| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 01 July 2003 11:52
 
|
 |
Ed's doing a 7MGE MA61.
As for savings, none, a bit and a bit more respectively.
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 01 July 2003 11:58
|
|
| gianttomato wrote on Tue, 01 July 2003 21:52 |
Ed's doing a 7MGE MA61.
|
"doing"?
"DOING"??
why i oughta!
To The MOON Alice!
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 01 July 2003 12:24
|
|
but ud save money on turbo piping and intercooler etc......
but i guess it wudnt be that much anyway 
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 01 July 2003 12:29
|
|
|
not comparedto the power gains, no
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 01 July 2003 12:30
|
|
|
Mmmm...maybe, and then you'd spend money trying to get it up to 7MGTE spec....6 of one, half a dozen of the other.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 02 July 2003 00:40
|
|
When are we going to hear this 7MGE scream Ed? You and your bitchy whinyness about ICQ2Go 
Seriously though, the 7MGE would be an alternative to the older 6MGE, but when you have the choice of going a 7MGTE for not a lot more, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense in the long run.
That said...theres nothing wrong with doing something different, especially when you have the ability to perform a lot of the work yourself.
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 02 July 2003 00:52
|
|
no idea when its going to run!
so many little fiddly things i want to do before i drop it in! but then again, the 5m is dying in a large way...so i need to move on things 
the main fiddly bit to do is calculating the deck height, and piston valve clerances. im getting the piston domes machined, and have to make sure the pistons, deck, head, and valve reliefs all match up to ~ 0.005"
i suspect some flycutting will be needed - even if olny 0.015" - 0.020" : its still pain in the arse.
but i pick my new manifold and cam gears up in 3 weeks, and im getting an ex mani plate laser cut this week (thanks hydro!). then i can start sorting out the headers...
BACK on topic: 7mge vs 7mgte - totaly different engines with different goals in mind. imho the 7mgte is kind of cheating - winding up the boost is a bit of a no brainer, much more finesse in getting an NA to work. but that takes LOTS of time and/or money. installation of the 7mgte is trickier, and maybe a little more $, and maintenance is more expensive. but theyre pretty much the same.
comes down to what you want out of your project: an engine SWAP that goes, or a tinkering project with some thought...
i chose the latter, and couldnt care less if the engine isnt as powerful as others 
cheers
ed
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 02 July 2003 01:14
|
|
| gianttomato wrote on Wed, 02 July 2003 11:02 |
Exactly what I am doing to 2JZGE Ver 2.00. About 20 thou off the domes and flycut, and 20 thou off the deck of the block.
|
...great minds...
im taking ~0.020" off the pistons, and ~0.035" off the block. pistons wil be ~ 0.010" out of the hole at TDC, and with a 1.2mm h/g, that leaves me with a final head clearance of ~0.035"
im also taking ~0.030" off the head, for a total height removal of 0.065" !! hello a calculated 11:1
i suspect with all of this, the flycuts will need doing im yet to figure exactly how much, and i dont want to dig more than 0.020" - 0.030" into the piston domes (i dont have a spare to cut open) so this will be the limiting factor on any machining...
cheers
ed
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 02 July 2003 11:28
|
|
| ed_ma61 wrote on Wed, 02 July 2003 10:52 |
imho the 7mgte is kind of cheating - winding up the boost is a bit of a no brainer, much more finesse in getting an NA to work. but that takes LOTS of time and/or money.
|
So in summary, a non-turbo engine takes a lot more time and effort to get the same result. But turbo is cheating!
I'm quite happy to be a cheat.
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 02 July 2003 12:17
|
|
yep
dont get me wrong, a turbo engine can be 'built' as a project as well, with just as much research, care, attention and detail as building a hiper NA - point is, most people dont bother
i like the "curious tinker" route, not the "wind up the boost and torque down the head" route
and keep in mind, i bought three 7mge's for $350. and having sold off all my extra bits etc, it actually MADE me money for a while there, paying for some of the machine work. only just recently did money start coming out of my pocket....
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
November 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 02 July 2003 12:41
|
|
| Quote: |
point is, most people dont bother
|
For good reason...
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 02 July 2003 14:35
|
|
| 7M-Brisbane wrote on Wed, 02 July 2003 22:41 |
For good reason...
|
yeah, 'cause its simpler not too, and it takes too much 'effort' and thought otherwise...
yeah, just wind up the boost, that'll fix it, duh
true performance turbo builds (like JUN etc), of course, do the true attention to detail approach, but most turbo'd conversions are simply just that - a swap with a bleed valve...
if thats what does it for you, great, but some of us like to know exactly what's going on inside, and like to know that every component is performing at its absolute peak of potential, and every tolerance is strung right to the wire...
|
|
|
Location:
Perth WA
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 02 July 2003 16:28
|
|
7mge is suspect of blowing head gaskets...5me is suspect of doing bottom ends...5mge is suspect of under performing 
7mge - 200hp stock
7mgte - 230hp stock *stock turbo boost and intercooler*
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 02 July 2003 22:36
|
|
Before this goes pear shaped, I just want to say that there is nothing wrong with turbo power, and as 7M Brisbane and Ed (and myself on previous occasions) have said, it's the most cost effective means of achieving significant power gains. I don't think anyone could honestly say that NA is the easy way to big power.
That said, for track work, turbo cars attract significant penalties (capacity multipliers, boost limitations, restrictor plates) and it may be in one's best interests to consider NA.
On a personal note, I enjoy the tinkering that goes on with building an NA motor, however I also enjoy the fruits of a nice turbo conversion.
PS: enough with the M bashing already. Thrashed 5MEs doing big ends 20-25 years after they were built - honestly, are you suprised? Tired 5MGEs underperforming compared to fresh motors with 20 years extra development - again, are you suprised? Grow a brain. I'll concede the head gasket weakness pertaining to the 7M, but it's easily fixed.
[Updated on: Wed, 02 July 2003 23:53]
|
|
|
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Thu, 03 July 2003 00:05
|
|
I'm with GT and Ed here...Ultimately, I'd love to eventually re-build the 1UZ as a 1UZ-GE, with all the right bits and pieces...I reckon with proper cams, intake (ie. ITBs), exhaust and some head work (a "Head job"?) it should be good for an easy 400+HP (around 300 at the rims) which, for an NA motor would be quite acceptable...(Even though my figures are probably a bit on the conservative side )
One day...
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Thu, 03 July 2003 02:17
|
|
|
Biased, if you EVER work out how to make the 1UZ become a 1UZGE...then I'm all ears!
|
|
|
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Thu, 03 July 2003 05:14
|
|
*laughs* No worries...
It'll probably go something like this...
"Good news everyone, I've finally built a 1UZ-GE! Now, where did I put my teeth?" 
|
|
|
Location:
Perth WA
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Thu, 03 July 2003 14:11
|
|
[quote title=gianttomato wrote on Thu, 03 July 2003 06:36]Before
PS: enough with the M bashing already. Thrashed 5MEs doing big ends 20-25 years after they were built - honestly, are you suprised? Tired 5MGEs underperforming compared to fresh motors with 20 years extra development - again, are you suprised? Grow a brain. I'll concede the head gasket weakness pertaining to the 7M, but it's easily fixed.[/qoute]
Look dude its from experiance. ! Im not comparing the engine's to newer engines OK ?
Now listen you might learn something, I have had 3 Cressida's in the family over the last 6moths.
First was a 5ME - good engine nice power for its age not bad torque over the rev range for its age. Eventually had a big end knock and is in the shop now getting it done.
Second 5MGE - Engine had good compression good fuel system good oil pressure and computer checked. And frankly it wasnt as good as the 5ME and in my EYES that is underperforming.
Third car was a 7MGE - 2 weeks and blow a HG need i say more ? Engine showed no signs of wear *not obvious* had cooling system done up on it new hoses raidator thermostat.
I drove all of these cars and the 7MGE had more power but i preferd the 5ME. I dont drive like a hoon. I drive the car for the feel of it. Not to go out and thrash the crapper out of it and break it. The 5ME was and still is a nice engine for its age and i will stand by that remark. 7MGE is a more refined engine and so it should be for its age being younger then the 5MGE. All engines can expect problems
And i wasnt "M" bashing. Just stating the obvious in my eyes. We all have differnt views and expectations about engines. And im not comparing these engines to newer ones. Why would i ? that wouldnt give a very good conclusion.
thats all ill say.
|
|
|
Location:
c'town, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Thu, 03 July 2003 22:00
|
|
| gianttomato wrote on Thu, 03 July 2003 08:36 |
Thrashed 5MEs doing big ends 20-25 years after they were built - honestly, are you suprised? Tired 5MGEs underperforming compared to fresh motors with 20 years extra development - again, are you suprised?
|
mazda please read this again and understand what Dave is saying...
|
|
|
Location:
Kenthurst, Sydney
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 00:31
|
|
so the conclusion is:
that mazda cant identify a farked car before buying it?
or:
3 is a valid sample size to infer statistical conclusions?
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 01:24
|
|
| Mazda626 wrote on Fri, 04 July 2003 00:11 |
Now listen you might learn something
|
whoa, thems fighten words...
2 other words:
'preventative maintenance'
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 01:54
|
|
Mazda626, the very fact that you were able to buy 3 cars in 6 months to me illustrates why they blew up - they were not prime examples and were commanding relatively low prices. Either that or you can't pick a shitter. Turbovan has also made an adequate evaluation of your understanding of statistics so I need to denigrate your intelligence no further.
Having owned over 12 M powered cars in the last 15 years, and built 10 or so early M motors, associating with other M fanatics (one of whom owns over 50 M powered cars), I feel that my experience and knowledge base surrounding early M series engines is ample, although I can always learn more. However, I don't think you are going to be where that extra little bit of knowledge is coming from.
|
|
|
Location:
Madrid - Spain
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 03:22
|
|
I don't know much about M series engines, but is the bottom end in the gte's the same as the ge's.
I know many factory turbo engines are stronger than the NA equivalents. If this is true then using the NA pistons and cams in the GTE block would be a good start.
The great thing about the factory turbo engines is that most of the hard work has been done in the factory. The bottom end is tuff and a little bit of work on induction and exhaust will reap rewards and I don't just mean the bits bolting to the outside of the head.
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 03:32
|
|
The 7M-GTE bottom end has a few minor differences, eg oil squirters. You can put the oil squirters in an NA block with a bit of machining though.
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 05:39
|
|
| gold28 wrote on Fri, 04 July 2003 13:22 |
If this is true then using the NA pistons and cams in the GTE block would be a good start
|
thats exactly what im doing
7mge vs 7mgte:
7mgte block has
a) oil squirters
b) remote oil filter mounting is machined and dowled
c) extra oil gallery return is machined
7mge block has:
a) low pressure oil outlet fitting
b) sump has oil retun line fitting
- rods are the same between both builds
- my 7mgte crank is forged
- im 'told' the 7mgte crank has some extra hardening, or is made of a different alloy, or some such thing (wilkins performance told me this - cant remember exactly)
- the 7mgte crank oil holes are chamfered more than 7mge (could be a year of production thing vs model thing)
-oil pumps are identical
cheers
ed
|
|
|
Location:
Hobart, Tas
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 06:16
|
|
| justcallmefrank wrote on Wed, 02 July 2003 10:40 |
Seriously though, the 7MGE would be an alternative to the older 6MGE
|
I read somewhere a long time ago that someone said the 6mge had a much better head design (or something) than the 7mge or maybe it was the te. I can't remember the specifics but it came to mind just then.
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 06:24
|
|
| Stefan wrote on Fri, 04 July 2003 16:16 |
| justcallmefrank wrote on Wed, 02 July 2003 10:40 |
Seriously though, the 7MGE would be an alternative to the older 6MGE
|
I read somewhere a long time ago that someone said the 6mge had a much better head design (or something) than the 7mge or maybe it was the te. I can't remember the specifics but it came to mind just then.
|
the 6m/5m head design is potentially better than the 7m for turbo applications due to it being only 2v per cyl (vs 4v 7m)...
there are both advantages and disadvantages to the 2v design though...
|
|
|
Location:
Hobart, Tas
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 06:30
|
|
Fair enough, but I think there was a bit more to it than that, I think I remember reading that specifically about the 6mge vs 7m. It's all a bit vague though.
Just to clear things up... in the US they got the 5me to begin with then the 5mge, but here we just got the 5me all the way throuhg and the 7m for the mk3, right? Wonder why.
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 07:29
|
|
| ed_ma61 wrote on Fri, 04 July 2003 16:24 |
the 6m/5m head design is potentially better than the 7m for turbo applications due to it being only 2v per cyl (vs 4v 7m)...
|
Eh? How did you reach this conclusion?
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
November 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 07:47
|
|
Turbo cars make more power in a less-stressed setup for less money, and make it possible to have large amount of horsepower in a driveable car that does not throw fuel away. Therefore turbos are bad. I see your argument. My mistake.
Seriously, this is an argument that I don't have the patience to win. There is only one time when an atmo engine is better - if you want to fit into a certain racing class. Other than that you're welcome to waste your money developing a less-than ideal setup. Please continue, I'll enjoy the extra money I have in the bank and the sensation I get when I spank your arse on the highway.
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
November 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 07:55
|
|
| Norbie wrote on Fri, 04 July 2003 17:29 |
| ed_ma61 wrote on Fri, 04 July 2003 16:24 |
the 6m/5m head design is potentially better than the 7m for turbo applications due to it being only 2v per cyl (vs 4v 7m)...
|
Eh? How did you reach this conclusion?
|
I was just going to let that slide, but now that you've brought it up... what the f_ck are you guys on? You clearly have very little understanding of... anything.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 08:41
|
|
It's an opinion that was bandied about on the Yahoo Mk2 Supra forums a long time ago. Some guys even believed it to the point that they actually built a 5MG headed 7MGTE. FFS, why not just turbo a 6MG (if that's your bent)?
I believe it had nothing to do with flow (I couldn't imagine any of those guys actually doing something vaguely scientific like measure flows), but something to do with two large valves being less likely to burn than 4 smaller valves. Sounds like a story to me unless someone is hiding a huge stash of 7MGTEs with burnt exhaust valves!
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 08:58
|
|
| 7M-Brisbane wrote on Fri, 04 July 2003 17:55 |
You clearly have very little understanding of... anything.
|
oh, pah-leeease...
i belive that the theory behind the yanks preference of the 2v vs 4v in forced induction setups was related to volume-flow versus valve surface area at low lift and high lift, and the different requirements of vlave timing and intke flow harmonic characteristics required between NA and forced induction setups.
no, i never did the maths to prove it right or wrong, but hell, they believed it and built engines based on these considerations. that is what i made my statement based upon.
GT is correct in that burning small valves was cited as a concern also.
and for the record mr 7M-Brisbane, noone is saying NA's is BETTER than forced induction, noone is saying turbo cars are 'bad',nor is ANYONE saying that an NA car will beat a turbo setup down the highway (where you like pulling your dick, apparently)...
christ, do you need a hug? have we upset your turbo so much you feel you need to defend it? if you read carefully - noone has challenged the performance potential of a turbo at all.
|
|
|
Location:
Perth WA
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 11:37
|
|
Look dude im not questioning your knowlege. I am just say NONE of these cars showed any forms of servre engine wear or stress when purchaced and i look through the cars before buying one.
I am stating a fact. In my EYE thats what i saw, i dont care if you dont like what im saying because i dont really give a toss.
5ME are notorous for spinnig big ends.
The 5MGE that the family owned didnt even come close to the 5ME.
and the 7MGE blowed the head gasket.
Dont like it ? stiff.
|
|
|
Location:
c'town, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 13:25
|
|
*cough* robbo syndrome *cough* 
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 14:38
|
|
Mazda626: did you join this forum to piss off everyone you come across? You're doing a top job so far!
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Fri, 04 July 2003 23:48
|
|
The few 5Ms I have seen that have done big ends have all been:
- high mileage units,
- poorly maintained (on all occasions low on oil), and
- comprehensively thrashed.
Is this any different to any other motor you have seen with spun big ends? Is it the engine or is it the owner? I'm yet to see a motor that survives this degree of neglect and abuse.
All 5MGEs I have driven have conferred a significant performance advantage over the SOHC 5M. I can't explain what was wrong with yours. Have you driven any others? Probably not, therefore they are all shit. Right.
7Ms unfortuantely have the propensity to blow head gaskets. It comes with the territory. Fix it. Properly. The first time. By someone who knows what they are doing. It won't give you a problem again.
Enjoy your Mazda 626. It was a car of the year you know, like the Leyland P76, Camira and Magna.
|
|
|
Location:
Hobart, Tas
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Sat, 05 July 2003 03:40
|
|
| gianttomato wrote on Sat, 05 July 2003 09:48 |
Enjoy your Mazda 626. It was a car of the year you know, like the Leyland P76, Camira and Magna.
|
LMAO!
|
|
|
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Sat, 05 July 2003 08:55
|
|
| ed_ma61 wrote on Fri, 04 July 2003 18:58 |
| 7M-Brisbane wrote on Fri, 04 July 2003 17:55 |
You clearly have very little understanding of... anything.
|
and for the record mr 7M-Brisbane, noone is saying NA is BETTER than forced induction, no-one is saying turbo cars are 'bad';nor is ANYONE saying that an NA car will beat a turbo setup down the highway (where you like pulling your dick, apparently)...
|
Well...Not exactly. My love of the 1UZ is well-known. What is, perhaps, less-well known is why I put one in the Cressida rather than, say a 1/2JZ. The reason? Simply under-stressed, bullet-proof reliability. Adding Turbos does two things:
1) Adds serious HP to most applications
2) Also adds the worry of a turbo "letting go" and ruining your engine.
...and for those about to say "My turboed *insert engine here* will s&*t on a 1UZ, let me say this:
Take one 1UZ. Add proper twin throttle-body setup. Add proper extractor/exhaust system. Add proper CAI. Add after-market engine management (in my case, delete this option, as I already have).
What do you have? About 400HP (300-odd at the wheels), in a bullet-proof (stock-internals) NA machine.
Yes, you'll get better performance in a high-boost turbo application...But will you run all day (say, for example, in the heat of the Top End - where there are no speed limits - but where it's also 32 degrees air temp), while I'm doing so?
*ends rant - and stands back for resultant shit-fight!*
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Sat, 05 July 2003 10:11
|
|
biased,
I'm with you in that I am a HUGE fan of the 1UZFE, money is what restricts me from having one. What I don't understand is this notion of a turbo letting go and destroying an engine...I would've thought it was 99% of the time a problem with the engine itself that made it let go!
That said, my next project car will HAVE to include a UZ...of some description
|
|
|
Membership Secretary
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 00:16
|
|
Just a quick question on my never ending quest for more car knowledge.
Is the machining of the fly wheel to lighten it or is there another reason you boys are getting them machined??
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 00:25
|
|
| TheStitt wrote on Tue, 08 July 2003 10:16 |
Is the machining of the fly wheel to lighten it or is there another reason you boys are getting them machined??
|
to lighten it
but ths is a dodgy practise on stock flywheels, much safer to get a lightweight chro-molly one machined up.
of course, you always machine the flywheel clutch face when you change the clutch plate...
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 02:21
|
|
| biased99 wrote on Sat, 05 July 2003 18:55 |
Take one 1UZ. Add proper twin throttle-body setup. Add proper extractor/exhaust system. Add proper CAI. Add after-market engine management (in my case, delete this option, as I already have).
What do you have? About 400HP (300-odd at the wheels), in a bullet-proof (stock-internals) NA machine.
|
Sounds very nice indeed, but that 400hp will cost you well over $10k. Ouch!
| Quote: |
Yes, you'll get better performance in a high-boost turbo application...But will you run all day (say, for example, in the heat of the Top End - where there are no speed limits - but where it's also 32 degrees air temp), while I'm doing so?
|
Yes. There's no reason a turbo 400hp engine will run any warmer than a non-turbo 400hp engine, all else being equal.
[Updated on: Tue, 08 July 2003 02:22]
|
|
|
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 03:41
|
|
[quote title=Norbie wrote on Tue, 08 July 2003 12:21]| biased99 wrote on Sat, 05 July 2003 18:55 |
Take one 1UZ. Add proper twin throttle-body setup. Add proper extractor/exhaust system. Add proper CAI. Add after-market engine management (in my case, delete this option, as I already have).
What do you have? About 400HP (300-odd at the wheels), in a bullet-proof (stock-internals) NA machine.
|
Norbie wrote:
| Quote: |
Sounds very nice indeed, but that 400hp will cost you well over $10k. Ouch!
|
I disagree. The mods listed above, while they would cost money, it should be possible for around $3k (in my car, as it sits, anyway). I have had quotes for things like the Twin Throttle-body setup ($1000 - this from the blokes at AEC) and exhaust (around $2000 - from an exhaust shop-owning, Soarer enthusiast). The CAI I can fabricate myself (with a little help from my friends ) and the after-market engine-management is already there...
| Quote: |
Yes, you'll get better performance in a high-boost turbo application...But will you run all day (say, for example, in the heat of the Top End - where there are no speed limits - but where it's also 32 degrees air temp), while I'm doing so?
|
Norbie also wrote:
| Quote: |
Yes. There's no reason a turbo 400hp engine will run any warmer than a non-turbo 400hp engine, all else being equal.
|
My question related more to the higher ambient temps being "unkinder" to a turbo'd car than an NA vehicle...(Large ICs notwithstanding! ) Note that while there myself, I didn't see a lot of turbo'd (high-performance) cars there relative to other types. (Of course, that may be because the NT guys haven't "caught up" yet...
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 05:18
|
|
| biased99 wrote on Tue, 08 July 2003 13:41 |
I disagree. The mods listed above, while they would cost money, it should be possible for around $3k (in my car, as it sits, anyway).
|
I wasn't talking about you specifically; I meant that if the average joe went out and purchased a 1UZ-FE then modified it to produce 300 rwhp, it would cost $10k plus. By comparison, my 2JZ-GTE ran 305 rwhp on Sunday, totally stock apart from exhaust and cooler. I can tell you that costs a hell of a lot less than $10k!
|
|
|
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 05:45
|
|
No worries...I guess that, from scratch, it WOULD cost decent $$.
|
|
|
Location:
Bris-vague-us
Registered:
October 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 05:45
|
|
 305rwhp
Nice 1 Norbie 
I want one  
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 06:34
|
|
| gianttomato wrote on Tue, 08 July 2003 16:05 |
Just the octet of throttle bodies for a 1UZ would set you back 2000! Another 2K for cams (real cams not some faggy 'move the power curve around' cams), a shim under bucket conversion with decent valve springs, some decent aftermarket setup to run this crazy thing, a bit of porting, a big wad of fabricating, serious exhaust...I'm counting 12K so far! That said I'd have a permanent chubby.....
|
Remember, I said twin throttle bodies...Yes the ITBs would cost big $ but the twin-setup I'm thinking of (as used by Bullet in their later incarnations) is made from a machined 1UZ item, produces similar power to the ITB setup (so I'm told) with less noise, and obviously costs a lot less...
As for cams...BIG $$$. (I hadn't even really considered going to that extent - primarily due to cost!)
Also, I'm reasonably certain the Autronic will run most things I can throw at it. (So, at least in my case, that expense is mitigated... )
Anyway, having said all that:
Yes, I agree that the turbo'd route is ultimately cheaper bang for buck.
I also agree with people like yourself that like the "well-engineered, get everything out of it you can" route...
Oh, and when I win the Lotto, I'll do exactly as you've outlined above with the 1UZ...then look out!
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 10:01
|
|
| biased99 wrote on Tue, 08 July 2003 16:34 |
Remember, I said twin throttle bodies...Yes the ITBs would cost big $ but the twin-setup I'm thinking of (as used by Bullet in their later incarnations) is made from a machined 1UZ item, produces similar power to the ITB setup (so I'm told) with less noise, and obviously costs a lot less...
As for cams...BIG $$$. (I hadn't even really considered going to that extent - primarily due to cost!)
|
Has anyone measured the bucket diameter, and any of the spring characteristics of the 1UZ?
And where can I find a bit more info on this twin TB mod?
|
|
|
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Tue, 08 July 2003 22:27
|
|
| gianttomato wrote on Tue, 08 July 2003 20:01 |
Has anyone measured the bucket diameter, and any of the spring characteristics of the 1UZ?
And where can I find a bit more info on this twin TB mod?
|
For the technical stuff, you've probably got two choices - First, Pete Scott's Planet Soarer or, for even more in-depth 1UZ stuff, look at http://www.lextreme.com, which has write-ups on 1UZ "bits", TT conversions (Yes, Jamie also hangs out there), and all sorts of 1UZ conversion links...Even mine.
As for the twin throttle-body setup, PM me if you want details of who I spoke to.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 09 July 2003 00:10
|
|
I'm sort of lurking at Lextreme already.....found this today - it's a good start: http://www.lextreme.com/Lex%20Specs.pdf
Interesting thing is the buckets are 31mm diam (just like a 2JZ) so a shim underbucket conversion ends up being a bit cheaper (only a bit ).
|
|
|
Location:
Central Coast
Registered:
July 2003
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 09 July 2003 03:22
|
|
| gianttomato wrote on Sat, 05 July 2003 09:48 |
Enjoy your Mazda 626. It was a car of the year you know, like the Leyland P76, Camira and Magna.
|
Gotta love biased comments!
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 09 July 2003 07:33
|
|
Gezzus you girls still bitching about the same shit!
seems like some of the dickhead factor has been flushed tho think ill look around here a bit more..
My thoughts..
My 5M-E:
Regular oil changes, thrashed regularly to 6500 and beyond and so far about 3 years out of it (Mr SupraV8 im shure had his fun out of the engine too), plenty of external let downs (IE ignition, alt, fuel system 20 year old car!!) but still running smoothly 63RWKW and run lean 16.5:1 causing eventual BHG but fixed for $100 (old M bits cheap and everywhere)
My 7M-GTE:
Just picked up MrEmils old MA70 (turbo, auto and sport roof)basically stock 100,000km on it has been boosted in the past, suffered a BHG replaced by previous owner at a "mazda performance" workshop SHIT job done (no washers fitted to the head studs the main problem) obviously first day turning a spanner for the money that did it bashed firewall and TEMS cover anyway died 2 hours after the engine mount was fixed and the car was driven for a long distance, Washers fitted and new toyota gasket, stock boost 120RWKW just done 1800km in 3 days to spin the rollers up there no problems at all
Mazda's
FE block 2ltr absolute SHIT has major head issues with cooling, cracking ect... shitfull design and basically a shopping trolley car there feted too!
Allan
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 09 July 2003 07:44
|
|
|
One word...yay!
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 09 July 2003 07:47
|
|
|
Look at what the cat dragged in......
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 09 July 2003 07:49
|
|
*ed does backflips*
this has to be a sign that the forums is returning to its former glory
like the first animal returning to its logged home in the forrest
or something like that
welcome back allan!
cheers
ed
PS: so much for that bloody ma70
|
|
|
Location:
c'town, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: 7mge vs 7mgte
|
Wed, 09 July 2003 07:51
|
|
damn now we cant talk openly about him
just kidding dude welcome back!  
|
|
|
