Project Thread LS 400 Single Turbo

[XR8tt]

Wow, thanks for that news. I will have to run a huge blower pulley and go very easy on my motor then. Maybe I'll stop at 330 crank horsepower (vs. 260 stock)

Keep in mind..
330 h.p in theory is approx 380 to 400 h.p @ crank with blower...

Personally I would buy another motor and fit forged assembly...

You guys can on and on about heat etc..
But if properly sized blower / turbo is fitted ??
It negates these issues unless your making over 200 h.p per litre...

 

[JustenGT8]

Keep in mind..
330 h.p in theory is approx 380 to 400 h.p @ crank with blower...

Personally I would buy another motor and fit forged assembly...

You guys can on and on about heat etc..
But if properly sized blower / turbo is fitted ??
It negates these issues unless your making over 200 h.p per litre...

Dude the heat discussion was just explaining the potential comparatives between big and small turbos...not anything to do with a specific setup. Me thinks you missed the point?

 

[XR8tt]

Dude the heat discussion was just explaining the potential comparatives between big and small turbos...not anything to do with a specific setup. Me thinks you missed the point?

On and on and on!!!
Read the bloody turbo maps !!!

 

[JustenGT8]

whatever

 

[Thermactor]

Keep in mind..
330 h.p in theory is approx 380 to 400 h.p @ crank with blower...

Personally I would buy another motor and fit forged assembly...

You guys can on and on about heat etc..
But if properly sized blower / turbo is fitted ??
It negates these issues unless your making over 200 h.p per litre...

I specifically stated 330hp at the crank, not wheels. I think that's getting close to the stock output of the 3UZ-FE, which appeared to have identical rods according to a Lextreme picture comparing the different rods of different Toyota motors. Looks like it would take maybe 3psi to get to this goal, which does seem quite safe.

 

[XR8tt]

I specifically stated 330hp at the crank, not wheels. I think that's getting close to the stock output of the 3UZ-FE, which appeared to have identical rods according to a Lextreme picture comparing the different rods of different Toyota motors. Looks like it would take maybe 3psi to get to this goal, which does seem quite safe.

I was adding the extra power / torque required to drive the blower..
Which I guess must be added up when considering the durability of the engine..
Seems there is no where to go on these engines ??
Other than adding a little boost to gain low rpm torque..
Did say crank h.p ???? Aha yes...

 

[Thermactor]

I was adding the extra power / torque required to drive the blower..
Which I guess must be added up when considering the durability of the engine..
Seems there is no where to go on these engines ??
Other than adding a little boost to gain low rpm torque..
Did say crank h.p ???? Aha yes...

I didn't think about that. Blowers do sap a lot of power. It is depressing to think that this V8, with its killer rep, is the weakest engine Toyota has ever built in its history.

 

[stevechumo]

I'm back to the skinny rod topic. My previous engine used to be a 1995 1UZFE on the SC400 that had the skinny rods. As I stated earlier that I had a T60-1. The only fuel setup that I had was a FMU 12:1, a 255 lph-hp fuel pump, and stock ECU.

Interestingly enough, it took 9 psi for a very long time and 11 psi for quite sometime in short boost. That's why I ran 11 psi on it. However, the engine got blown at this 11 psi due to the combination of overheating & pre-ignition (timing). I boosted uphill for continously 10 minutes in summer along with the engine heat risen up. The overheating wasn't from hot intake temperature, but the engine itself was really hot. I had underpower electric fans.

I opened the engine and found out 1 piston got damaged and its rod got bent. The other 7 cylinders were fine.

If you look at the picture here, my skinny rod was on the 2nd from the left. So if the rod is skinny like that, it shouldn't break at 7 psi. There must be something else that broke the rod, but not because of its weakness. Lacking of fuel and with advanced timing? Imbalance rod that couldn't take boost, who knows?

I initially thought the 1995 1UZ rod is beefy just as many of us thought but not until it blew. The picture is a revised picture after I found out the rod with David.

I used to boost a lot in the Honda crowd and none of them broke at 12 psi if fuel & timing is correct.

 

[Thermactor]

Some people have repeated on and off that the 95 SC400 had the beefier, early-generation rods. You're saying that you indeed had the thin ones. That is interesting, but also encouraging. Thank you for a great post.

 

[stevechumo]

Some people have repeated on and off that the 95 SC400 had the beefier, early-generation rods. You're saying that you indeed had the thin ones. That is interesting, but also encouraging. Thank you for a great post.

You're correct, because that's what everyone thought. I just found that out from my engine and David (Lextreme) had also seen that. That's why the Lextreme's picture now lists 95-97 for both LS and SC with skinny rods.

 

[XR8tt]

In your case as you explained over heating, detonation etc..
The ignition timing was way wrong and I suspect mixture was way off..
Retarding [initial] timing can help when on boost .. BUT its still a bodgy back yard way of tune.. At those boost levels you REALLY require a stand alone ECU...
That's 99.999 reason why Jason's engine stayed together at the power levels he was using.. Although stronger rods in his motor ..

Lets work out what your injectors where running at ??
11 [boost] X's 12 [rising rate reg] is 132 Lb plus 40 Lb the injectors run at N/A.. That's just over 170 Lb your trying to push through the std injectors.. Plus at the pressure the fuel pump doesn't flow very well so as rpm increases the fuel supply fulls off...
Most injectors go static at about 80 Lb [some way less] so there's no ecu control and spray pattern is bad... Fuel is just being damped!!

As boost comes on the ignition timing drops down to around 20* then slowly increases as rpm rises and as engine efficiency drops off a little...
With N/A ignition advance curve .. You'll find it advances all the way from 30 to 40 *.. Totally different advance curve !!! This is what killed your engine imo...
Often you can get away with one point lower compression and moderate boost levels..
Factory turbo engines have different tune, compression, ECU etc ..
Even colder plugs...

 

[cribbj]

Interesting discussion, but don't forget, you're in Fasteddie's project thread....

 

[stevechumo]

In your case as you explained over heating, detonation etc..
The ignition timing was way wrong and I suspect mixture was way off..
Retarding [initial] timing can help when on boost .. BUT its still a bodgy back yard way of tune.. At those boost levels you REALLY require a stand alone ECU...
That's 99.999 reason why Jason's engine stayed together at the power levels he was using.. Although stronger rods in his motor ..

Lets work out what your injectors where running at ??
11 [boost] X's 12 [rising rate reg] is 132 Lb plus 40 Lb the injectors run at N/A.. That's just over 170 Lb your trying to push through the std injectors.. Plus at the pressure the fuel pump doesn't flow very well so as rpm increases the fuel supply fulls off...
Most injectors go static at about 80 Lb [some way less] so there's no ecu control and spray pattern is bad... Fuel is just being damped!!

As boost comes on the ignition timing drops down to around 20* then slowly increases as rpm rises and as engine efficiency drops off a little...
With N/A ignition advance curve .. You'll find it advances all the way from 30 to 40 *.. Totally different advance curve !!! This is what killed your engine imo...
Often you can get away with one point lower compression and moderate boost levels..
Factory turbo engines have different tune, compression, ECU etc ..
Even colder plugs...

I knew that would happen, but I just tried to max out to see when it'll blow. That engine had 158K miles on it, so I didn't intend to keep it long.

Thanks John for reminding. I haven't heard from Fasteddie for awhile.

 

[Speeedy]

Hey Fasteddie,
please send me your email address. I will invite you to come to Oldenburg in Mai.

Have a nice day!
Alex

 

[Fasteddie]

Hi Guys,

short update on the car: doing more test driving on 7 psi with max. 4500 rpm....the T88 isn't even "awake" by then, and the LS already flies....acceleration from 90mph-145mph is crazy even at this low boost setting.
Planned: installing more stuff in Feb + March...final mapping in April

@Speedy: that sounds good man !....my car should be finished by then...you got mail

 

[Fasteddie]

...by the way: can others confirm that above 3000 rpm a boosted 1UZ really feels strong and powerfull ?....

 

[Thermactor]

Hi Guys,

short update on the car: doing more testdriving on 7 psi with max. 4500 rpm....the T88 isn't even "awake" by then, and the LS already flies....acelleration from 90mph-145mph is crazy even at this low boost setting.
Planned: installing more stuff in feb + march...final mapping in April

@Speedy: that sounds good man !....my car should be finished by then...you got mail

Hey fasteddie:
I would love to see pictures of the car, particularly of the engine and intercooler routing. Your project is amazing!

 

[stevechumo]

...by the way: can others confirm that above 3000 rpm a boosted 1UZ really feels strong and powerfull ?....

Mine starts becoming a beast at 1500 RPM. Maybe your turbo and piping are too big.

 

[Fasteddie]

...its a 70mm turbo ...but also we are not going full throttle....40% and the car already flies, must be the torque !

@Thermactor: will post pictures when the weather is better...
@Speedy: thx for your mail.

 

[Fasteddie]

...at 40% !!! throttle and 7psi we are already seeing 145mph on the autobahn...at 4700rpm....