no

 

^ helpful lol.

I don't see the point in a "street friendly" 1xxxwhp/wtq supra.. 600 is tipping friendly IMO. However, time and time again, the 2jz has proven itself... So why not? If you can afford to build a motor That will handle regular street driving/bursts of death, then you can afford a rebuild that will handle 700-800 in my opinion.

 

If you want 1000wtq you should be looking at big-displacement V8's.

The 2JZ-GTE, while a brutally over-engineered engine, is killed by torque a lot more easily than it is killed by HP. Considering that most of the 1500-1600whp boost only 2JZ's are in the 800-900wtq range from what I've seen, combined with it's nature as a small displacement engine (in the grand scheme of big power, 3.0L or 3.4L is puny) it depends on that 8k-9k redline to make huge numbers, which means you'll have way more HP than torque.

If you're determined to throw a huge shot at it and make big torque numbers, spend the $$$ on a top-notch 3.4L build with the beefiest rods you can find (likely to be the beefed-up Carrillos from what research I've done), Billet mains + a block girdle, SPS Carr hardware, and a hell of a precise engine builder. Also going by the usual numbers I've seen, which show most ~1000whp 2JZ-GTE's being in the 600 to low 700 range in wtq, You're looking at at least a 200 shot, which naturally would be wisest to implement as a progressive direct port, or do a progressive 200 with a 100 fogger on top, etc etc. With that much nitrous + boost you're going to want to stay low on the compression even if you're running E85 or the good stuff.
Sort out the nitrous on low low boost, then start throwing boost at it with ridiculously conservative timing numbers, and get prepared to break the fuck out of all kinds of driveline parts in search of a silly ass number.

 

There are some 1000rwhp Supras on the site that have made low 800 ft lbs all boost see here:

My personal car made 787rwhp and 674 ft/lbs on race gas and a bone stock longblock. Also a few of the of the 3.4L cars making 1500+ whp are making over 1000rwtq. Amit's car made 1053 ft/lbs, Jamie Carter's car made 1000 ft/lbs etc.

I also wouldn't call 3.0L puny. Porsche still builds performance cars that displace 3.X liters and still wins numerous road racing competitions.


As for the OP's question, I doubt you are going to see 1000rwtq on a street friendly Supra. Most of the reasons explained in the post by wreckless.

 

Gonna be tough, but I did make 758ft torque and 780hp. E85, 74mm. I dont know about 1000 though...

 

doesnt seem possible with that size of a turbo but try and see let us know the results

 

ok so call my crazy but i have this idea once i build my motor to shoot for 1000 rwtq but i want a street friendly car ( great spool fast response ect)

1k rwtq Street friendly? LOL ! Supra owners are crazy..

 

1000WTQ and street friendly shouldn't be in the same sentence. In fact the torque would make the car less fun to drive due to traction. You are better off building a 1000whp Supra that will make between 700-800wtq. The displacement of the 2JZ is just too small to make huge torque numbers and honestly that is an advantage. I'd say a super nice streetable set up would be one of the new 76-80mm T4 turbos, a 3.4l, and the SP QSV. That combo would provide great spool and enough power to take out 99% of the cars on the street.

Steve

 

Kageryu, that car actually cracked 900 ft. lbs.
I think you mis-read the graph.

 

ok let me clarify a few things. when i say street friendly i am referencing to the boost only part throttle performance i want the combo to be making 400+ rwtq by 4000 if not sooner. again on boost only. my whole point was if you took a great responding combo already and give it a healthy shot could that 1k tq happen? given many of the newer 62 and 67's are making 700+ tq as it is throw 200+ worth of spray early in the rpm i think it might surprise people.

 

You'd need to focus on low rpm power obviously... sooo.

Running a set of twins with over sized compressors relative to their exhaust housing, such that you'd be choking out power at 6000 rpm. It could be done. And I'd go air to water intercooling, and find some way to chill that water.

You'd need lots of headwork, and cam, even though it pushes VE to the right you'll still need that capacity to handle the volume of air at high boosts even at low rpm. I'd run a stock intake manifold with ported runners.

Again you'd need to size the exhaust housing and wheels on the twins such that power would be dropping off by 6,000 rpm otherwise you won't spool fast enough and you'll be turning torque into RPMs making power and not hitting your torque target.

If I had money to waste I might try something like this one day, but I don't so I won't.

Let's not forget how you're going to require a 3.4 stroker.

 

beau i am glad you at least gave this a little thought instead of pulling the classic "no one has done it so it cant be done"

but remember that i am talking about taking a combo that lots of people do and simply add a large shot of spray at a low rpm to move the curve left and hopefully up a good amount
for example take a built 3.0 with a 6768 and a large exhaust side (divided) and have a qsv to keep the the normal response strong. i would think you would need to keep the a/r large to hopefully attempt to flow the kind of exhaust energy created by 3Xpsi + and 200hp of nitrous

 

Ryan Woons old Supra.

 

We have done it with various different setups.

 

ok again i should have said can 1000tq be done on a < 74mm turbo. i know there have been plenty of 1k tq supras but they all do it at a much higher rpm then what i am talking about.

 

for example take this 7175 that made 9xx on boost and hit it with 200hp @ 2900 what would be the results??
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?636546-Precision-7175-CEA-Billet-dyno-903whp-36psi

 

I would have thought a possible way would be to use a compound turbo system? Gives awesome boost off the mark from 2500rpm with a smallish say 400whp 56mm turbo and then transitions to a larger say 76mm turbo from 4500rpm to redline. This with a 3.4lt, qsv and E85 might work? I know one workshop here in Australia that is doing this kinda work and getting fantastic results.

 

Wait are you talking about 1000 wtq anywhere or at a low rpm?

 

1000 tq at less than 6000 rpm

 

Perhaps you should consider the Bugatti Veyron....

 

The problem will be in finding a way to get such a small exhaust housing/wheel mated to such a large compressor.

 

correct me if i am wrong cuz i probably am lol if you were to add nitrous to an already maxed out compressor wouldnt you still gain power as you arnt making the power from the air flow rather the reaction of the nitrous with said air flow in the in the combustion chamber? i would think it could be the opposite of what your suggesting. perhaps a silly large exhaust housing (preferably twin scroll to use qsv to keep light throttle response) to help keep up with the added exhaust flow.

 

why not just sleeve your block with block extension girdle, and make a 4 litre 2jz. custom crank.

lets make some torque at low rpm.

if skylines can kick it up from 2.6 to 3 litre we should be able to kick a 3.4 litre up to like 3.8 or 4 with some ingenuity.







disregard peak hp

acquire torque

 

Interesting idea but I am sure this would take quite a bit of work and engineering. Also this is assuming the engine won't fail during test runs. Pretty sure with a stroker crank like that, the rod ratio will not be optimal.

 

now granted it isnt 1k tq 1k hp but it is close enough for me.

THIS is exactly what i was referring to

more info here
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sh...read.php?647531-New-Precision-66-turbine-wheels-for-67-and-62-CEA-turbos./page7
put this car on a dynojet and ill bet it would be within 20-30 hp/tq of 1k

thinking outside the box ftw!! its a shame more wouldnt try "new" things.

 

now granted it isnt 1k tq 1k hp but it is close enough for me.

THIS is exactly what i was referring to

more info here
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sh...read.php?647531-New-Precision-66-turbine-wheels-for-67-and-62-CEA-turbos./page7
put this car on a dynojet and ill bet it would be within 20-30 hp/tq of 1k...

It's probably already there, in fact. The SP Mustang dyno has consistently proven to read approx 5% lower than a Dynojet, so 950/950 Mustang, is roughly equal to 1000/1000 Dynojet.

And keep in mind, theses results are with the smaller .81 single scroll turbine housing and a 125 shot; put the larger .96 housing on and spray a 150 shot, and you're well over 1000/1000.

Craig


Ps. Get to drive the new setup for the first time this weekend, woo-hoo!

 

didnt amits twin come close?

 

My car made 611wtq which is a number that usually goes hand in hand with 900-1000whp. Yet I only made 726whp because it was on e85, So I think with a 74-76mm and some nitrous it is very possible. As others mentioned you will be looking for some extremely heavy duty rods. Doesn't Carillo make a severe duty rod?

 

you are gonna need some serious tire to hook that tq. traction control will be working overtime lol

 

Good to see you're realizing that you might not be able to actually use the 1000 ft/lb you have been wanting to see out of a 2JZ, at least not without a full slick on a prepped track that is.

In for smokescreen video!

Al

 

damn almost 1k wtq at 5k rpms is freaking crazy, gonna look at the build thread now but damn!