Threxx

So taking the cars themselves out of the equation in the end we can agree that 13 years later the BMW 3.0tt came out and provided somewhat better fuel economy, considerably more off-idle torque, a much flatter torque curve, eliminated turbo lag altogether, offered similar peak power, and is probably considerably less capable of handling heavy modifications.

For the average car buyer who is not going to mod or mod lightly, I see the BMW as progress as usual for a 13 year span. Nothing amazing, but it is obviously an improvement over what was already a great motor 13 years ago.

For the enthusiast who's interested in making tons of power on their factory motor, yeah, I'd probably look back at the 2JZ and think how good I had it back then.

Och

iTrader: (3)

Well, no, because the cylinders themselves have insert sleeves thats are forged steel I believe and the head is aluminum.

DASHOCKER

iTrader: (2)

Old muscle car guys feel the same way about the old motors vs the new motors. The aluminum block LS series motors were once thought to be inferior to the old iron block motors yet have been proven to be solid as time went on.. These aluminum motors, in addition to electronic tuning, are being turbo & superchargered with little issue.. Modifications are getting better & better for new motors with the advancement of technology.. The N54 potential is just being tapped..

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

No. There are no bore liners in a 2JZ. The entire block is high nickel content cast iron. High content means ~5%. The bores are constantly coated with hydrocarbons - either oil or burned fuel - so corrosion is not a problem unless it sits for a very long time. If you're worried about sulfur corroding nickel, you need to spray some water on your brake discs - they're also cast iron - and watch them corrode right in front of your eyes. A cylinder block does the same thing, and when we wash the bores with hot soapy water after boring and honing are completed, we follow up with copious amounts of WD-40 to get the water off the cylinder walls and stop the corrosion.

Nope, no inserts. Solid cast iron. Cast in sleeves are a relatively recent development for production engines. Sleeves have been common in racing for quite a long time.

The new blocks are inferior in some ways. The real test of a block's ability to make power is found in a hydrostatic test. This test puts water in the cylinder - typically only the top 10mm or so - with a seal on the top and bottom. Then the water is pressurized with air. Because the water is (more or less) incompressible, the gas injected in the water causes the material to expand. The hydrostatic limit tests the limits of elasticity in the material. So, we find the pressure where the cylinder permanently deforms with a hydrostatic test. Once you know this pressure, you know exactly how much reliable horsepower the block can produce from the cylinder's perspective (there are other issues like crank support and block flex if it is being used as a stressed member in the chassis, but if you get these right and fail the hydro test, it's all for naught.)

Aluminum deforms more easily than cast iron, it's obvious from aluminum's Young's modulus numbers. It's also lighter. Casting an iron liner into aluminum doesn't overcome this material's limitations. So an iron block will potentially make more power because the walls are thicker and the material will tolerate more force before permanent deformation. All the old school guys know this.

Sure you can pump up an aluminum block, but the ultimate limit will be lower and the service life will be shorter. Just like aluminum rods - they're really light and work well for drag racing where you plan to replace them every run. You'll never see them in a street production engine because the service life will never be acceptable to the motoring public.

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

IMHO, the biggest plus for the N54 TT is the VATN turbos. They were experimental in the 90's. Porsche finally built a VATN turbo reliable enough for a production car. Now everybody has them and they really are a LOT better than the old school turbos everybody had in the 90's. They're just not easy to retrofit because they work best with electronic control integrated into the rest of the ECM's functions.

Lets Drive

iTrader: (3)

Are you discussing the variable vane turbos? If so, I remember when Porsche came out with the design, and many of the 7 guys were drooling at the prospect of somehow applying them to our cars, especially when the larger single kits back then were less able to provide the best of both worlds (I stayed with the more responsive twins for this reason + primary street driveability).

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

Porsche didn't come out with the design. Aerocharger did in 1976. Corky Bell had them in his book on turbochargers. It took Porsche to make them viable in a production engine.

LexFather

Wanted to bump due to the problems BMW is having with their turbo. I don't think stock Supra turbos (or JDM TT Aristo turbos) gave near the problems but if I am wrong please talk about it.

SLegacy99

BMW maybe havin issues from their turbos but lookin at fuel economy.gov.

'93 Supra (5MT): 16/21/18.5 MPG
'09 335i (6MT): 17/26/21.5 MPG
'11 335i (6MT): 19/28/23.5 MPG

mitsuguy

iTrader: (2)

somethings wrong there... the 93 Supra didn't have a 5 speed manual, it was either a 4 speed auto or 6 speed manual...

PhilipMSPT

iTrader: (5)

Don't forget that MPG and HP rating methods were changed in 2007.

Most '07+ cars "lost" MPG/HP ratings even though nothing mechanically changed from pre-'06 models.

exvelocity

I wouldn't trade my Supra for any bimmer,though I give them respect, very well built car

bnizzle87

having this thread revived makes me want the supra all over again some great looking ones just from this thread alone.

PhantomZX

It did have a 5-speed manual with the 2JZ-GE engine.