Project Thread Toyota Land Cruiser Turbo

[stevechumo]

John,

Swapping a 1UZ, or better cams into this stock Land Cruiser engine aren't cost effective. They'll cost an addition of at least a grand or more. The best economical way with boost on this engine is to rebuild it with factory parts. And then run it with a turbo boosting around 6-8 psi max. With this low psi, an aftermarket ECU isn't necessary. You'll only need a hi-flow fuel pump and a rising rate fuel pressure regulator to handle the fuel. For timing, a MSD ignition box with a boost retard timing controller is good enough to retard the timing. MSD also has a digital timing controller that controls the timing better than its cousin manual controller.

For this low boost, a 800 hp efficient turbo isn't needed nor a small T3. One is too big which will surely lag, doesn't matter how you run the pipes, and the other is too small which will obstruct the exhaust flow and doesn't have enough CFM. Between these 2 turbos, a 800 hp is a better choice because it doesn't work at its peak power. The T3 will usually max out at around 250 hp. And even a new T3 can support 300 hp, it will create boost spike, which is dangerous for the car. I've been using T3 turbos on many 4 cylinder Honda/Acura so I know their peak performance.

The best turbo for this engine with low boost might be a hybrid (higher flow than regular ones) T3/T4, standard T04, or a standard T-60. But I would go with a T04 or T-60.

 

[jibbby]

Steve what do you think I am looking at $$$ for the T04 complete setup? Approx. guess total... Need to budget the ideas and then decide......

 

[Pro]

your comment about power versus torque there is a bit out. power = torque x rpm. they're VERY torquey engines, but they don't rev like a 1UZ. so power will be down a bit. a turbo 4.5L straight six will ANNIHILATE an 4.0L NA V8 in the torque department - and i mean absolutley blow it out of the water.

a good example is the engine that my turbo is off - a 9.5L Deutz Diesel. revs to 2300rpm and makes over 1500Nm of torque, but only makes 230kW.

if you're not looking for a custom manifold, then bridging two "J" pipes off the two manifolds into a T4 flange as you mentioned would be the cheapest bet. avoid any step downs in the whole system before the flange and brace the pipes to the exhaust manifold bolts. but as i mentioned, i would always use the bigger option turbo with a reducer so my money is on the T60.

your landcruiser is heavy on fuel because of a few reasons.

1) it weighs well over 2 tonnes.
2) the gearing.
3) the automatic.

bump up the oil pressure in the tranny to improve shifts and maybe change the centre diff gearing to suit what you intend it to do if you can without financing a debt that could pay off the third world - i have no idea if you can even GET centre gear options...?

people put the 1UZ into HiLux's - not Landcruisers. the landcruiser has the 2UZFE as an option though. the HiLux has a pretty gutless petrol 4 pot that is useless for serious 4X4ing.

 

[jibbby]

your comment about power versus torque there is a bit out. power = torque x rpm. they're VERY torquey engines, but they don't rev like a 1UZ. so power will be down a bit. a turbo 4.5L straight six will ANNIHILATE an 4.0L NA V8 in the torque department - and i mean absolutley blow it out of the water

Aaron it sounds to me like you really love the 1FZ...Motor...and I completely agree that a turbo'd straight six will destroy a NA 1uz..V8, but a Super Charged Iuz..V8 motor will dance circles and laugh at the NA 4.5L straight six 1fz..motor also in torque and every other hp department.

Now Aaron, I use to buy and sell these 93-95 Toyota Land Cruisers and they all drank up the gas, this one I currently own is lighter in weight compared to others for several reasons, it has a high flow exhaust sytstem and a KN filter intake, the truck is pepier then all the other same year stock Cruisers but is still under powered. Especially when comparing to the Vortec Chevy truck motors, the Trinton Fords, Dodge Hemi's etc.. and gas milieage is probably about the same compared to those way more powerful V8 stock truck motors.

Don't get me wrong I like the 1FZ.. motor too or else I wouldn't be owning this Land Cruiser, and I think the motors are built like tanks and made to last...But that gas consumption thing drives me nuts, I feel like I am being cheated every time I fill up....Oh and Aaron one other reason it consumes the patrolium is that it is ALL TIME AWD....

 

[Toysrme]

Misc. suggestions.
Non-MLS Toyota head gaskets... If you don't go custom. I *highly* suggest not *grossly* passing a peak effective compression ratio of 12:1. Nobody that I am aware if makes a "traditional", or "non metal" gasket that is rated to hold more than 12:1.
So that would be right around 7psi to be 100% safe, but because you're only at peak VE & hence, *peak* effective compression for relatively shorts amounts of time, you can likely surpass that without huge dangers.
T04E-60 compressor will make about 300bhp @ about 8-9psi. That'd be a great match for wanting to make 375-400bhp stock on a t3 63 exhaust. If you just want 300bhp... Screw everything. Put a t3 60/63 on it & thank my ass later.
If you want 300-350, go with a CT26a off a supra. They'll give 350bhp on the modern dohc v6's at 8-10psi.

On the plus side, the 1FZ has a relatively huge 4.5L displacement. On the downside. Stock cams... Ok everybody that's ever been around a 6 cylinder Toyota truck engine! All together!
Bawahahahahahah ahhh hahahahah
I rode in one doing hill-climbs a few years back that had a junkyard ihi rhc6 (GM turbo diesel) on it. Even with the relatively tremendous low end grunt of the N/A engine - I would suggest skipping such classes of turbocharger. If you want a seriously responsive engine. (Skip anything in the straight up t4 class).
In all honesty... A t3 60/63 would be out of breath & dieing on an internal wastegate (Which doesn't stop you from using it... There are many cases of small turbo, big engine to do nothing but double low end torque output), but nearly all of the better t3/t04E sizes will stomp the crap on a straight up t4.
The simple fact is there is not that much rpm to waste trying to spool something that is bent on taking it's sweet time.
That works fine on a drag strip, or anytime you can throw down a huge torque convertor, but not for an off-road vehicle. It's partly because the power isn't in the middle of the powerband like you want it, and partly because it can just come on too strong.


AFA trail use, I've turbo'ed 3 3vz-e 4runners at this point. You're not going to find *special* problems because you have a turbo that anyone else wouldn't. Don't run lines anywhere they can scrape & if you run a FMIC, protect it...

I had the pleasure of doing some mild hill-climbing/trail blasting in the last one while I had it. With a well matched turbo, there is no lag, it's simply power on demand. Power on engine load also.
If it's sized right, you'll be huffing along your chosen low Toyota gear at what? Say 3000rpm? You won't have the throttle down enough to be boosting. Start putting a ligt load on the engine & it'll make it's own extra power.
For lighter stuff, your throttle foot is reduced to more feathering the throttle in & out than it is shuffling between 1/3 &1/2 throttle and floored.
For the larger stuff... Because you're sitting in the powerband where the turbo *would* be making power (with enough throttle). You have power available nearly instantly at any time.


I have preached & preached to the truck owners about powerband selection for off-roading. The simple fact is that most of them use insanely flawed logic when picking components... Ya don't *need* more power under 3000rpm, or say the bottom 1/3rd of your powerband. It's completely pointless!?
1) Most of the guys are driving automatics, meaning the torque convertor is going to ensure 2200-2500rpm to make any power. (Meaning accessing a turbo that is boosting at 2500-3250rpm is nearly instantaneous)
2) The M/T guys are not exactly poking along a trail in third gear at 2000rpm


Trust me. I've never driven an 1FZ, but I know what I'm talking about! Toyota's been using the same rpm range on truck/suv 6 cylinders for decades now. (My theory is that they were deathly afraid of running the higher RPM's through the 4*4 trickery that the car 6 cylinder's run. Atleast until rescently!). If you can start cracking positive pressure around 3000-3500rpm on either an A/T, or M/T.
You're going to have twice the engine that you use too on the trial. Even if you're only making marginally better power at high rpm, or with a turbo that's too small to keep from running out of breath (straight t3).



If it were my cruiser, I would settle for about 350bhp. Either off a CT26a running 8-10psi, or a t3 63 / t04E-50 (Avoid 54 & 57 trims. Ew!) If you want more than that... A t3 63 / T04E-60 is going to have the best response. If you're wanting over 400bhp, you can do that with a t3 hybrid... But it's in your very best interest to go dig out one of the rare .84 A/R t3 turbine housings. Tho I normally do not, I would suggest a *real* oil temp gauge. Along with higher psi coolant pressure caps, and a 160-170*f thermostat. Just to be on the safe side.
Unlike a street engine, you can see long durations of boost without realizing it racks up off-road. I would probably rig up some $15 intercooler water spray that is temp/timer activated also.










jibby go dig up a 1FZ-FE dyno & what drivetrain it had. (A/M/T & 4*2/4*4). I'll setup the crap work for you.

 

[Pro]

dude a CT26a is WAY too small. we're talking about 4.5L of engine here, and using a turbo off a factory 3.0L.

it defies all logic. i would use a PAIR of CT26a's - but not just one. the wastegate won;t bypass enough gas and the thing will boost it's nuts off and absolutely fry the inlet charge and put the compressor on the wrong side of it's efficiency island.

in my playing with factory turbos, i have found that if you use the reducer you can use a bigger turbo than what you would normally.

for example - i have run a pair of CT9s (starlet GT turbo - 1.3L dohc) quite successfully on a 2.0L sohc engine. i used a slight reducer before each turbo and it came on song at 2200rpm and boost stayed steady right thru to redline (6500).

i have also run a hitachi 18S (13B rotary turbo) on a 1.8L sohc - kind of a T03 in size. again - a small reducer and a mild cam and this engine was already giving 3psi boost at a VERY low 2000rpm, full boost (9psi) at 2500rpm right out to redline (7000).

these were all internal wastegate turbos too.

everyone told me those turbos were "too big", "oh it'll take forever to boost", etc etc. the trick is the reducer. get this right and you can generally go a few sizes larger and have less restriction in your exhaust housing.

there is so much more to this that i can't write here because i would be here all day.

i got the reducer idea after studying a few 1980's honda indycar turbo setups - they ran the same setup that i'm trying to explain now.

 

[Pro]

and a boosted 1UZ will have around the same torque as a boosted 1FZ - but the 1UZ will dance circles around the 1FZ because it's average power is oh-so-much more.

outright power, bossted, the 1UZ will win hands down.

 

[stevechumo]

Toysrme,
You've very much pointed it out. But for the application of turbocharging this huge Land Cruiser, I believe the T3 (even with the hybrid one) is too small. The T3 is only best for 4 cylinders. I've been using T3s to turbocharge many Honda/Acura so I know their peak performance. You can avoid that internal wastegate by using an external wastegate for better boost control, but the problem is the T3 would max out around 250 hp, even though it's rated at 300 hp for new model T3. Thus, when it maxxes out, it'll create boost spike which is dangerous for the car. Plus, it'll create much more heat for the engine. Another problem would be obstructing the exhaust flow.

On the other hand, the 800 hp turbo that someone mentioned earlier is too big and will surely lag. When you're driving on snow, you don't want 3000 RPM or 3500 RPM to kick in, although the car still moves forward. Big turbo is only good when it's for street or drag racing.

John,
If you only want the most economical way, a standard T04 or T-60 is best for 300 hp or slightly under. Hi-performance cams are not needed. For 6-8 psi, new stock engine parts are the best for the money. I'd say it'll be the max of $3000 for a complete low boost set-up. I can't see the Land Cruiser headers side clearly from the picture so I can't tell much. This is important since it'll be easy or hard to build the turbo manifold, which costs $$$ . Tubular type, log type, or just a short pipe from the stock headers connected to the turbo. If you can cut & weld, you'll even save more $$$. I'm willing to show you what parts are needed, the structure, and how a turbo system operates. That's why I'm saying it'd cost around $3000 or a lot less if you do 70% - 100% of the work.

 

[jibbby]

Man!!! Thanks guys for all the input and suggestions this is definetely more than I ever expected...... I am doing more research on the turbo info that's provided on this thread, it may take another week or so before I begin.... What is funny is I really wasn't sure if I would get one reply post when I first started this thread..wow..Again, all thanks...I will post work when I begin as usual...unless told other wise....See ya.

Pro - since your the most familiar with the Ifz.. motors, what are their weaknesses? Just the cams? Also is the 2UZ.. a better motor and why?

 

[jibbby]

One other point I would like to make for Toysrme - In regards to the Toyota 4X4 straight six cylinder motors, Toys you are so right that the power band is ever so geared toward the 2000-3000rpm range at stock and then the motor dies off after anything higher then that....I recently upgraded the exhuast and intake filter on this cruiser and the power came on higher now from 2000-3500rpm which was an improvement but still not impressive by any means of the imagination...

I have been spoiled with the Small block Chevy 4X4's over the years and remember that feeling of instant juice at the rears and fronts.... Why is Toyota so set on the low to mid end power band at factory? To me there is just no excitement in crawling in low range creeping up a hill with the diff lockup engaged... It's boring to me and takes too long... I always really enjoyed being able to hammer the throttle and instantly get the rpm's rising and listining to the deep roar of exhaust come thru the headers as the wheels start spinning. A small dust storm is started, or mud showers and then the feeling of the truck aggressively begining to rip and bounce up the hill as apposed to the creeping, slipping snail climb.. No?

That was a great feeling with the power hungry high reving Small block Chevy's in the Toyota's trucks.. Is that same feeling even possible in a boosted 1FZ? I just can't picture the 1FZ.. being a terror on the hill climbs even with a mild boost...

Pro - you are right in many ways about the gearing being responsible for the excellerated gas consumption. The motor uses much less gas at the 2500rpm range which is the motors natural power band area, rather then the freeway/highway driving of 85mph which is about at the 3500rpm range... The older 70 and 80's Landcruisers were really a joke.... Another added transmission gear would be the difference I believe...Oh well....

 

[Pro]

cams - for sure - are their biggest let down. in stock form, they're great for low down grunt - useless for anything else.

a turbo 2UZ would be my choice - more power, more torque, all useable. the 1FZ will give excellent low - midrange power and torque with a bit of boost and mild cams but don't expect to win any dyno competitions with it. but to do without the hassle of the engine conversion, i would look at a supercharger or turbocharger on the stock 1FZ with mild regrind cams.

 

[stevechumo]

But for low boost turbo, I don't think cams are necessary at all. If not carefully designed, cams in turbo system will give negative/worst performance. Hi-performanced cams in natural aspirated engines won't work with turbo system.

 

[Toysrme]

jibby my guess has been that they never felt the 4wd would hold up to more rpm.
So it's not like Toyota *couldn't* have had an extra 1000rpm & wider powerband if they wanted to have done it. (Compare the powerband shape of a 3vz-fe VS a 5vz-fe truck engine). It also wouldn't have cost them any more money, or engine development (on the 5vz-fe) to have done so!
Which leads to my opinion, that Toyota *couldn't* afford to use that extra 1000rpm if they had it. Since the engine is fine for 6000rpm... That just leaves the drivetrain as a major reason as to why they didn't do it!

I am going to ramble, on & on about this so... Tuff!
Allrighty! I respect you guys an aweful lot! However, I do not see eye-to-eye with yall on the whole "what turbo to make 300-350bhp issue". I do not agree with what you guys are saying about the smaller turbos.

The turbos I gave are not too small. In fact look at all the OEM's that break the "too small" turbo laws jin the name of building a ginormous powerband
Plenty of 3L v6 Z31's using tiny T25's making 250bhp @ 14psi.
Tons of 3L v6 Z31's with the T3 48/60 (Restrictive exhaust on an internal gate remember!) running 270-300bhp @ 14-17psi with upgraded intercoolers & fuel. That's a 3L v6 on a t3 48 turbine.
BGN's run a t3 63 turbine housing. They make 350bhp easy on the stock turbo. That's a 3.8L. (That makes a hard pulling stock/mild build i4 turbo.)

Even worse yet. In an attempt at nothing farther than making a massive torque curve. Saab has been using single bank GT15 & GT17 turbos on their late model v6 for several years now.
Their fanbois have been upping boost (from stock 0.1/0.15 bar) enough to make around the 250bhp peak area.
A supra's CT26a can easily make 350bhp. (Like I said, that's only in the neighborhood of 10psi). They top out about 14psi of being great. While some people think it's suspect, there are enough 7m-gte supras over the years that have run 17psi on a stock turbp & netted 280-300whp. (That's easily over 350bhp, on an engine with much less compression).

Now the 3s-gte's use two other twin scroll entry CT26s... Those is too restrictive on the turbine section!!!
A side note, no flow maps are known for the ct26's. If you want my opinion on what to equate them too:
The Supra's CT26a is bigger & makes more power than a t3 super 60/63, less power than a t3 63 / T04E-46 trim hybrid.
The 3s-gte CT26's are both closer to t3 48 turbines with a 50 trim compressor. (With a 60's housing swap done... Because they *are* a little better than a 50trim t3)

Remember! CT26a is going to make a hair more power than a t3 60/63 will.
Designation: Toyota CT-26a
Source of Turbo: JDM 7M-GTE
Rated Flow Capacity: 437 cfm (33 lb/min)
Compressor A/R Ratio: 0.70 a/r
Exhaust A/R Ratio: 0.50 a/r
Compressor Trim: 40- trim
Bearing Type: Full-Floating Bearing
Optimum Boost Level: 8-10 psi
Max Recommended Boost: 14 psi
Water Cooled: Yes
Estimated HP (7M-GTE): 300-320 HP @ 12-14 psi
Horsepower 1mz-fe: 340-350 HP @ 10psi






<cue auzzy voice>
Right then!

AFA t3's maxing out around 250bhp. Correct...
Only for a little 42/48, or 50 trim /48.
That is the t3 turbo that makes "about" 220whp (about 250bhp) at (10-14psi) on your typical 4 cylinder. Now forget that and look at something running a 60/63, or a super 60 (Remember there is also a 60/84). The 60/63's make 300-330bhp easily where the 42/48 can only make 250bhp. One t3 does not equal another!!! Don't get caught into grouping them together!




Remember guys! Displacement is an issue with compressor size much more than turbine size!!!
In general, the more displacement, the easier for the compressor. However the turbine only cares about one thing. Exhaust flow. A honda making 300bhp is going to have nearly the same overall exhaust flow as anything else running 300bhp!

So don't worry so much about the displacement. The smaller RPM range & drastically reducing VE of the 1FZ-FE will keep the turbo's I suggested from tanking... They'll easily make the power & give a broad powerband.

 

[Toysrme]

It's just how the Toyota truck cams work out! Like I said before, I've never seen a dyno of a 1FZ-FE, but I know in my heart that is exactly what happens. (Because you see it on every other Toyota truck/suv 6 cylinder until the 1gr-fe)
PLEASE DIG A DYNO UP!!! (I looked & couldn't find on)


Even without a dyno, or knowing anything about the specs.
History shows us two, pretty basic things about truck "ish" Toyota 6's.
1) it's got in the neighborhood of: .3-.32 lift, say 220-231* of duration & only a few degrees of overlap.
2) the power peak is about 4500rpm (4600rpm), and peak torque is around 3500rpm (3000rpm). Give or take. It *probably* has a redline around 5000-5250-5500, and *probably* has a fuel-cut setup at 5250-5500-5750rpm.
From idle there is a lot of torque on tap. It takes a massive upswing of torque through the torque peak, then has an even faster torque fall off until it's just embarrassing near the redline/fuel-cut.

I think that this is where you guys are getting a problem with what I am saying about a smaller turbo for that type of powerband!!!. This is not a "car" engine that'll make peak power in the 5000rpm & turn 6500rpm+ if you let it. It's a big, fat powerband, that falls off very fast & doesn't last for near long enough.


For the lack of a 1FZ-FE dyno to work with... He's working with a powerband that's only going to be about like this (Ignore the S/C dyno):


Visualize, if you will. The turbo's I gave as examples on what I would choose. Extremely broad powerband. It'll be on it's way down, but WILL NOT be choking. (The massively decreasing VE will keep it from flat out choking).
Now visualize anything a full out T4+ turbo...
It's going to still take your typical 6 cylinder 4000rpm to spool up & it's going to build power until he bounces off the fuel-cut.

This isn't what I think he wants his powerband to be. 400bhp is really into one of the blank areas in turbo choosing. You can't get a single turbo that'll power 2/3 of the powerband like he's going to be after.

jibby, you'll wind up either picking something roughly what I laid out for 300-350bhp for the majority of the powerband. Or you'll want that 400bhp & pick a larger turbo that only helps in the last half of the powerband.

 

[Pro]

rrrrrr! so frustrating!!! :34:

i completely respect what you have to say here Toys, but there is SO much more to turbo selection that just compressor sizes - you have to take in manifold Ø, exhaust size, cams.

sure, a small turbo will produce the same power. but it will be working WAY too hard to be efficient. it will be frying the inlet charge as the comparitively small compressor works overtime. the exhaust back pressure from an internal wastegate setup designed for 3.0L worth of gas - and now having to cope with 4.5L - will see it overspeed, overboost and hurt inlet temps even more.

a bigger turbo with a few manifold tricks and mild cams will produce the same result at lower psi, which means cooler inlet temps and less stress on the engine as far as exhaust pressure is concerned.

i'm trying to get that little blue line to be almost FLAT from 2500 all the way to where it starts to drop off at 4800. but then add the mild cams for improved low - mid rpm breathing and you have FULL boost from 2500 right out to probably 5500.

a bigger turbo will improve your average power and torque right across the rev range. a smaller turbo will improve your low RPM response and start to die off halfway thru the midrange.

a single CT26A makes great horsepower and torque ON A 3.0 LITRE engine, and is NOT IN ANY WAY suited for a 4.5L engine unless you're looking for all grunt to happen before the tacho needle is even vertical and nothing after that - not even revs because it will be choked to death.

example -------------------------------------------------------------------------

it's the same scenario as putting a starlet GT turbo (CT9 - 1.3L) on an acura (integra) 1.8L because you're "only" chasing 250hp and the CT9 makes 250hp on the 1.3L.

that is INSANE logic. the same turbo will need to be boosted well outside it's efficiency range to even keep up with a 1.8L. sure, it'll make 250hp, but it won't last long. the inlet charge will need a big aftercooler to cool the inlet temps back from well over 120ºC, which is more cost and weight.

now, why not use a T04 on the 1.8L with a reducer? sure, it's a little bigger, but will make 250hp WITH EASE on very low boost using an external gate. cooler inlet charge may completely negate the need for an aftercooler in a mild setup, but it would be recommended to run a small, good flowing core anyway.

plus, there's room for A LOT more power should you ever want it (and let's face it, you will).

 

[Dusty]

Holy Heaven this is so cool!

www.avoturboworld.com/4x4/i6_turbokit.pdf here is the dyno $11,000 AU
www.man-a-fre.com/parts_accessories/turbo_charger.htm
www.airpowersystems.com.au/safari/turbo/1fzfe_80/1fzfe_int_turbo.html

I was directed to this forum by a gentleman from homemadeturbo.com (toysrme) where I too have been asking specific questions about putting a turbo on my 96 lx450 (landcruiser) with 140,000miles-and even have a week of vacation 2 weeks from now to work on install. The main reason i am doing this is for the fun of it-but am looking for a little more reliable power from this motor. I only want to run 6psi for now. I am a 3rd year medical resident and thus don't have much time or money so I'm looking on ebay right now for the parts-I have collected some of parts already. This project is pure gheto. There are a few people on the ih8mud.com (landcruisers) that have run the Safari turbo kit with 6lbs of boost with no engine management at all. The TRD superchgarger kit for the 4.5L six also runs 6psi and comes with no engine management. The motor does just fine on its own at these low boosts. So for now I will have no management either and thus save some money.
I have a millermatic 175 mig welder and am a good welder. I plan on fabbing a flange (will actually use the flange I cut from oe exhaust) to make a bolt on extension from the 2 piece oe manifold curving up to the turbo. I will use weld el's for this. I will run 2' ID aluminized exhaust tube for the intercooler. If I can find an internal wastegate I will go that way for simplicity but will use external gate if needed.
I understand turbo maps and I grasp the logic shared in the discussions above. I dont care if there is no extra power till 2500rpm's. I drive my landcruiser offroad and I love its power down low-it has plenty. I want a turbo that wont heat up my motor down low when im loping in the rocks but will give me some more power at 3000-4000 rpm when I am running long distances down the highway with big tires and want to pass people. If I can have both great but given the choice I want cool and efficient. It has to run cool as poss here also. It sounds like either option argued above would work for me. But i need help. The problem i have with picking a turbo is with identifying the turbo "size" if I get a t3/t4 with ar ratios of .60/.63 dont i need to specify the trim? t3 turbines come in stage 1-5 sizes so dont I need the stage size besides just the a/r? and dont i need the specific compressor trims for the t4 and not just the .63 a/r ratio? same goes with a pure t04e-dont i have to know the trim. a guy is offering me a rebuilt air research for $225 and all he knows is that it is a ".6 inlet with a .1.10 exhaust t04" will this work ok?

help me and I will post pics
would this work
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1,1&item=8049193500&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
how about this
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1,1&item=8049113779&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
how about this
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1,1&item=8049863169&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
or this
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1,1&item=8049051542&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
or
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1,1&item=8050099505&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT

ct26's are cheap on ebay

 

[jibbby]

Dusty- welcome... you have come to the right thread and forum, these guys posting are brilliant and are breaking it down big time. The information is flowing... infact I am a bit over whelmed and trying to learn and keep up. I finding out it is almost a science trying to pic the ideal setup for this motor, so many types to choose from... Dusty, thanks for contributing with the links. However, I disagree in the second link with the speed breakdowns which states the stock 1FZ does 15 seconds 0-60 at stock, and 9 seconds turbo'd. Well I don't know about the over seas cruisers but mine at stock right now does 9 seconds with just an intake filter and exhaust and that is without a turbo.. The 93 and newer models aren't that sluggish...Anyway that is trivial.

Pro - I still think you are right on.... however all the other posters have made great points as well. What some don't understand is that the 1FZ.. is a huge 4.5L six cylinder motor, that at stock redlines at 5000rpm is a dog at 4000rpm, is perky at low rpm and has the peak power at 2500-3000rpm... This is definetely a Toyota car and engine that has been geared for low end grunt, unfortunately there is just not enough HP at stock to complement the low end gearing and grunt in the truck.... Now there was a limited addition Toyota Super Cruiser made from factory that came equiped with a TRD supercharger that runs at 6 psi, that was Toyota's attempt at an Elite offroad cruiser... Now I forgot what the hp and torque numbers are but they are minimal for a S.C. setup but effective from what I have heard... My question is Toyota's manufacturing choice to choose the TRD supercharger may possibly the best choice for setup but boosted slightly higher for more power?... While the TRD S.C. is more expensive this maybe the most reliable and effective choice for the IFZ.. motor from what I have read, and I think the Toyota heads thinks so aswell... What do you guys think?....

I am still trying to take all this info in, learning at a fast curve... I am finding out these turbo's are not so bad at all... Some are cost effective as well that is if you know what you are doing... I must be honest I would really just love this IFZ.. motor of mine to hang with the Hemi's, trintons, Vortec, and current V8 motors. From what I am reading so far with the Air forced induction this is very possible and then some... I will try and post Toyota's "Super Cruiser" power stats that is equiped with the factory Super Charger. I would love some final thoughts on that setup if possible.. I also have access to a very nice set or long type headers for this IFZ..engine made by TRD. Does anyone know if a good set of headers work as well for this 1FZ.. motor like the 1UZ.. header install? That is all I can think of so far...thanks all....

 

[Dusty]

more specific questions on turbo options i am exploring
help with these

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8049208418&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8049193500&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8049812178&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4624671278&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8049863169&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8050099505&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=8050854726&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT

also a "airesearch t04 .60inlet and 1.10exhaust" no other info

 

[stevechumo]

I would prefer your first choice. However, I don't like those rusted turbos. They might not be new. Although new hybrid T3s have high flow, I still don't want them on a big engine. They'll obstruct exhaust flow, which might create turbo lag and boost spike. A 3" major diameter on the turbine is ideal for your engine.

I don't recommend rebuilt turbos since you're not sure if they're properly rebuilt and balanced (to get rid of vibrations), and who rebuilt them. Rebuilt turbos are not necessary to be balanced if they're carefully marked and put in the exact location as before. And people make mistakes in messing things up all the time.***If they're properly rebuilt, make sure there're no cracks in the turbine housing. Many used turbos have hairline cracks after long-time use. They might last for a few more years but not for long.

I don't recommend unknown brand turbos. They might not last under 1500-2000 Farenheit degree. But if they're really cheap, they could be worth a try. Brands such as Garrett (AirResearch), Turbonetics, Precision are most popular and excellent. There're many other good brands such as KKK, Holset.

Here's a very good link for a turbo starter. It's for 4 cylinder Mitsubishi cars but turbo system concept is the same for all engines. http://www.beesandgoats.com. Click on the right top corner for G2IC Turbo Guide.

For 6 psi, even up to 9 psi, no engine management is needed. This is safe for 6 psi: Beside the turbo, its related parts and all piping, you'll only need a high flow-high pressure fuel pump, a fixed 12-1 rising rate fuel pressure regulator. If you run more than 6 psi up to 9 psi, I would say 8 psi to be safe although some cars successfully run 9 psi with stock injectors, you may need a timing retard controller. For more than 9 psi, which might max out 80% of the fuel injetor's duty cycle, you might need larger fuel injectors and a computer to control the injectors. I used to run 9 psi with 20% larger injectors with stock ECU & 12-1 rising rate fuel pressure regulator on a Honda. The car runs excellent with richer fuel than needed. The only problem was it started a little harder, but it idled fine and boosted responsively.

Make sure you'll have a boost gauge and air/fuel ratio gauge for monitoring.

 

[Toysrme]

Ya I found dusty everywhere I went looking for a 1fz-fe dyno LoL! He's on every cruiser forum known to man digging for info. I'm just glad he's digging for it!
*Note to other people. See how cool & collected staff are when discussing an issue? We do not yell... Notice how we are both typing a lot, but are formatting (bolding) text that we want to make sure is not skipped. I.E. turbo specs so as not to get lost, or an underlying point above others to be made.
Civility, is key.

rrrrrr! so frustrating!!!
i completely respect what you have to say here Toys, but there is SO much more to turbo selection that just compressor sizes - you have to take in manifold Ø, exhaust size, cams.

Aw, I love you toooooo!
"There being more to turbo selection" had already been taking into account when I chose what I did. What I had to say negates any change to displacement, cams, etc. Because it <I ran out of words...> naturally compensates for such changes.
From here, we take our separate paths on how to choose mid-range dominating, highly responsive turbo.



The bhp output of an engine is directly proportional to the mass of the charge it injests. The same is true for the exhaust! The output of the engine is directly proportional to the amount of exhaust created. (You always hear the 10lb/m of air = 100bhp statement as a rough guide. I find about 8.75lb/m = 100bhp on the 'yota car v6s to be closer.)
Again, a 200bhp 1.5L honda is creating the same ballpark exhaust flow as a 200bhp 3.0L v6 toyota, as a 200bhp 5L v8 Ford, etc on down the line. It will vary to an extent; just as the "mass of the charge" rule will vary on creating power. But the key is that you can get a ballpark estimate down without "major" effort.

This is much easier. As you get to break a complex problem down into three major areas, in no order:
1) Compressor "stuff"
2) Turbine/wastegate "stuff"
3) Power output of the non-turbo engine
It's an entire package to look at. #3 takes car of any engine change. Provided you always know what the power output is.
Anyways. The guideline that power created will ballpark exhaust flow. Yes, you can make said power levels on the turbos I had previously stated. Because displacement variance between a smaller, and larger engine are NILL because you are compairing the same power level, they are both providing around the same exhaust to spin a turbine. Which is all the turbine cares about.

But I'm still saying it...
1) The turbo's I laid out *will* make the power levels I said
2) Using a straight T4 turbine may very well hit peak psi at what sounds like a great rpm. I think that relative to the powerband, it is more likely to not be fast enough for what you guys what.
Which is be cruising in a gear, get the throttle 3/4 of the way down & see the boost gauge rise & feel a huge power surge.