Realistic performance goals for light build-up of 1UZFE

[JBrady]

Nope, 415 comes outta the old "450hp" 488ci motor. My guess is they just underrated it?

I don't know about the new exhaust on the 505/500, but the 488/450 had two generations of headers.. the second was slightly better - adding it to the old generation yielded about 8-10hp. The A+ exhaust system was on an otherwise stock car - it went from ~415 to ~460 from memory.

Most of the gain comes from headwork. I believe most of the high 500s cars got about 40 from exhaust and intake, 20 from cam, and the rest from heads and tune.

I have no idea if the UZ would be better than the Viper motor with exhaust. I believe, for a 2V motor, they put a hell of a lot of work into designing the heads. Who knows what goals the Toyota guys had in mind, I know the Viper team was only after performance. Mileage is absolutely disgusting on that car.

I'd really like to see what would happen if a decent tuner, experienced at head and cam work, took on this motor. I've seen some motors produce very little after a lot of head and cam work... others like the Viper just go crazy..

Miles, didn't you say that NZ tuners are already pulling 450hp out of the early 1UZFE engine? If you agree with me that that engine is actually 230hp stock your example is nearly double the power. The stock engine has minimal valve lift and duration and horrible exhaust manifolding an passable intake manifolding. If you do not care about low rpm smooth operation it would be easy to run big cams with good manifolding and make a MAJOR jump without going into the engine.

You are correct about different heads responding better than others to port work. Of course what works on one geometry may fail to produce on another. www.motoman.com Pat McGivern makes some very interesting points regarding flow and claims performance gains in making motorcycle intake ports SMALLER! Before anyone dismisses his theories I highly recommend signing up and reading his 24 back issues. Great stuff!

It is also very interesting that the 450hp Viper dynos at 415rwhp. Less than 8% drivetrain loss if you believe the factory rating. My guess (especially with the heavy parts and wide sticky tires) would be 17-18%. At 17% the "real" flywheel output would be 500hp. Under and Over rating of engines occurs all the time. As I just said I believe the original 1UZFE made 230hp flywheel. The upgrade in 1995 to 260hp was actually a 30hp increase and shows up in the performance and dynos near 200rwhp. The 1998 at 300hp rating shows up at the dynos as 235rhp or so. In Japan 280hp was the highest official rating for most cars and was in many cases pure beauracratical BS.

 

[turboandrew]

BTW, what do you intend to install your VVTi engine in? I am in Houston and would love to see what's going on some time.

It's going in a 1998 Supra. First round will be stock 1UZvvti N/A to work out fitment and fuel injection quirks. Second round will be larger displacement block and lower compression, third round will be adding turbos.

I am trying to get the enigne fitted to the chassis this week. It will probably be two months to get the transmission to the engine; then it should finally be drivable.

 

[Miles B]

The NZ engines are total rebuilds. Bored, destroked, hi comp on race gas, rods, pistons, crank, cams, heads, 8 TBs, the lot..

I'm familiar with motoman and know a few people who have JB'd up their intakes on bikes with excellent results.

Out of interest, what does a later model 1UZ with good compression go for in the junkyards on the east coast over there? Since I get free US->AUS shipping and I'm after a spare motor anyway, could be a go?

 

[JBrady]

The NZ engines are total rebuilds. Bored, destroked, hi comp on race gas, rods, pistons, crank, cams, heads, 8 TBs, the lot..

I'm familiar with motoman and know a few people who have JB'd up their intakes on bikes with excellent results.

Out of interest, what does a later model 1UZ with good compression go for in the junkyards on the east coast over there? Since I get free US->AUS shipping and I'm after a spare motor anyway, could be a go?

I haven't priced any engines lately but TurboAndrew picked one up for a STEAL... $1600... I would think $2500 would be more the going rate. Even so, IMO it would be tough to bring an early 1UZ up to VVTi standards for $2500. Higher compression, better valve timing, much better 2 stage variable intake manifold and more...

Mentioning the NZ engines being destroked... that rings a bell... are they turning like 10,000rpm? Otherwise, I cannot see the point in destroking. Furthermore, for a street engine, I cannot see doing things that will kill low and mid range power to gain peak output. If the goal is over 350rwhp... I think turbo or supercharging would be MUCH more effective and probably cheaper at that level.

Glad you have read Pat McGivern's site (motoman). I would really like to try his port concepts on a 1UZ. I do not know the stock ratio of port area to valve diameter but it would make sense that high velocity one directional ports would help power especially low and mid range, something this engine could really benefit from.

Are you familiar with Larry Widmer AKA "The Old One" of Endyn (www.theoldone.com)? He is another highly controversial tuner. His theories and applications of combustion chamber, valve, port and cam designs are thought provoking to say the least. He argues (very convincingly) that the combustion chamber (shape defined by the piston top and head at TDC) can be designed in such a way as to produce "mechanical octane" or in other words become highly resistant to detonation. Good stuff.

 

[Miles B]

Ahh, duh to me... I'm actually after the original low compression 1UZ - forgot the later ones went up half a point... are those much cheaper?

I believe they are running higher redlines, but the main point was their class limit is a little lower than 4L.

I've read some stuff by Larry, but it wasn't on his website.. will read some more It certainly makes sense to me that chamber design can help with detonation.. thus why my bike ran 11.7:1 on 98RON (US 93) octane fuel, and is supposed to still be able to take a bunch more advance... whereas an old chevy small block with that sort of compression would start getting pretty angry.

 

[JBrady]

Miles, David Phan (AKA Lextreme) has been sourcing them in California in the $500 range... very cheap. If you intend to run a stock intake, or even cut one down for a SCharger... look at the later intake manifolds... much better parts. For a cut down find a 2UZ truck 4.7L engine as the autos have the dual area internal butterfly valves (would be a shame to cut one of those up).

Regarding Larry Widmer... here is a good place to start.
http://www.theoldone.com/articles/The_Soft_Head_1999/

 

[cyberdiamond]

Miles, when I rebuild motors to run on the limits of compression for a perticular type of fuel I find it has a lot to do with the quench shape of the pistons/heads.
A closed chamber head will also allow much more compression before detonation for the same cc of volume than an open chamber.

Also the squish between the head and the top of the piston is best if it is kept to the absolute minium before the piston hits the head.
It alows a better burning of the mixture and better flame front travel due to its higher velocity (as the air gets pushed from under the squish area)

IE the piston to deck clearance I usally run 0thou so the only room is the gasket thickness (38thou for the felpro's on a cleavland for instance)

 

[LEXUSV8NZ]

Miles, didn't you say that NZ tuners are already pulling 450hp out of the early 1UZFE engine?

Mentioning the NZ engines being destroked... that rings a bell... are they turning like 10,000rpm? Otherwise, I cannot see the point in destroking

Does someone in here Build or know someone who builds these stock car engines in NZ?
Because I think we need some serious facts on what is done to these engines and how they perform, Instead of having people (like me) who pass on "What they have heard" (trying to be helpful)
From what I have heard (Once again what I have heard) they dont destroke the engines to make the capacity restriction (I was surprised to hear this) they do it by lining the bore and going to a smaller diamter piston
I have also heard that some are running as much as 12,500rpm on these carburetted engines

(Somebody please confirm/correct anything I have said with information that has been backed up/proven)

Logan

 

[Miles B]

OK.. I believe I read about it in a mag.. definitely wasn't here.. I took special note of the destroking because I was thinking "If they can make the stroke *shorter*......."

There was also talk of destroking on a bike forum I'm on at the same time - helped raise the rev limit on the engine, bore increased to suit category, added 10% top end hp and the bike won races.

 

[Miles B]

IE the piston to deck clearance I usally run 0thou so the only room is the gasket thickness (38thou for the felpro's on a cleavland for instance)

Just repeating what I've learned from bike motors... guys have definitely reported pistons clipping heads at 10k RPM with squish <0.9mm on the TL1000 engine.

 

[Miles B]

Miles, David Phan (AKA Lextreme) has been sourcing them in California in the $500 range... very cheap. If you intend to run a stock intake, or even cut one down for a SCharger... look at the later intake manifolds... much better parts. For a cut down find a 2UZ truck 4.7L engine as the autos have the dual area internal butterfly valves (would be a shame to cut one of those up).

I intend to cut down for SC manifold.. was going to follow jordy's instructions exactly (or hopefully get him to do it!) How are the later ones better for this? I've never seen a later intake manifold. My main concern is getting the mounting plate as low to the engine as possible.

 

[LEXUSV8NZ]

OK.. I believe I read about it in a mag.. definitely wasn't here.. I took special note of the destroking because I was thinking "If they can make the stroke *shorter*......."

Destroking would definately be a better idea, than sleeving
As it would increase the bore/stroke ratio rather than decreasing it, causing a more "over-square" engine that would rev better
I was quite surprised when i heard/read that they were sleeving the engine down and running so many revs

Logan

 

[Miles B]

Yeah, destroking also reduces the max speed of the piston, and should let you go for higher engine speeds than sleeving. Less load at each end for the crank to have to hold in.

 

[Kreb]

This has been a very educational thread. Thanks guys.

My cousin used to build dragsters in Christchurch before moving to California. He's moving back in two months. I'll try to have him get us the hookup with Kiwi builders.

Honestly, I'm probably 15 mos. away from my build. I'm just trying to get my path laid out in advance. The 3UZ appears to be the hot setup out of the box, but they're significantly more expensive than the early 1UZs. One thing that appeals to me about the early motors is they're not as intimdating technically to someone like me who's on the lower end of the knowledge/skill spectrum.

My current leaning is to put the 1UZ in there with a Crown CPU and headers, then explore options - Megasquirt/spark, cams, supercharging et cetera. I can also build up the other systems on the car to keep pace with the increasing power - aerodynamics, brakes and such. Honestly the car goes like stink at 200HP, after that it's all just fun, games and bragging rights.

 

[JBrady]

I intend to cut down for SC manifold.. was going to follow jordy's instructions exactly (or hopefully get him to do it!) How are the later ones better for this? I've never seen a later intake manifold. My main concern is getting the mounting plate as low to the engine as possible.

Miles, the newer style manifold has a better port angle. It also may work with the Jaguar SC conversion that Peter Scott is doing. If there is in fact enough room between the outside ports to allow the SC unit to fit between the ports... a design that would allow the SC to blow upwards and through intercoolers (like the Jag) would be a nice way to intercool the roots SC.

Otherwise, Jordy's configuration is very nice.

Here is a picture of the lower intake:

 

[Trvln Nalzmn]

I heard that they re-sleeve and don't de-stroke too. I think all the need to do is drop it 5 cubes so the difference in the piston velocity maybe very small. Would they have to change the crank if they destroked? Maybe is much cheaper to resleeve than change the crank. What ever way they would have to change the pistons and conrods to make those revs wouldn't they?

The guy that told me this pointed me to CSL in Palmerston North and I gave them a ring and they do indeed build race engines. I was after a price for some pistons and rods at the time for a 1uzfe and didn't mention the stock car motors.

 

[SCV8]

Lets see, some re working of the heads(remove valve guides in port area, blend, port match), along with the removal of the MAF, short exhaust, better advance curve, and tune should give around 325-330 hp; twice what the 4ag would provide!
Add some welded up cams that won't last very long, cost $1,200, and add another 40 hp.
I also saw that article on reducing the port cross sections on crotch-rockets, and they wound up looking like the 1uzfe heads afterwards.

 

[rocky]

ok. im getting of the subject a little but how hard would it actually be to install a newer version on the 1uz-fe into a 1st generation Ls400? I'm quite sure the engine itself would most likely bolt right in but how hard would it be as far as wiring in the newer ecu etc?? thanks for your help!

 

[jerry hofling]

hallo my name is jerry and i comming from sweden and we ar building a drag race car 1uz-fe and we ar aming at 1500 hp twin turbo and we nead som fat conrods titanium