Jay351

here you go:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...r47/400hp3.jpg

Everyone chip in a few bucks, I will test it out

frodin1

This was posted on another thread 2 days ago. I call BS, If anybody was even thinking of buying this thing, I would call Ivan Stuarts Company directly and ask them. I believe he's still factory backed and I know that he's heavily involved with CORE. I saw an interview from a race in Glen Hellen a few months ago and he was showing off his warehouse in SO Cal. full of all his old rigs including the first baja winner which was suspended from the ceiling. My point! I would just make a call and confirm prior to believeing anything on EBay.

elripster

I searched the net for a while and could find any HP claims for that generation of race truck. Anyone else have any luck?

Frank

SKNKWRX

I feel like only one or two of us actually read the text of the e-bay ad. The motor claims it has TRD molded into the block and heads etc. That the motor was built with a $100,000 budget and gave the history of how it came into the hands of the person selling it. I cant prove its a TRD racce motor more than anyone else can disprove it. But if it is what he says it is I see no reason it could not make that kind of power (close to 400bhp). The only thing that motor there has in common with the 3.0 in your 4Runner is that its displacing 3 liters so saying they used the worst motor Toyota ever made is invalid since the majority of the problems with it are intake manifold and exhaust. Im not comparing it technologically to F1 but you calimed a 3.0 NA engine could not make 400 bhp and THAT is not true. Go drive a Porsche 911 GT3.

hosh

"That's why his Cal Wells team built him a special single-seat "truck." In its knobby-tired way it was an F1 car of the desert, with its seat plumb on the vehicle centerline and its 325-hp Toyota V6 behind the cockpit. By no means was it the most powerful racer in the desert, but it was light, well-balanced, agile and tough, and it perfectly suited Ironman's style of driving. He could somehow get everything out of the machine it had to give, without asking too much and breaking it. He was especially deft at spotting and just missing the thousands of rocks that flattened so many of his opponents' tires."

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=108094

most of the way to the bottom

chimmike

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_911_GT3

the GT3 motor was 3.6L. Not 3L, besides the fact that it's horizontally opposed, which, like inline motors, tend to be more powerful than V configuration. Show me a production 3L V6 motor making 400hp without forced induction of any kind.

If it was a TRD motor, and it did have TRD in the block and heads, don't you think the pics would show it?

They can claim all they want, but in those pics I simply see a V6 with wrapped headers, dry sump oiling, and some sort of homemade timing belt cover.

SKNKWRX

There is alot more in that pic that doesnt look stock, intake manifold fuel rails etc etc.....The guy says he has plenty more pics Im sure somebody could ask for some of the castings etc. There might not be production 3.0L motors out there making 400bhp ( I havent even bothered to look) but if it is what the seller claims its nothing close to production. Remember this motor would run with not a single thought to fuel economy or emissions restrictions. Hey all I am saying is that if Porsche can pull 485bhp from 3.7 liters why couldnt TRD get 400 from a 3.0? Build the bottom end strong enough and I bet you could get alot more out of a 3.0 than just 400bhp.

911 GT3 RSR
flat six-cylinder boxer engine, water-cooled
3,795 cc, stroke 76.4 mm, bore 102.7 mm ?
max. torque: 435 Nm at 7,250 rpm
max. power: 358 kW (485 bhp) at 8,400 rpm with 2 x 30.3 mm restrictors
max. rpm: 9,000 rpm
four-valve cylinder heads
oil-water heat exchanger
dry-sump lubrication system with engine mounted dry-sump tank made from carbon fiber
oil and cooling water refilling system
intake manifold made of carbon fiber with dual air restrictors and single throttle per cylinder, dual restrictor
electronic engine management system BOSCH MS 4.0
required fuel quality: 98 octane ROZ, unleaded
race exhaust: multiple pipe manifold, open exhaust, no catalytic converter

chimmike

As I said before, you CANNOT compare a horizontally opposed motor with a V-style motor. Nor can you compare an inline motor with a V-style motor.

Regardless, the technology in that porche engine is far and beyond what is in that yota 3L.

Sure the fuel rail is aftermarket, but it looks kinda shoddy to me.....square corners and not bends? It's not terribly tricky to get the right material and bend to make turns, but why that fuel rail is rectagonal with sharp turns I don't know. As for the intake manifold, okay, I'll give you that, but I don't know how the runners are, who made it, how it was tuned, etc.

All I'm saying is, for that to be a 400hp motor, they'd have to be running STUPID high compression on highly leaded gas (which would fubar the oxgen sensor required for use with EFI)

That just makes me curious, the claims of that motor. I might believe 300hp.....but that block casting looks peculiarly close to stock. Usually it's fairly evident when a casting is non-stock.

Anyways, it doesn't matter, as others have said, nobody here will buy it......it'd be cheaper to get a sbc/th400 and adapter to yota case.

Greg_Canada

Here's is mosk's reply over on 4x4wire

4Rocker

Wow that is awesome! If i had the 4g reserve I would be on that!

elripster

Chimmike, it does not have to have stupid high compression if it can rev. You have to realize, that is necessary for power when an engine can't rev. In that case, all you are left with is to increase torque by pushing down the piston harder. When you build for power, the rules change. If the engine can withstand the stresses of high RPM operation, it can produce a lot of energy without flying apart. I'm sure Ivan ran race gas. The engine likely richened the mixture all it wanted to stop detonation, no smog or MPG requirements here.

F1 engines hit 18,000 RPM. Many motorcycles reach 14K or so. To give an example of durability, people are turbo charging Hyabusa engines, getting 300HP out of them and they are only 1.3L.

Anyway, flat, inline, V, all can be tuned and built to create and withstand much more power than we will ever see from our factory engines. Clearly there are examples showing that what the seller claims is not impossible. This does not mean the seller is accurate, but he could be.

Now if someone will just buy and dyno it already!

Frank

SKNKWRX

THANK YOU! If it is what he claims it is I see no reason it cant amke that power. People posted specs from Stewarts truck and it def could have been improved in design since fuel delivery and whatnot. if its the genuine article it would be a great motor for somebody with some real know how. If i had the cash I might buy it anyways lol.

CJM

I been watching you bicker.

It may be a 3.0L Toyota engine but what it shares with what we know as the 3.0 V6 is very little I am willing to bet. So long as it can rev I bet it can achieve that power.

Ganoid

horizontally opposed are probably the least efficient design out there. By nature their design allows for a low center of gravity but it does have the most internal component drag since everything is laying on its side affected by gravity. That would be why you don't see Porsche,Volkswagen or even Subaru going 300k miles with out a rebuild. Every modern diesel truck motor is an inline 6 because they have a longer service life partially due to the fact that gravity does not pull down on one side of a piston all day long like the flat 4 and V style motors. If a flat 4 was the end all be all of power and efficiency then we would see them in every high HP motor cycle out there but instead we see inline 4's with very few exceptions (BMW and Guzie) and those exceptions aren't making big power. The flat 4 has only 1 advantage a Low center of Gravity and thats it.

chimmike

You do realize that 99% of all piston aircraft engines are horizontally opposed, right?

Ganoid

Thats done primarily for compactness (you already knew that). If size was not an issue then they would be using something different. Small Helicopters use flat 4's as well. My point is that flat 4's have specialized uses and the overall design is less than ideal for power and efficiency. If it was Ideal we would all be driving flat 4's but we are not. Porsche builds then for the low center of gravity aspect and simply because its a Porsche thing thats what they do.

Don't discount Toyota's ability to make near 400 hp with only 3 liters and no limit to their budget. If you took a standard 3.0 and bumped the TQ from 180 to say 200 @ 3500 rpm your at 150 hp. Take the same 3.0 and build that 200FT/Lbs at 10k RPM and your in the neighbor hood of 350 hp by doing nothing but moving the TQ up the RPM band.



edit... in the case of the flat 4 use in the air you need to consider the inherit oiling issues when designing a flat 4 because the affects of gravity on the moving parts. The beauty of this for the air is that those oiling problems once they are solved will also cure any problems caused by running the engine up side down.

chimmike

I'm discounting their ability to build a 3L to 400hp in that era that would be useable in off road racing.

Obviously technology has jumped incredibly up to now. I mean we've all seen honda guys running 300whp n/a 4bangers.......but you have to look at the technology in cars during those days.

Look at the 3vze in stock form. There are 3 different vacuum based systems for emissions control. There's a cold start fuel injector, and then a catalytic converter. They didn't engineer the motor to run clean so they had to use bandaids in the form of whatever technology they had at the time. The engine control via ECU at that time was rudimentary at best.....especially in the 4runner. I've shown that to myself just by yanking all that worthless vac line crap and disconnecting the EGR.

my old 2001 sentra, the ECU would flip out and kick into safe mode if I disconnected the EGR harness. And that sentra was BASIC compared to most other cars in 2001 with the fancy gadgets. We're talking continuously variable valve timing now, some with variable lift, etc. That 3L motor is a SOHC with direct acting valvetrain. What's the bore/stroke of it? I doubt it's stock. I don't remember the 3vze's stock bore/stroke but I'm thinking it's like 86mmx86mm.....square.

I don't doubt they could've squeezed 300hp out of it at that time, but the only way I'd buy 400hp is through seeing an engine dyno of that specific motor.

chimmike

and for the record, if there was ANY way I could improve the 3vze without spending thousands on it to get more power, more reliably out of it, I would........I like using what I've got.......

but because it's such a lousy, gutless motor.....for the money involved I'll probably end up doing a SBC swap when this thing goes. the 3.4 swap looks great and all, but for the same money I'm talking a carb'd sbc with a th350 or th400...bam......all the power I'd ever need.

frodin1

That's what I'm talkin about! I'd love to have a SB in my rig.

Kaydon

Glad you said carb'd.