3SGTE 200hp Toyota 2 litre/ power vs economy

[Jason James]

From what I can see, this twincam, 16V turbo donk was not released in
Australia, tho in the US it is available in Celicias and I think MR2s from
the late '80s thru early '90s.

It is a very strong motor apparently capable of much abuse and is always
preferred to turboing the venerable 3SFE (Camry 2 litre twincam NA) or 5SFE
(Camry 2.2 twincam NA) workhorse.

The trade-off bewteen high-end flow and therefore output versus low-end
torque and economy are the differences between the turbo and its sister
'family car' twincams.

Apart from larger combustion chambers the turbo has more angle (approx 45
deg) between inlet and exhaust valves while the standard Camry motors have
half this valve inclination for increased economy.
Another claim is that the 5SFE is not a revvy motor.

Information like this helps to highlight previously vexing issues eg why
Chrysler called the slightly canted valves on the Hemi 215,245 and 265cu
motors as being 'hemi".

Jason

[Forg]

Jason James wrote:
....
> From what I can see, this twincam, 16V turbo
> donk was not released in Australia, tho in the
> US it is available in Celicias and I think MR2s
> from the late '80s thru early '90s.
....

They did bring them here, in AWD Celicas; ST185 ('89-'94) & ST205 ('94 -
?'95') models had them, although they weren't cheap & didn't sell that
many. The S185's had 150kW-153kW (I think the WRC edition had a better
intercooler &/or ECU), and the ST205's had 178kW. Toyota touted the
ST205 GT4 as a "baby Godzilla", but the engine was too laggy & the car
too heavy; while they had reasonable performance, they didn't live up to
their power-to-weight ratio (nor did they handle as well as they should
have).


--
---
Forg! -DUH#6-

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Brought to you by DUH!Inc.
DUH!Inc; Building Synergistic Wellness For All

[Jason James]

"Forg" <Forg@zip.com.au> wrote in message
news:41e45092$0$2590$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
> Jason James wrote:
> ...
> > From what I can see, this twincam, 16V turbo
> > donk was not released in Australia, tho in the
> > US it is available in Celicias and I think MR2s
> > from the late '80s thru early '90s.
> ...
>
> They did bring them here, in AWD Celicas; ST185 ('89-'94) & ST205 ('94 -
> ?'95') models had them, although they weren't cheap & didn't sell that
> many. The S185's had 150kW-153kW (I think the WRC edition had a better
> intercooler &/or ECU), and the ST205's had 178kW. Toyota touted the
> ST205 GT4 as a "baby Godzilla", but the engine was too laggy & the car
> too heavy; while they had reasonable performance, they didn't live up to
> their power-to-weight ratio (nor did they handle as well as they should
> have).
> DUH!Inc; Building Synergistic Wellness For All

Arrh,..I get it,..its the "ST***" codes that stipulate what engine it is.
Toyota made an incredible number of 4 cyl engines,,, the Corona after the
18R seemed to change engines every model for a few years.

Jason

[Forg]

Jason James wrote:
....
> Arrh,..I get it,..its the "ST***" codes that
> stipulate what engine it is.
....

True ... well, the rules waver a bit, but if you know it's an "ST16x"
then you know it had a 3S-series engine in it. Similarly, an MA7x Supra
& JZA7x & GA7x Supra were the same bodyshape; the first had a 7M-series
motor, the second a 1JZ-series, and the third had a 1G-series. I dread
to think of how dodgy a Supra would've been with the eighty-something
kilowatt version of the IS200 engine ... :)


--
---
Forg! -DUH#6-

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Brought to you by DUH!Inc.
DUH!Inc; Building Synergistic Wellness For All

[D Walford]

Jason James wrote:
>
> From what I can see, this twincam, 16V turbo donk was not released in
> Australia, tho in the US it is available in Celicias and I think MR2s from
> the late '80s thru early '90s.
>
> It is a very strong motor apparently capable of much abuse and is always
> preferred to turboing the venerable 3SFE (Camry 2 litre twincam NA) or 5SFE
> (Camry 2.2 twincam NA) workhorse.
>

Don't know much about the turbo 3SGE but I've had quite a bit to do with
the Gen 3 non turbo version and I'm not so sure I agree with the
"capable of much abuse" bit.
The engine I know well is fitted to a Clubman (Lotus 7 replica) and was
refitted to the car last sunday after a rebuild.
The rebuild was required after we found 3 cracked pistons most likely
caused by severe pinging which happened when setting up the engine with
a Microtech ECU on a dyno.
This is the second 3SGE in this car, the first one destroyed its bottom
end from oil surging after a serious workout at a practise day at
Winton.
The sump has since been extensively modified with baffles etc to prevent
this reoccurring.



Daryl

[athol]

Jason James <vellicet@bigpond.com> wrote:

> Arrh,..I get it,..its the "ST***" codes that stipulate what engine it is.
> Toyota made an incredible number of 4 cyl engines,,, the Corona after the
> 18R seemed to change engines every model for a few years.

The S is a designation of the engine family fitted. The T is a
designation of the body shell series to which it is fitted.

Back in the '70s, Celicas were A bodies, and could have R or T
series engines, thus allowing for the existence of RA and TA
celicas.

T is the corona body code. A celica called an ST(something)
is essentially admitting to being a corona coupe. :-)

--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol>
Linux Registered User # 254000
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

[cd]

What your reffering to is the BEAMS 3SGE which is 2.0 litre 200HP 4
cylinder, the 3S series engines were never introduced over in the
states, and the BEAMS 3SGE was only availiable in Japan. That's not to
say alot of people import them but they are hella expensive, but for
good reason 100/HP per litre is amazing engineering.

And they are bloody tuff! stock internals, turbo'ed and oil squirters
from a 3SGTE engine producing a realiable 480HP all day long.
actually how about those japs putting gen4 3sgte's in a supra JZA80
(1500KG car) and churning out 900HP reliably from a 2.0 litre engine!!

It's all in the tuning, no engine can survive detonation that i know of.

But if i had one, i'd really keep it stock running under the safe tuning
of a toyota ECU these engines are reliable as fuck. (my friends Gen1
3sge has 280,000km's on the clock and just feels so smooth and new
still! what really impressed me about it is he gets 780km off a full
tank! dam i am thinking about selling the supra now! ... actually nah no
way.

[Jason James]

"cd" <urantiacjd@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:41e4d9e8@news.comindico.com.au...
> What your reffering to is the BEAMS 3SGE which is 2.0 litre 200HP 4
> cylinder, the 3S series engines were never introduced over in the
> states, and the BEAMS 3SGE was only availiable in Japan. That's not to
> say alot of people import them but they are hella expensive, but for
> good reason 100/HP per litre is amazing engineering.
>
> And they are bloody tuff! stock internals, turbo'ed and oil squirters
> from a 3SGTE engine producing a realiable 480HP all day long.
> actually how about those japs putting gen4 3sgte's in a supra JZA80
> (1500KG car) and churning out 900HP reliably from a 2.0 litre engine!!
>
> It's all in the tuning, no engine can survive detonation that i know of.

Aye,..I was looking up what fails in turboed engine blow-ups (specifically
turboed 5SFEs,..but they aren't especially suited apparently),...ring-lands
seem to rank highly according to:

http://www.gtfour.ca/howtoblowyourengine.html

detonation= broken ringlands

Jason

[D Walford]

cd wrote:
>


> But if i had one, i'd really keep it stock running under the safe tuning
> of a toyota ECU these engines are reliable as fuck. (my friends Gen1
> 3sge has 280,000km's on the clock and just feels so smooth and new
> still! what really impressed me about it is he gets 780km off a full
> tank! dam i am thinking about selling the supra now! ... actually nah no
> way.

The reason for switching to the Microtech was it was running very lean
at low rpm and very rich at high rpm due to the very modified inlet and
exhaust.
The mods were mainly due to the stock manifolds not fitting under the
bonnet.
With the Microtech tuned properly the mixtures are now ok throughout the
rev range and it no longer pings.


Daryl

[Forg]

athol wrote:
....
> T is the corona body code. A celica called
> an ST(something) is essentially admitting to
> being a corona coupe. :-)
....

Well, sort-of ... to nit-pick, that model was designed as a Celica
_before_ it was used as a Corona, Camry or Carina. The Celica was
available as a Corona coupé overseas; looks exactly like the Celica
coupé here, except with the Camry-esque (but slightly more slimline)
non-flipup-headlight front-end you see on grey-import Corona sedans of
that era. :)


--
---
Forg! -DUH#6-

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Brought to you by DUH!Inc.
DUH!Inc; Building Synergistic Wellness For All

[Forg]

D Walford wrote:
....
> The rebuild was required after we found 3
> cracked pistons most likely caused by severe
> pinging
....

Severe pinging; must be bad engine-management. Wonder what sort?

....
> Microtech ECU
....
^^^^^^^^^

Oh ... *knowing nod*


--
---
Forg! -DUH#6-

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Brought to you by DUH!Inc.
DUH!Inc; Building Synergistic Wellness For All

[athol]

Forg <Forg@zip.com.au> wrote:
> athol wrote:

> > T is the corona body code. A celica called
> > an ST(something) is essentially admitting to
> > being a corona coupe. :-)

> Well, sort-of ... to nit-pick, that model was designed as a Celica
> _before_ it was used as a Corona, Camry or Carina. The Celica was
> available as a Corona coup? overseas; looks exactly like the Celica
> coup? here, except with the Camry-esque (but slightly more slimline)
> non-flipup-headlight front-end you see on grey-import Corona sedans of
> that era. :)

Yes, but the Celicas before that were A-bodies and the Coronas
were T-bodies. Hence, regardless of which badge they released
first, the vehicle was designed as a Corona. :-p

--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol>
Linux Registered User # 254000
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

[Fraser Johnston]

"Jason James" <vellicet@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:34j0srF4b3h8vU1@individual.net...
> From what I can see, this twincam, 16V turbo donk was not released in
> Australia, tho in the US it is available in Celicias and I think MR2s from
> the late '80s thru early '90s.

Pretty sure it came out in the GT4 Celicas. In very limited numbers.

Fraser

[Fraser Johnston]

"Forg" <Forg@zip.com.au> wrote in message
news:41e4fefd$0$6540$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>D Walford wrote:
> ...
> > The rebuild was required after we found 3
> > cracked pistons most likely caused by severe
> > pinging
> ...
>
> Severe pinging; must be bad engine-management. Wonder what sort?
>
> ...
> > Microtech ECU
> ...
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Oh ... *knowing nod*
>
What is wrong with Microtech? They are meant to be the bees knees on
rotarys. Haven't heard much about them on piston motors. Any horror
stories?

Fraser

[D Walford]

Forg wrote:
>
> D Walford wrote:
> ...
> > The rebuild was required after we found 3
> > cracked pistons most likely caused by severe
> > pinging
> ...
>
> Severe pinging; must be bad engine-management. Wonder what sort?
>
> ...
> > Microtech ECU
> ...
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Oh ... *knowing nod*
>

They are not a problem once they are set up by someone who knows what
they are doing, trouble is we let a friend who has a dyno and is wanting
to learn about programable ECU's have a go at the original setup which
turned out to be a very bad idea.
Luckily another mate is the parts rep at the local Toyota dealer so
parts were not expensive and we were able to use the pistons from the
other 3SGE that had a bottom end failure.


Daryl

[D Walford]

Fraser Johnston wrote:
>
> "Forg" <Forg@zip.com.au> wrote in message
> news:41e4fefd$0$6540$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
> >D Walford wrote:
> > ...
> > > The rebuild was required after we found 3
> > > cracked pistons most likely caused by severe
> > > pinging
> > ...
> >
> > Severe pinging; must be bad engine-management. Wonder what sort?
> >
> > ...
> > > Microtech ECU
> > ...
> > ^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Oh ... *knowing nod*
> >
> What is wrong with Microtech? They are meant to be the bees knees on
> rotarys. Haven't heard much about them on piston motors. Any horror
> stories?
>

Nothing wrong with them but don't let someone who doesn't know what they
are doing set it up:-)



Daryl

[Forg]

Fraser Johnston wrote:
....
> What is wrong with Microtech? They are meant
> to be the bees knees on rotarys. Haven't
> heard much about them on piston motors. Any
> horror stories?
....

To be honest, they aren't anywhere near as bad as they used to be, and
if I could find a tuner who knew how to do it properly then I could
_almost_ stomach having one on my car.

One point of contention; they're not the bees' knees on rotaries, but
they are cheap and a lot of rotary people are cheapskates (which is why
rotaries have an undeserved reputation for unreliability). They did get
a reputation for being good 'cos a couple of successful (in the "street
car" 4's & rotaries category) drag teams ran them, but those drag teams
had "special" models that you couldn't actually buy. Drag engines also
tend to get pulled apart more often than is acceptable in road ones
(read: a couple of times a season), so the sort of stuff that might root
your road engine wouldn't have bothered those guys.


--
---
Forg! -DUH#6-

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Brought to you by DUH!Inc.
DUH!Inc; Building Synergistic Wellness For All