does have more power from the factory, it has a tunable turbo, and it may have strong internals, so it might have some overhead for tuning. We don’t know, but what we can guarantee is the FA24 will be an improved FA20, which is already a good thing from my perspective, as others and I have doubled the power with stock internals. I can’t wait to see what the FA24 can do.

[sato]

Originally Posted by salty_91

• 3 cylinder turbo noise (no good, but fa20 was also not a music to ears)

I thought that 3-cyl turbo sounded sweet. Sounds like a 6-cyl!

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by sato

I thought that 3-cyl turbo sounded sweet. Sounds like a 6-cyl!

And a 6cl sounds like a 12 cylinder... so basically, your 3 cylinder is a 12 cylinder, just like a Lambo.

[Red-86]

I am actually glad they didn’t use the GR 3 cylinder. Much as I think the twins could use a turbo without detracting from the experience, I don’t think the lower redline, ‘rally’ style 3 banger in the GR Yaris is the right one. I like the fact they stick with a flat 4. It’s distinctive.

If anything, I wish back in 2012 they had put a Subi flat 6 in (e.g. the EZ30D/3.0R). People mistakenly think it is heaps heavier, but in fact it is actually only a few kg heavier than the FA20, and would have provided the power and torque to turn the twins into front engined Cayman hunters. I know it was never part of the original design brief, but a man can dream, right?

[Irace86.2.0]

Don’t dream. Swap it.

[anticubus]

Originally Posted by Red-86

If anything, I wish back in 2012 they had put a Subi flat 6 in (e.g. the EZ30D/3.0R). People mistakenly think it is heaps heavier, but in fact it is actually only a few kg heavier than the FA20, and would have provided the power and torque to turn the twins into front engined Cayman hunters. I know it was never part of the original design brief, but a man can dream, right?

Gen 1 would never have made it in the EU if they'd done that. Displacement taxes would have meant the same thing they do for the 2.4L version. They're also not a small tax. Luckily the Japanese market put all 2.0L-2.5L in one class, so that's why it was possible for Gen 2 to get a bump at the cost of the EU market (Where in certain countries going above 2000cc can mean more than doubling the cost of the car for the consumer.)

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by anticubus

Gen 1 would never have made it in the EU if they'd done that.

I'm cool with that. If our European brothers and sisters had to miss out for the sake of the rest of us, so be it. And funnily enough, it looks like they could well miss out on gen 2 entirely anyway.

Displacement taxes would have meant the same thing they do for the 2.4L version.

And yet here we are anyway, with a 2.4L that they will likely only sell in North America, Japan, Australia, the Middle East and a few other markets.

Given the poor sales of the twins in the EU (when you see the steep prices you will understand) it is fascinating to think of what a different car it could have been from the beginning if they had decided to cater entirely to the rest of the world and rule out the EU from the get-go.

As I said, I understand it wasn't part of the design brief. They wanted a NA H4, and that's what they got. But I can still daydream about a H6 twin that never was...

[salty_91]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Incorrect. The specs: The FA20 is 86x86 which is a shorter bore and stroke than the Yaris motor. The FA24 has the same 86mm stroke as the FA20, so the stroke is shorter than the Yaris, but it does have a larger bore of 94mm. The point is the Yaris has an extra 4mm of stroke, which means piston speeds are higher for any given RPM. The bore is larger on the FA24, but the Yaris could have heavier pistons considering the specific output of the Yaris engine is higher than the FA24, and each cylinder has to manage much more . Think about it.

Damn, I was wrong, sorry. I always thought it was the stroke they increased on fa24 compared to fa20. Now I see.

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

The Yaris is making more hp with less cylinders, so each rod and piston is working harder. If they bother were tuned for 400hp, the Yaris would be dealing with 133hp per cylinder, but the FA24 would be dealing with 100hp per cylinder—about 30% less. At 400hp, the Yaris would be putting out 250hp per liter. The FA24 would be putting out 167hp per liter—about 33% less stress per liter. If the FA24 put out 250hp per liter it would be making 600hp.

Three cylinder engines also have a power stroke every 120 degrees vs 90 degrees of crankshaft rotation, and they are less balanced, so they require more balancing shafts.

Considering the strength needed in the powertrain, the extra stroke and the engine imbalance, the rpms are lower. Because there is less cylinders, each cylinder sees higher pressures per hp. Because there is less displacement, the engine has to work harder to attain the same output like a short man having to lift the same weight as a big man. For all these reasons, I would rather have the FA24.

I think all this bore and stroke thing doesn't really matter in this case since the engine's redline is on 7000 and you don't have to spin it all that much to get the torque.

And if it's properly balanced with the shafts I don't care about it's natural imbalance - I've driven 3 cylinder mini cooper and it felt perfectly smooth, not much difference with the 4 cylinder cooper s engine (which is b48 and btw powers junior Supra).

And if we go on with bmw engines - this yaris 3 cylinder is actually very similar to bmw s55 engine (though split in half), which powers m3 and m4 - both have the same stroke (89.7 - yaris, 89.6 - s55) and same power per liter ratio (261/1.6=163 hp; 493/3=164 hp). And s55 is highly tunable.

But anyway I share your excitement on fa24 (though skeptical of it's being enough).

[salty_91]

Originally Posted by anticubus

Gen 1 would never have made it in the EU if they'd done that. Displacement taxes would have meant the same thing they do for the 2.4L version. They're also not a small tax. Luckily the Japanese market put all 2.0L-2.5L in one class, so that's why it was possible for Gen 2 to get a bump at the cost of the EU market (Where in certain countries going above 2000cc can mean more than doubling the cost of the car for the consumer.)

Making it viable on european markets is just another great reason for 86 to go turbo.

And finally there's a difference between twins: Toyota gets a self-developed low displacement turbo three, while Subaru stays stick to it's iconic flat engine.

These are two different audiences and everybody is happy

[HKz]

Originally Posted by salty_91

Making it viable on european markets is just another great reason for 86 to go turbo.

And finally there's a difference between twins: Toyota gets a self-developed low displacement turbo three, while Subaru stays stick to it's iconic flat engine.

These are two different audiences and everybody is happy

Some extra low end torque, still would be slower than similarly priced coupes, arguably would have a higher price tag, more complexity under the hood..what is the benefit here, just to shut a few folks up who don't want N/A power band?

Silly to wish for them to increase production and development costs on a car that doesn't make them much money or bring more brand awareness even. The 3 cyl isn't even developed for longitudinal mounting..

How many people prefer Fiata engine over Miata in the ND?? They are discontinuing the Fiata in Japan if that says anything..

Admittedly I would love to see Toyobaru give everyone the middle finger and come out with a limited edition hi-po varient that ends up costing as much as a Supra just to say they did it...they sure could afford it, but in reality the whole project from the start has been a pointless love child just to reward the 100 enthusiasts who care for shit like this..

[sato]

If they do make a real limited edition release, I just hope they do not simply add 5hp or add a body kit and call it a win. Mazda made a big improvement (almost 30hp) on the Miata engine s few years after the ND introduction.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by sato

If they do make a real limited edition release, I just hope they do not simply add 5hp or add a body kit and call it a win. Mazda made a big improvement (almost 30hp) on the Miata engine s few years after the ND introduction.

It also took them almost 30 years to do that increase. So for the Quintuplets that means a couple more decades and two more generations before they have to act to do what Mazda did.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Don’t dream. Swap it.