| Author | Topic |
|---|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 04:26
|
 |
Iam sorry if this has been posted before but I couldn't find anything when I searched it.
Iam looking at buying either a Ae82 Twin cam 86KW 'rolla or the 100KW SX. What I want to know is which car is quicker/faster and/or better overall package.
I would assume the ae82 is lighter that than the SX so thats why iam not too sure...
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne - NthSubs
Registered:
January 2004
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 04:30
|
|
sx, its newer and better
on the other hand... something like a 4agze ae82 would be a little quicker 
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 04:47
|
|
|
I would like to get an SX but Iam really reluctant to get rid of my HSV. I need something with a bit of go otherwise Iam not going to be happy
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 06:04
|
|
| hsv215i wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 14:26 |
Iam sorry if this has been posted before but I couldn't find anything when I searched it.
Iam looking at buying either a Ae82 Twin cam 86KW 'rolla or the 100KW SX. What I want to know is which car is quicker/faster and/or better overall package.
I would assume the ae82 is lighter that than the SX so thats why iam not too sure...
|
umm... i really don't know my FWD pieces of crap, but...
didn't the AE82 come with the 100kw, and the AE92 only with 4AC and 4AF variants?
hmm... althought holdens are not my thing... and 215kw is pitiful from such a massive engine... i'd keep the commonwhore instead of getting into an even more underpowered shopping trolley...
at least your current shopping trolley is good as a tow car 
Cya, Stewart
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 08:49
|
|
You have kind missed the point. A V8 engine is not all about sky high KW ratings. 215KW may sound low for stroked 5.0L. but there is not much out there that has more than 400NM available at idle, and 485Nm at 4000RPM.
How old is the holdens V8 now? 20yrs old??? I think its doing pretty well.
But yeah Iam after a road car not a racing car. So any helpful suggestions would be appreciated. Can I please only get replies from ppl who know what they are talking about.
thanks guys
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 09:04
|
|
| hsv215i wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 18:49 |
You have kind missed the point. A V8 engine is not all about sky high KW ratings. 215KW may sound low for stroked 5.0L. but there is not much out there that has more than 400NM available at idle, and 485Nm at 4000RPM.
How old is the holdens V8 now? 20yrs old??? I think its doing pretty well.
But yeah Iam after a road car not a racing car. So any helpful suggestions would be appreciated. Can I please only get replies from ppl who know what they are talking about.
thanks guys
|
heh he, you missed the point also.... think of the kw if it could rev above 5000rpm yes, for a 1960's design, it's doing ok...
ANYWAY...
AE82 are older, AE92 is nicer to drive, and look better.
if you are looking for just a car to be driving around, the AE92 with 100kw would be a better package.. just...
it's ok, i never know what i am talking about.... i just post up ueless shit that no-one ever reads 
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 09:10
|
|
| hsv215i wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 14:47 |
I would like to get an SX but Iam really reluctant to get rid of my HSV. I need something with a bit of go otherwise Iam not going to be happy
|
AE92 + 4AGZE...
you know about torque steer right?
why not something newer (and also cheap) like a camry V6?
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 09:14
|
|
Thanks mate,
I think I just need to take a few for a drive and work it out for myself.
Might just end up buying another V8
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 09:26
|
|
L love the V6 camry, such a beautiful smooth engine. Camrys are a little understeery though...
My mate used to drive a 5spd manual and it is actually quite a quick car
|
|
|
Location:
Potts Point, Sydney
Registered:
October 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 09:56
|
|
i'd go with the ae82 4agze alternative, ver nice and responsive with a bit of go 
|
|
|
Location:
syd- northen beaches
Registered:
June 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 10:02
|
|
didn't the AE82 come with the 100kw, and the AE92 only with 4AC and 4AF variants?[/quote]
ae82 twincam16 =4age(bigport)=86kw
ae92 sx =4age(smallport)=100kw
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 10:05
|
|
Iam pretty sure they are both 4age.
Iam not to keen to down the path of engine transplant, so 4agze prolly not a real option. I want to keep it simple to insure and run
|
|
|
Location:
Potts Point, Sydney
Registered:
October 2003
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 10:30
|
|
|
Thats the normal stock engines. Iam only interested in the wide angle cammed engines, which are the 4age variants
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 14:57
|
|
| hsv215i wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 14:47 |
I would like to get an SX but Iam really reluctant to get rid of my HSV. I need something with a bit of go otherwise Iam not going to be happy
|
What kind of HSV have you got? 'cuz you might find a GZE AE92/AE82 is faster. Although torque steer will be a new and interesting experience for you.
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
August 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Sun, 16 October 2005 20:00
|
|
|
ive got an sx ae92 100kw for sale mate, 3200, let us know if ur interested
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 10:22
|
|
its a 94 senator 5.7 L. factory claimed times 6.9 sec 0-100 and 15.0sec quarter. So for a stock holden V8 its pretty good.
how hard is it to insure a agze transplanted into a 'rolla?
The only reason Iam getting rid of the V8 is high insurance and running cost. I need to start saving some money. There is not much point in getting something else that cost a fortune to insure.
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 11:42
|
|
| oldcorollas wrote on Sun, 16 October 2005 19:10 |
AE92 + 4AGZE...
you know about torque steer right?
why not something newer (and also cheap) like a camry V6?
|
My gze ae82 is quite tame. Mere 15x195x50 tyres, no lsd but admittedly power steering. It's quite suprising how well these chasis' grip.
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 11:47
|
|
|
Iam very interested in the 4agze but just worried about how much hassle it is to transplant the engine into ae92 and get insurance. I havent really experience torque steer but I've been in a mates car thats done it and yeah that was a bit scary. I think I prefer the back end of the car to dance sideways than the front
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 11:55
|
|
Oh I'm not recommending it as something to do. It's probably a lot easier to simply turbo the stock 4age than it is to implant a gze.
I was merely pointing out that there isnt a lot of torque steer in these chassis'. It's there if you really push it. But if you have even the slightest concept of throttle control, it's not really an issue even on corners.
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 12:04
|
|
I used to have a ae82 with the carbie engine but that was prolly to underpowered to get torque steer. Especially with 17inch rims weighing her down.
I have driven a V6 camry quite a bit and never noticed any real bad torque steer
|
|
|
Location:
Potts Point, Sydney
Registered:
October 2003
|
|
|
Registered:
October 2005
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 13:19
|
|
For a low level 6-10psi setup it'd still probably be easier, cheaper and arguably as reliable as a gze swap and a turbo.
That's assuming it's tuned properly and in fairly good condition to start with. For more than that, a more hardcore setup, then the ze's internals start to look more appropriate.
The main reason Toyota did it ofcourse is reliability over the very long term.
The standard gze can run on shit fuel, be thrashed to hell, neglected, and still not die within the warranty period.
Besides that, when you're an OEM dealing with masses of engines, the small desirables like forged, ceramic coated pistons, scale well with volume so they dont even notice the manufacturing cost increase.
What I'm basically saying is that Toyota did it not because they NEED to be, but because the little bit extra had a minimal cost impact with a maximum probability of reliability under any conditions.
The stock 4AGE, like any other motor out there, will handle low amounts of boost without modification or strengthening - assuming it's serviced and tuned correctly.
The main benefit I see of the gze is its' computer. Rigging a GZE computer up to a GE with a turbo and a couple of extra sensors should allow for a reletively cheap turbo kit.
But anyhow, back on topic. 100kw or 87kw.
All I can say is you're not buying an engine, you're buying a car. Get the one in the best condition for your dollar.
If you find an 87kw '82 with good suspension, neat paint, clean interior and a service history for a low price, you'd be stupid to knock it back because of 13kw.
Buy the package.
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 13:29
|
|
|
if all you want is a stock car with a bit of go... methinks a corolla is a fair step down from the senator... sure the rolla has redeeming features, but power is not one of them. i think a V6 camry/vienta would give most rollas a run for their money.. and no, they don't have enough power to torque steer...
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne - NthSubs
Registered:
January 2004
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 13:29
|
|
i find it hard to 'not' to wheel spin with the gze on 185/60/r14's 
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 13:31
|
|
| rthy wrote on Mon, 17 October 2005 23:29 |
i find it hard to 'not' to wheel spin with the gze on 185/60/r14's
|
isn't that becuase you have shit tyres that are nearly bald??
with good tyres, the difference in grip will be amazing.. buy some good tyres next time (ie yokies, falken, RE055, proxes etc etc)
|
|
|
Location:
Potts Point, Sydney
Registered:
October 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 13:40
|
|
yeh get better/wider tyres
i've currently got 17's with 205/40 Zigen (or something or rather) and damn do they grip
|
|
|
Banned by his request
Location:
moved to tamworth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 22:56
|
|
the good thing about a well setup rolla is that no senator etc is going to keep up with it threw the corners and under brakes.me i like going very fast around the bendy bits and limit braking.there is nothing like going around the outside of someone going quick around a corner, on the track of course.
mick
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne - NthSubs
Registered:
January 2004
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Mon, 17 October 2005 23:56
|
|
they where good... they use to be on the ae95 with about 60% tred left, 2weeks on the ae82 and they have like 25% tred left on the front 
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Tue, 18 October 2005 01:21
|
|
My car did 0-100 in 7.3 seconds with a passenger and less than desireable conditions (tyres where a tiny bit damp).
Granted that was just on a G-tech though.
My car:
96.6kw ATW (stock 125kw at the fly)
1150kg
That power is easily attainable with a 4A-GZE (stock 120kw at the fly) or 4A-GTE. Also, with either of these engines you'd get more torque low down (I gotta wait till over 4500rpm before my car gets any grunt).
The AE92 is also under 1000kg.
So you'd be looking at an easy 6.8-7.0 second 0-100, with better cornering and response than your senator. Not to mention better economy.
I hear 4A-GZEs get about 10ltr/100km if tuned properly.
My car gets torque steer on laucnh, and power under around corners if I'm not carefull. I would suggest an LSD if you plan on having more than 90kw at the wheels (my car lacks that item and I'm suffering for it).
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne - NthSubs
Registered:
January 2004
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Tue, 18 October 2005 03:42
|
|
yea, mine has a stock lsd and is a nice smooth take off followed by wheel spin at med>high revs 
u should take the vtec to calder drags and c wat u get? ill take my grannyspec ae82 once i get it to rwc
|
|
|
Location:
Campbelltown
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Tue, 18 October 2005 03:44
|
|
| rthy wrote on Tue, 18 October 2005 13:42 |
yea, mine has a stock lsd and is a nice smooth take off followed by wheel spin at med>high revs
|
Sounds just like our Camry Touring five speed manual though it doesn't have an lsd, doesn't torque steer, but if you are giving it stick off the line it'll launch fine then it'll light it up once 4k+rpm comes on board (about 30kmph). This is with good condition tyres on 16 inch mags.
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne - NthSubs
Registered:
January 2004
|
|
Re: AE82 Vs. Ae92 100kw SX
|
Tue, 18 October 2005 07:29
|
|
i donno, i dont have a tacho
if i stick it off the line it will just wheel spin... then wheel spin even more at 4000
|
|
|
Because the gze's come with forged internals and lower compression ratio...