Tuning the n/a

[Supraguy]

Originally posted by Steve W2

It would seem the Yanks have done most things with the Supe, but I'm always dubious when quoting like for like.

 

Its easy to say they have 700BHP NA but they also have 1100 BHP single turbo mosters. None of which we seem to be able to get close to in the UK.

 

Quite simpy, its because there is LOADS more Supra tuning experience in the US than there is here in the UK. Single turbo cars are a dime a dozen. Go browse through the Tech / Dyno / and Drag sections of SF and you will see what I mean.

[Digsy]

What about revving it harder? Has anyone managed to raise the rev limit on a J2Z?

 

Would probably need top and bottom end work though, as well as the airflow and remapping to take advantage of it.

[Syed Shah]

Originally posted by Ian C

I wonder if, for all this "block and head are the same" talk, the NA head is different because the exhaust ports don't need to be a compromise around the twin turbo exhaust manifold? They may be shaped differently, i.e. more efficiently.

-Ian

 

I never saud the head was the same, I said the block was the same and the head flows better.

 

Other than than, bloody good post.

 

Oh, their were people on SF trying the all motor route, look for Xdreamers posts on there, someone else too, forget their username though. To summarise: Not very successful, but very expensive.

[Alex]

Originally posted by Darren Blake

What about revving it harder? Has anyone managed to raise the rev limit on a J2Z?

 

Would probably need top and bottom end work though, as well as the airflow and remapping to take advantage of it.

 

Glaringly obvious point - flogging myself now for not mentioning it!

 

Hence why F1 engine's rev to 19,000rpm.

 

A Ti valvetrain + lighter pistons and rods + electronic fudge could = 8,500rpm, at a push. Would be a fun experiment. I'm sure with the right kit you could get 100hp/l - but you might HAVE to run SUL/Optimax.

[Ian C]

Syed - that wasn't aimed at you, just the general belief that it's the same "engine". Just asking the question about the NA head, can't say I've heard it asked before?

 

Raising the rev limit is a lot harder on the engine than turbocharging is. If you want long term reliability the last thing I'd do is up the revs, but in an NA of course it's an excellent way of getting more power.

 

-Ian

[lust2luv]

Originally posted by outatime

Just out of interest, at what RPM does the N/A put out the most power?

 

225HP @ 6000rpm

209.5ft-lb @ 4800rpm

 

[Syed Shah]

Again we are back to the question of getting the NA to 280BHP.

 

Is it possible? Yes, heck with enough money, 400 is possible.

 

Is it attainable at reasonable cost? No. All resonably priced, wise mods with net not more than 25HP, so you will still be sub-250BHP. Even these will cost a lot of money. Doable, but not VFM.

 

My advice: Keep the NA, and make a choice: Eirther add basics to the NA and be happy with very little power addition, or save for an NA-T.

[Digsy]

Originally posted by Alex Holdroyd

Glaringly obvious point - flogging myself now for not mentioning it!

 

Hence why F1 engine's rev to 19,000rpm.

 

A Ti valvetrain + lighter pistons and rods + electronic fudge could = 8,500rpm, at a push. Would be a fun experiment. I'm sure with the right kit you could get 100hp/l - but you might HAVE to run SUL/Optimax.

 

Slightly shorter intake runners too, but you might start to impact midrange torque then.

[Paul Laing]

A few points there, but i wasn't saying change cars because of the engine bay! lol, i was just adding another point to why Twin Turbo supras are better in every way. Thats all.....

 

And about the N/A-T being quicker than a Bpu supra cos it's a single, thats crap. It only makes 330bhp, if i put a single on mine with stock UK fueling it would make 440rwhp...so there a difference still mate.

 

Anyway back to the original thread!

 

Paul

[Syed Shah]

Originally posted by Paul Laing

 

And about the N/A-T being quicker than a Bpu supra cos it's a single, thats crap. It only makes 330bhp, if i put a single on mine with stock UK fueling it would make 440rwhp...so there a difference still mate.

 

 

I've tried explaining it, but you still don't get it. I won't bother explaining this again. Please educate yourself on this subject rather than posting incorrect infomation.

[Paul Laing]

Syed - FFS explain what???

 

All i can see from your posts is that you say by bolting on a turbo kit to a N/A will give you a Bpu/Hybrid turbo Supra beater, the reason you gave was because it's a single turbo. Right so thats 330bhp (same as stock tt yes, but not Bpu?) Also just by bolting on a single you will get a 1/4 mile time of around 13.3 (speak to powerhouseracing) Also same as stockish TT, but not Bpu.

 

So if i spend the same money on a single for my car using stock fuel, it will make 450hp at the wheels.....is this not true?

 

What else are you trying to say that i'm not getting?

 

Paul

[Syed Shah]

Yes 330bhp on the stock compression, add a thicker HG and your good to go.

 

Anyone else fancy trying to explain this to Paul?

 

They only power levels where a TT wastes an NA for VFM is in the 350-400 range, after that it don't matter!

[Paul Laing]

And fuelling.........bigger injectors, new fuel rail, bigger fuel pump

[Syed Shah]

Did you read my post on the pricing on an NA-T?

 

Anyway, I feel this is going massively OT, you want to discuss this any more, please PM.

[Steve W2]

Yes, I think most of the points have been covered. I would appear that thera re several levels to the original question.

 

If you want to tune your NA to Big horsepower you spend big money, if you want to take a progressive route you can get more power but is still wont be VFM in comparison to a TT.

 

It would appear that 250-260 is achieveable without going to crazy or more if you want to go down the nitrous route.

 

At the end of theday if you wnat big power is always going to be expensive, NA or TT. As you have to buy single turbo fuelling and all the other gubbins that goes with it much over 450 BHP becomes the same as Syed has alreday said

[Paul Laing]

Agreed, over 450bhp then you probably have to spend the same cash, but getting to 450bhp is easier on a TT, agreed?

 

Reading on the US Boards, it seems the most you can tune a N/A is about 15bhp extra, thats without Nitrous oviously though.

 

Paul

[dangerous brain]

And ariston And On this thread rolls. Like when I dared to suggest fitting a supercharger instead of of a turbokit I got all this balls about 700 hp machines etc lol.

 

I looked at the options for mine and the tuning options collectively ie the exhaust upgrades and the decats and the head work and lightening and all the rest of it totted up to a hell of a lot of cash For example £500-£600 just for the exhaust.

 

Now most people will not juust go out and splurge a load of money out in one go and have the car upgraded like that. They will do the job in stages ie one month do the decat in another the exhaust. Then whichever of the port flow work/ lightening work will be the right way round of doing things. All of these steps over possibly years. Thats how that kind of upgrade will work for those that can't afford the immediate leap to TT power.

 

For those that want the immediate rise to TT power then financially speaking the tuning option is a less viable option than looking at forced induction. I still put my money on the supercharger over a turbo charger kit if you only want to extract stock TT power, for all the reasons I put in my thread on the subject.

 

Then there is the other option that they reccomend in the states and thats a transplant. If you can source the engine and drivetrain (I have been offered from more than 1 source a TT engine transmission setup for circa £2k so they are out there and available), best bet is a whole written off car which are unfortunately for the previous owners available.

 

I still think that once developed the supercharger will be a very good option but with a transplant running significantly cheaper than the developement costs of a supercharger kit financially I am left with little option but to go for the cash freindly option.

[Rob]

Originally posted by Faye

Mandy ( The Pink Lady) says her Supe is putting out about 260 bhp. Maybe worth asking her how she's managed it.

 

she said...

 

Yes I had nurspec exhaust

Custome cold air intake

Polished head

superchipped.

Running at 264.5BHp

 

Gonna get it supercharged next with a shot of NOS for fun

Mandy

[Paul Laing]

Didn't think you could Superchip a Supra

 

Originally posted by Stu

Someone said to me it would be worth "chipping" my Supra if I didn't plan on any other mods?They said I would get a substantial gain in power for th amount it would cost..is this right?Also would it put any strain on engine and are the gains worth it?Thanks in advance..Is it right you gain about 30-40 bhp?

 

Originally posted by Terminator

No don't listen, not true, walk away and save your money.

 

The MKIV cannot be chipped.

[Rob]

Neither did I, but she said she gone dun it, and since I slagged her car for being pink, I ain't going to start calling her a liar as well.

 

 

Remember Mos, he had an intake cam designed and fitted on his N/A, it gave him an extra 15BHP.

[Paul Laing]

You can slightly tune them, but really you don't need to, they are quick enough for most people, i just get used to cars too quick! Then have to pay more money for faster ones......

[Rob]

I'll have to get mine dyno'd again.

 

It was 223/183 BHP with just an HKS induction kit, which in a RR dyno shed would sap some power (I believe, due to no air flow on static car), but I've now got De-catted HKS Hiper as well, so those mods would represent a BPU NA.

I suppose that lot would be £600 worth.

 

Mos' camshaft was £250 ish IIRC for 15 BHP.

[Paul Laing]

On my N/A i had custom exhaust which took out the first cat, but left the one in the downpipe, felt very quick for a N/A, i loved it

 

Any the noise,

 

Paul

[Tom]

Wow I didnt expect 4 pages of reading when I came back to this post!

 

Some interesting things there, I did mention the n/a being chipped in the first post, and as it was stated the the TT can not be chipped but I cannot see why the n/a cant, the engines are a lot different so im sure there are plenty of suppliers out there for the 2jzge, also these are future plans for when I get my car, the goal would be 280bhp or anything close to that, just enough to be a bit quicker than ctr's/itr's rs focus's etc, and lightening the car too maybe upto 100kg and get the handling spot on.

 

TBH I wouldnt want more than 280bhp thats probably the limit you need really, why would you need the car to be much more than that? unless you reguarly go to track days and 1/4 miles there's no real point as the power will never get used on the roads legally, i'd rather have the n/a supra that you can chuck about a bit and actually put the power down through the bends without having to worry about the 2nd turbo coming on.

 

Also in the US the guys are very power hungry but they've got the roads for it and plenty of 1/4 mile strips/circuits which we dont so its not really worth it IMO also the TT supra in stock form in the US is not that amazingly quick but here its extremely quick! as there are so many powerful cars that come out in stock form there.

 

Good/fun driving is about going through bends quick not in straight lines.

 

Anyway getting back to the first post why are the US guys struggling to break 15 sec 1/4 miles and making 200rwhp when here with less mods managing mid 14's? are the us spec n/a's more like the uk TT being quite heavier than the j's??

[dangerous brain]

Surely though if you haven't already purchased a car the better sense option is to buy the car that is already at the power level that you want? Unless you are going aero-top the price difference is now so little that with a trade off of miles you can get a TT for the same money as an N/A. You can of course buy an N/A and after a year or so and going to a few meets and feeling slow you will want that extra power, I know I have that feeling right now and its not nice.