hey i was just curious but would a lotus engine be able to fit and run in our celicas since the engine is toyota based. i know it would be super expensive, but i was just wondering when i was reading a magazine with a lotus in there that, would it be possible.
lotus engine - 6G Celicas Forums
it's a beefed 2zz-ge. maybe search around the site for that.
its the same engine as the 7gc gts. imo, too much work and money for only 185 hp.
ss-iii splitters and 404 skirts areon. which means i need to update my sig.
Lotus Elise is 190hp
you could get that engine from any Celica GTS [00+] Matrix XRS, Vibe, Corolla XRS
If you want to swap a 2ZZGE get one without DBW it will be less of a hassle with wiring. They have around 160whp and the best bang for the buck mod is a PFC.
A Celica GTS with basic I/H/E PFC will run mid 14s
you could get that engine from any Celica GTS [00+] Matrix XRS, Vibe, Corolla XRS
If you want to swap a 2ZZGE get one without DBW it will be less of a hassle with wiring. They have around 160whp and the best bang for the buck mod is a PFC.
A Celica GTS with basic I/H/E PFC will run mid 14s
I think it's a good option for a swap. Very debatable. There are a good many threads about it.
Live Free, Be Happy
http://videos.streetfire.net/search/coroll...8630172cf8d.htm
that always makes my pants tight.
This post has been edited by Bitter: Feb 4, 2007 - 9:43 PM
that always makes my pants tight.
This post has been edited by Bitter: Feb 4, 2007 - 9:43 PM
2000 Celica GTS 'slowest gts evar'1998 Mazda 626 FS-DE/CD4-E
The 2ZZ is an extremely peaky engine, it has NO bottem end because it was built by Yamaha. The ZZ engines are pretty much low-revving, 4-cyl, motorcycle engines 
someone needs to swap in a hyabusa engine into their celica that would be sweeet
>
Turboed. Mmmm. Sounds good.
QUOTE(playr158 @ Feb 4, 2007 - 11:36 PM) [snapback]524005[/snapback]
>
someone needs to swap in a hyabusa engine into their celica that would be sweeet
someone needs to swap in a hyabusa engine into their celica that would be sweeet
Turboed. Mmmm. Sounds good.
FlickR2011 Subaru WRX and 1997 3sgte Celica
>
yes...chain driven just use a solid rear w/a single gear like a four wheeler
QUOTE(BLINKYxMUNKEY @ Feb 4, 2007 - 11:45 PM) [snapback]524007[/snapback]
>
>
Turboed. Mmmm. Sounds good.
>
QUOTE(playr158 @ Feb 4, 2007 - 11:36 PM) [snapback]524005[/snapback]
>
someone needs to swap in a hyabusa engine into their celica that would be sweeet
someone needs to swap in a hyabusa engine into their celica that would be sweeet
Turboed. Mmmm. Sounds good.
yes...chain driven just use a solid rear w/a single gear like a four wheeler
>
the zz engine is all toyota, the G heads are the yamaha part. the 2zzge has a powerband similar to a 1zzfe below 5000 rpm. most G headed engines are higher revving engines, because yes the G heads do have SOME similar characteristics to motorcycle engines, but they also have alot thats NOT in common.
QUOTE(JesterDC @ Feb 4, 2007 - 10:14 PM) [snapback]523986[/snapback]
>
The 2ZZ is an extremely peaky engine, it has NO bottem end because it was built by Yamaha. The ZZ engines are pretty much low-revving, 4-cyl, motorcycle engines
The 2ZZ is an extremely peaky engine, it has NO bottem end because it was built by Yamaha. The ZZ engines are pretty much low-revving, 4-cyl, motorcycle engines
the zz engine is all toyota, the G heads are the yamaha part. the 2zzge has a powerband similar to a 1zzfe below 5000 rpm. most G headed engines are higher revving engines, because yes the G heads do have SOME similar characteristics to motorcycle engines, but they also have alot thats NOT in common.
2000 Celica GTS 'slowest gts evar'1998 Mazda 626 FS-DE/CD4-E
>
And even though the 2zz revs ok for a CAR engine, it dosen't rev nearly high enough to make a decent powerband with the way its heads were desighned.
Think about it like this, Car engines rev to 6-7,000-ish on average, while most performance motorcycle engines rev to +11,000, and then the fact that the 2zz was supposed to be a performance engine comes into play. If the desighner desighns a head for a 11,000 rpm engine and is then asked to make a head for toyota, chances are it's going to be very characteristic of the motorcycle head...
here's a 2zz dyno
QUOTE(Bitter @ Feb 5, 2007 - 2:18 AM) [snapback]524022[/snapback]
>
>
the zz engine is all toyota, the G heads are the yamaha part. the 2zzge has a powerband similar to a 1zzfe below 5000 rpm. most G headed engines are higher revving engines, because yes the G heads do have SOME similar characteristics to motorcycle engines, but they also have alot thats NOT in common.
>
QUOTE(JesterDC @ Feb 4, 2007 - 10:14 PM) [snapback]523986[/snapback]
>
The 2ZZ is an extremely peaky engine, it has NO bottem end because it was built by Yamaha. The ZZ engines are pretty much low-revving, 4-cyl, motorcycle engines
The 2ZZ is an extremely peaky engine, it has NO bottem end because it was built by Yamaha. The ZZ engines are pretty much low-revving, 4-cyl, motorcycle engines
the zz engine is all toyota, the G heads are the yamaha part. the 2zzge has a powerband similar to a 1zzfe below 5000 rpm. most G headed engines are higher revving engines, because yes the G heads do have SOME similar characteristics to motorcycle engines, but they also have alot thats NOT in common.And even though the 2zz revs ok for a CAR engine, it dosen't rev nearly high enough to make a decent powerband with the way its heads were desighned.
Think about it like this, Car engines rev to 6-7,000-ish on average, while most performance motorcycle engines rev to +11,000, and then the fact that the 2zz was supposed to be a performance engine comes into play. If the desighner desighns a head for a 11,000 rpm engine and is then asked to make a head for toyota, chances are it's going to be very characteristic of the motorcycle head...
here's a 2zz dyno
So what's the problem with the motor? It's 160whp in a 2400-2500lbs car. Sounds like a good idea. If you just drive around town, it's probably not for you, but then neither is a turbo.
btw: That can't be a acurate messure of torque from that motor. There's no way it goes from 113 down to 97, and then back up to 120.
This post has been edited by Bigmeanbulldog55: Feb 5, 2007 - 8:07 PM
btw: That can't be a acurate messure of torque from that motor. There's no way it goes from 113 down to 97, and then back up to 120.
This post has been edited by Bigmeanbulldog55: Feb 5, 2007 - 8:07 PM
Live Free, Be Happy
>
You sir... are highly generalizing the way this engine, or any performance n/a 4 cylinder makes power. If you think 160whp @ 8000 rpms is bad... well... haha. If you think torque peak at 6500 rpms is bad... well... haha. Guess you never raced a car before huh? Low-end torque is fine and dandy if you like to drive around town and act like you're fast... get some groceries and such and such... but if you want to drive a car with track capable engine AND still be able to drive around town... well... not a lot of 4 cylinders will out-perform the 2ZZ. The only time you should talk about low-end torque is when you have an engine bigger than 3 liters... or a big fat turbo.
FYI... almost all of the Toyota heads have some sort of Yamaha input if not completely yamaha designed... a couple of them are pretty much Yahama designed PERIOD. 3SGE heads are all labeled YAMAHA... 1/2JZGE heads... Yamaha... 20V 4AGE... Yamaha. That's like... pretty much all of Toyota's sport engines huh?
This post has been edited by Kwanza26: Feb 5, 2007 - 8:08 PM
QUOTE(JesterDC @ Feb 6, 2007 - 12:22 AM) [snapback]524220[/snapback]
>
And even though the 2zz revs ok for a CAR engine, it dosen't rev nearly high enough to make a decent powerband with the way its heads were desighned.
Think about it like this, Car engines rev to 6-7,000-ish on average, while most performance motorcycle engines rev to +11,000, and then the fact that the 2zz was supposed to be a performance engine comes into play. If the desighner desighns a head for a 11,000 rpm engine and is then asked to make a head for toyota, chances are it's going to be very characteristic of the motorcycle head...
And even though the 2zz revs ok for a CAR engine, it dosen't rev nearly high enough to make a decent powerband with the way its heads were desighned.
Think about it like this, Car engines rev to 6-7,000-ish on average, while most performance motorcycle engines rev to +11,000, and then the fact that the 2zz was supposed to be a performance engine comes into play. If the desighner desighns a head for a 11,000 rpm engine and is then asked to make a head for toyota, chances are it's going to be very characteristic of the motorcycle head...
You sir... are highly generalizing the way this engine, or any performance n/a 4 cylinder makes power. If you think 160whp @ 8000 rpms is bad... well... haha. If you think torque peak at 6500 rpms is bad... well... haha. Guess you never raced a car before huh? Low-end torque is fine and dandy if you like to drive around town and act like you're fast... get some groceries and such and such... but if you want to drive a car with track capable engine AND still be able to drive around town... well... not a lot of 4 cylinders will out-perform the 2ZZ. The only time you should talk about low-end torque is when you have an engine bigger than 3 liters... or a big fat turbo.
FYI... almost all of the Toyota heads have some sort of Yamaha input if not completely yamaha designed... a couple of them are pretty much Yahama designed PERIOD. 3SGE heads are all labeled YAMAHA... 1/2JZGE heads... Yamaha... 20V 4AGE... Yamaha. That's like... pretty much all of Toyota's sport engines huh?
This post has been edited by Kwanza26: Feb 5, 2007 - 8:08 PM
"It's ok to be naked girl... I'm an artist!"1995 AT200 Celica ST:stocked out daily driver...1984 AE86 Corolla GT-SR5:silvertop 20V 4AGE project car jacked up with goodies...1991 SW2x MR2 n/a:bare bones hardtop model soon to be...
>
This is a worse looking dyno graph than usual... but it's pretty typical the way lift works. Even TVIS shows a dip in torque during the crossover... but typically the torque starts to dip as the primary cams reach their maximum efficiency then the lift lobes cause a bit of overlap resulting in a slight torque dip... then it picks up again as the air catches up to the engine... not to mention fuelling has the catch up also. It's not really noticeable though... cause when lift hits... (VTEC!) the engine screams and you pretty much feel an instant jolt of about 50hp...
This post has been edited by Kwanza26: Feb 5, 2007 - 8:13 PM
QUOTE(Bigmeanbulldog55 @ Feb 6, 2007 - 1:05 AM) [snapback]524226[/snapback]
>
So what's the problem with the motor? It's 160whp in a 2400-2500lbs car. Sounds like a good idea. If you just drive around town, it's probably not for you, but then neither is a turbo.
btw: That can't be a acurate messure of torque from that motor. There's no way it goes from 113 down to 97, and then back up to 120.
So what's the problem with the motor? It's 160whp in a 2400-2500lbs car. Sounds like a good idea. If you just drive around town, it's probably not for you, but then neither is a turbo.
btw: That can't be a acurate messure of torque from that motor. There's no way it goes from 113 down to 97, and then back up to 120.
This is a worse looking dyno graph than usual... but it's pretty typical the way lift works. Even TVIS shows a dip in torque during the crossover... but typically the torque starts to dip as the primary cams reach their maximum efficiency then the lift lobes cause a bit of overlap resulting in a slight torque dip... then it picks up again as the air catches up to the engine... not to mention fuelling has the catch up also. It's not really noticeable though... cause when lift hits... (VTEC!) the engine screams and you pretty much feel an instant jolt of about 50hp...
This post has been edited by Kwanza26: Feb 5, 2007 - 8:13 PM
"It's ok to be naked girl... I'm an artist!"1995 AT200 Celica ST:stocked out daily driver...1984 AE86 Corolla GT-SR5:silvertop 20V 4AGE project car jacked up with goodies...1991 SW2x MR2 n/a:bare bones hardtop model soon to be...
>
It's not a baaaad engine, it just does not live up to the expectaions most had for this engine(The whole point of this engines existance was to beat out all competition, didn't really happen). If I had a 7th gen Celica or Mrk III MR2 withthis engine already in place, I would be happy I just do not believe this engine is a good canidate for a swap other than the "Hey, look what I did" factor.
Yes, that dyno is really crappy, a good check to see if a dyno is real is to see if HP and Tourque intersect at 5252rpm, HP and Torque are derivatives of eachother, and no matter what HP=Torque at 5252rpm
QUOTE(Kwanza26 @ Feb 5, 2007 - 9:11 PM) [snapback]524229[/snapback]
>
>
This is a worse looking dyno graph than usual... but it's pretty typical the way lift works. Even TVIS shows a dip in torque during the crossover... but typically the torque starts to dip as the primary cams reach their maximum efficiency then the lift lobes cause a bit of overlap resulting in a slight torque dip... then it picks up again as the air catches up to the engine... not to mention fuelling has the catch up also. It's not really noticeable though... cause when lift hits... (VTEC!) the engine screams and you pretty much feel an instant jolt of about 50hp...
>
QUOTE(Bigmeanbulldog55 @ Feb 6, 2007 - 1:05 AM) [snapback]524226[/snapback]
>
So what's the problem with the motor? It's 160whp in a 2400-2500lbs car. Sounds like a good idea. If you just drive around town, it's probably not for you, but then neither is a turbo.
btw: That can't be a acurate messure of torque from that motor. There's no way it goes from 113 down to 97, and then back up to 120.
So what's the problem with the motor? It's 160whp in a 2400-2500lbs car. Sounds like a good idea. If you just drive around town, it's probably not for you, but then neither is a turbo.
btw: That can't be a acurate messure of torque from that motor. There's no way it goes from 113 down to 97, and then back up to 120.
This is a worse looking dyno graph than usual... but it's pretty typical the way lift works. Even TVIS shows a dip in torque during the crossover... but typically the torque starts to dip as the primary cams reach their maximum efficiency then the lift lobes cause a bit of overlap resulting in a slight torque dip... then it picks up again as the air catches up to the engine... not to mention fuelling has the catch up also. It's not really noticeable though... cause when lift hits... (VTEC!) the engine screams and you pretty much feel an instant jolt of about 50hp...
It's not a baaaad engine, it just does not live up to the expectaions most had for this engine(The whole point of this engines existance was to beat out all competition, didn't really happen). If I had a 7th gen Celica or Mrk III MR2 withthis engine already in place, I would be happy
I just do not believe this engine is a good canidate for a swap other than the "Hey, look what I did" factor. Yes, that dyno is really crappy, a good check to see if a dyno is real is to see if HP and Tourque intersect at 5252rpm, HP and Torque are derivatives of eachother, and no matter what HP=Torque at 5252rpm
when the lift point is lowered to 5700 rpm and the redline raised to 8700 rpm then the engine really starts to shine, that more like how yamaha had designed it to be ran, but for durability, warranty, and emissions reasons toyota raised lift and lowered redline.
2000 Celica GTS 'slowest gts evar'1998 Mazda 626 FS-DE/CD4-E
that was only for the corolla xrs motor right?
>
its the same damned motor, same way i have the ST motor and GT's have the Camry motor.
QUOTE(purplegt4 @ Feb 8, 2007 - 2:28 AM) [snapback]524977[/snapback]
>
that was only for the corolla xrs motor right?
that was only for the corolla xrs motor right?
its the same damned motor, same way i have the ST motor and GT's have the Camry motor.
2000 Celica GTS 'slowest gts evar'1998 Mazda 626 FS-DE/CD4-E
Yeah but there is something different about the ECU that gives it less HP or something. I'm not sure of the specifics but a guy in our Toyota club was bitching about how the Matrix XRS and the Celica GTS got 20 more HP or something than his Corolla XRS.
IDK - never really gave a $hit but I assume the motor is the same.
IDK - never really gave a $hit but I assume the motor is the same.
retuned 2zz to get 10more hp or w/e and raised redline. . .
no biggy.
7th gen is lighter than us, not the best idea for a swap IMO, especially since the CR is high.
good choice if you aren't trying to set any speed records, but be a peppy NA...
no biggy.
7th gen is lighter than us, not the best idea for a swap IMO, especially since the CR is high.
good choice if you aren't trying to set any speed records, but be a peppy NA...
>
you can retune that with the hydra ems standalone like the in the vid, any 2zzge can put down those power numbers with similar mods to that one from the video.
QUOTE(Negative @ Feb 8, 2007 - 6:28 PM) [snapback]525170[/snapback]
>
Yeah but there is something different about the ECU that gives it less HP or something. I'm not sure of the specifics but a guy in our Toyota club was bitching about how the Matrix XRS and the Celica GTS got 20 more HP or something than his Corolla XRS.
IDK - never really gave a $hit but I assume the motor is the same.
Yeah but there is something different about the ECU that gives it less HP or something. I'm not sure of the specifics but a guy in our Toyota club was bitching about how the Matrix XRS and the Celica GTS got 20 more HP or something than his Corolla XRS.
IDK - never really gave a $hit but I assume the motor is the same.
you can retune that with the hydra ems standalone like the in the vid, any 2zzge can put down those power numbers with similar mods to that one from the video.
2000 Celica GTS 'slowest gts evar'1998 Mazda 626 FS-DE/CD4-E
>
That's what I thought too, put it's not true. The 7th gen is listed as 2425 for the hatch. And the 6th gen is listed as 2755 Vert, 2395 Coupe, and 2415 Hatch. So if that's your reason for not doing the swap, it's time to find a new one. I'll always back up that motor just because I like high reving NA power.
6th Gen
7th Gen
QUOTE(Consynx @ Feb 8, 2007 - 6:33 PM) [snapback]525173[/snapback]
>
7th gen is lighter than us
7th gen is lighter than us
That's what I thought too, put it's not true. The 7th gen is listed as 2425 for the hatch. And the 6th gen is listed as 2755 Vert, 2395 Coupe, and 2415 Hatch. So if that's your reason for not doing the swap, it's time to find a new one. I'll always back up that motor just because I like high reving NA power.
6th Gen
7th Gen
Live Free, Be Happy
>
r those numbers real cus i always thought 6gc hatches were 2580 or at least thats what edmunds, autotrader, and kbb have them at
QUOTE(Bigmeanbulldog55 @ Feb 9, 2007 - 1:19 AM) [snapback]525199[/snapback]
>
>
That's what I thought too, put it's not true. The 7th gen is listed as 2425 for the hatch. And the 6th gen is listed as 2755 Vert, 2395 Coupe, and 2415 Hatch. So if that's your reason for not doing the swap, it's time to find a new one. I'll always back up that motor just because I like high reving NA power.
6th Gen
7th Gen
>
QUOTE(Consynx @ Feb 8, 2007 - 6:33 PM) [snapback]525173[/snapback]
>
7th gen is lighter than us
7th gen is lighter than us
That's what I thought too, put it's not true. The 7th gen is listed as 2425 for the hatch. And the 6th gen is listed as 2755 Vert, 2395 Coupe, and 2415 Hatch. So if that's your reason for not doing the swap, it's time to find a new one. I'll always back up that motor just because I like high reving NA power.
6th Gen
7th Gen
r those numbers real cus i always thought 6gc hatches were 2580 or at least thats what edmunds, autotrader, and kbb have them at
>
Those sites are showing higher numbers for the 6th gen, and KKB shows higher on the 7th. It shows 2560 for 6th and 2500 for 7th. I think these weight differences would be lessend when going from an iron to aluminum block too. Only real way to check is to get cars and measure them, or get the specs from Toyota.
QUOTE(urbandork @ Feb 9, 2007 - 2:39 AM) [snapback]525338[/snapback]
>
>
r those numbers real cus i always thought 6gc hatches were 2580 or at least thats what edmunds, autotrader, and kbb have them at
>
QUOTE(Bigmeanbulldog55 @ Feb 9, 2007 - 1:19 AM) [snapback]525199[/snapback]
>
>
That's what I thought too, put it's not true. The 7th gen is listed as 2425 for the hatch. And the 6th gen is listed as 2755 Vert, 2395 Coupe, and 2415 Hatch. So if that's your reason for not doing the swap, it's time to find a new one. I'll always back up that motor just because I like high reving NA power.
6th Gen
7th Gen
>
QUOTE(Consynx @ Feb 8, 2007 - 6:33 PM) [snapback]525173[/snapback]
>
7th gen is lighter than us
7th gen is lighter than us
That's what I thought too, put it's not true. The 7th gen is listed as 2425 for the hatch. And the 6th gen is listed as 2755 Vert, 2395 Coupe, and 2415 Hatch. So if that's your reason for not doing the swap, it's time to find a new one. I'll always back up that motor just because I like high reving NA power.
6th Gen
7th Gen
r those numbers real cus i always thought 6gc hatches were 2580 or at least thats what edmunds, autotrader, and kbb have them at
Those sites are showing higher numbers for the 6th gen, and KKB shows higher on the 7th. It shows 2560 for 6th and 2500 for 7th. I think these weight differences would be lessend when going from an iron to aluminum block too. Only real way to check is to get cars and measure them, or get the specs from Toyota.
Live Free, Be Happy
iunno...
i can't find a site that lists all weights that i trust...
but from comparison, a s14 is 2800ish i believe
a mr2 is 2600ish i thought. . .
and i don't see a celica being lighter than a mr2, but i do see it being around a S14. . .
iunno though. . .
i can't find a site that lists all weights that i trust...
but from comparison, a s14 is 2800ish i believe
a mr2 is 2600ish i thought. . .
and i don't see a celica being lighter than a mr2, but i do see it being around a S14. . .
iunno though. . .
>
Our engine alone is within a couple lbs. of a LS1 The 5SFE is an Iron block I4 and weighs around 420lbs while the LS1 is an all aluminum V8!
QUOTE(Consynx @ Feb 9, 2007 - 12:11 PM) [snapback]525399[/snapback]
>
iunno...
i can't find a site that lists all weights that i trust...
but from comparison, a s14 is 2800ish i believe
a mr2 is 2600ish i thought. . .
and i don't see a celica being lighter than a mr2, but i do see it being around a S14. . .
iunno though. . .
iunno...
i can't find a site that lists all weights that i trust...
but from comparison, a s14 is 2800ish i believe
a mr2 is 2600ish i thought. . .
and i don't see a celica being lighter than a mr2, but i do see it being around a S14. . .
iunno though. . .
Our engine alone is within a couple lbs. of a LS1
The 5SFE is an Iron block I4 and weighs around 420lbs while the LS1 is an all aluminum V8!
iirc the 6th gen celica hatch and 7th gen corolla sedan weigh almost the same.
2000 Celica GTS 'slowest gts evar'1998 Mazda 626 FS-DE/CD4-E
if you want a 2zz powered celica, why not just buy a used 7th gen? they are pretty cheap these days and you would be getting a newer car. you would get pretty much the same performance as you would if you swapped it, but without the hassle.
15PSI - 30MPG - Megasquirt Tuned
>
x2
the wireing from the zz motors to the sfe is just kinda...ever so slightly (sarcasm) harder then it should be.
i toyed with this idea, just the electrical alone will drive u bannanas
QUOTE(lagos @ Feb 10, 2007 - 5:09 PM) [snapback]525762[/snapback]
>
if you want a 2zz powered celica, why not just buy a used 7th gen? they are pretty cheap these days and you would be getting a newer car. you would get pretty much the same performance as you would if you swapped it, but without the hassle.
if you want a 2zz powered celica, why not just buy a used 7th gen? they are pretty cheap these days and you would be getting a newer car. you would get pretty much the same performance as you would if you swapped it, but without the hassle.
x2
the wireing from the zz motors to the sfe is just kinda...ever so slightly (sarcasm) harder then it should be.
i toyed with this idea, just the electrical alone will drive u bannanas
KawiLove