stock fwd beams 3sge dyno results

[aw11man]

My afm is as far as i know the standard setup as found in the caldina with standard pipe but should be prettey simular to the red top.
Really i am bit of a dummy and dont understand much but trying to learn

I was thinking about some simple mods but i probably will turbo the engine at some stage so i will stick to stuff that i wont have to buy twice like perhaps a motec m400 and a set of plugs.

[Roman]

Aaaah okay, so you're running the Caldina engine, with grey intake manifold and rocker cover?

And presumably the auto ECU too?

my spare beams engine has the auto ECU to suit an ST202, I'm not sure how easy it is to get running with a manual transmission?

Also according to the stats, one beams engine makes 152 ft lbs @ 6000rpm and 200hp at 7000rpm, and the other (presumably auto version) makes 152 ft lbs @ 6000rpm and 190hp @ 7000rpm.

surely if peak torque and HP are at the same points, and max torque is the exact same figure, surely this must indicate that one version (presumably the auto, or maybe engine for the 4WD Caldina?) is detuned at higher RPMs, rather than physically different?

Glenn AKA Celica RA45 says all of the engines are the same, but I wonder if the ECUs are what makes the difference.

[aw11man]

Yep thats the one black cover grey intake manifold.

Thats an interesting thaught about the auto ecu, i was lucky in the way that the guy who i baught it off already had it running in his manual aw11 so it was just a matter of swapping chassis and wiring it into body loom, not sure what was involved getting it to work without auto.

Once when i had to have the hg changed there were aparent differences between the st202and st215 (caldina) heads, not sure what they were but i think something to do with the vvti setup.

[Roman]

Okay well today I finally got around to trying to suss out my problems.

I swapped my AFM for my spare one, undid all of my earths, cleaned the connections and put them back on, and also found that my oxy sensor was loose!

I took out the oxy sensor, cleaned it (Couldnt find my spare one, damnit!) and put it back in.

I went for a spin, and damn! The difference is absolutely amazing.
I definitely think I've fixed the problem now, what ever it was. It's running like it used to again, cant wait to get back to the dyno to see how it goes!

[Alchemist]

Great engine, glad you have shoe horned it into an AW11 Just for comparison I got 94RWKW out of a Gen 2 3S-GE, extractors and panel filter in airbox. Can post up the graph if it's any help for you with comparisons.

[Roman]

I'd like to see the graph, I can add it to my hoard.

[Alchemist]

Here you go Roman...

Mods, unknown 4-2-1 extractors, HKS Panel filter.

[AndyTTR]

I thought the beams engines should be putting out more than that amount of power at the wheels? My Gen 3 (which is essentially a beams engine without VVTi) put out 99fwkw with only a pod filter and 2" cat back exhaust?

[Roman]

Errr.... which dyno plot are you talking about?

The original poster?

Bear in mind that he could possibly have the 190hp version, or incredibly unlikely, the 180hp version that came in the Rav-4. More low/midrange and response than a gen 3, but not much increase in outright power. (especially if it's restricted with the ECU backing off timing etc)

Also I can see how a 2" exhaust would really choke it up.

A .5" inch diameter increase or decrease makes a fairly significant difference to cross sectional area.

A 2" pipe has a cross sectional area of 3.14 square inches,

while a 2.5 inch pipe has a cross sectional area of 4.91 square inches.

More of a difference than you'd think, although his pipe has 80% of the diameter of the standard pipe, it only has 63% of the cross sectional area.

I mean look at his torque curve, it starts dropping from relatively low rpms.
It should peak at about ~6000!
Even though my plot only goes to 5400rpm, and the AFRs are messed, look at the torque, it's still on its way up.

So in my opinion, his car seems choked up.

I'd say that sorting the exhaust will be his first port of call, if he's wanting more high end HP!

My Gen 3 (which is essentially a beams engine without VVTi, steel intake manifold with velocity stacks in the plenum, bigger throttle body, coil over plug ignition, 11:1 compression, sodium filled exhaust valves, stronger block)

Fixed for accuracy.

[AndyTTR]

sorry, i wasn't aware of all the other little differences. But essentially, the Gen 4 is just a better head and intake manifold on a gen 3 bottom end is it not?

I was just putting my 2c in, the guy on ozcelica doing the red top conversion in his ST184 was getting similar figures - around 90-100 fwkw until they worked out his vvti solenoid wasn't kicking in. I'm not sure what it pulls now though.

The exhaust system on my car was a compromise between noise and flow. Its only 2", but it has a resonator and straight through muffler. If I were to go 2.25" or 2.5" it would've needed bigger, flow robbing mufflers. The smaller diametre also works to my advantage, the smaller diameter means the gas has to flow faster to exit the system wheras with the larger diameter it slows down and becomes a restriction before it hits the mufflers.For a race car straight through 2.5" is fine, but if he wants to keep it legal then he'll have to make some kind of compromise.

If the original poster is running an auto ECU is it possible that the ECU is pulling the iginition timing at high rpm to make shifts smoother?

Back to my original point, I thought that the beams engines would produce more outright power. The factory literature rates them at around 200bhp? My gen 3 is fairly standard - it has the standard ST202 exhaust manifold and a stock-ish exhaust but still puts out 95-100fwkw which is similar to what your dyno graphs show. With all the extra features you listed before (and the considerable difference in price) I just thought there'd be a greater difference in performance.

[Roman]

sorry, i wasn't aware of all the other little differences. But essentially, the Gen 4 is just a better head and intake manifold on a gen 3 bottom end is it not?

Yeah, I was just being facetious really, sorry.
Yep I think a big chunk of the power comes from the intake manifold, head design, and higher compression, rather than all of the other bits. Things like a reinforced block and sodium cooled valves make it a better candidate for prolonged high RPM uses like race cars etc, but probably make SFA difference in day to day driving with the odd blat.

I was just putting my 2c in, the guy on ozcelica doing the red top conversion in his ST184 was getting similar figures - around 90-100 fwkw until they worked out his vvti solenoid wasn't kicking in. I'm not sure what it pulls now though.

The exhaust system on my car was a compromise between noise and flow. Its only 2", but it has a resonator and straight through muffler. If I were to go 2.25" or 2.5" it would've needed bigger, flow robbing mufflers. The smaller diametre also works to my advantage, the smaller diameter means the gas has to flow faster to exit the system wheras with the larger diameter it slows down and becomes a restriction before it hits the mufflers.For a race car straight through 2.5" is fine, but if he wants to keep it legal then he'll have to make some kind of compromise.

I've got the standard gen 5 SW20 exhaust... which is 2.5 inches.
Actually I'm not sure where the TOMs extractors end and the gen 5 bits start, but either way that's what I'm running. It definitely doesnt lack low RPM punch with this setup.

If the original poster is running an auto ECU is it possible that the ECU is pulling the iginition timing at high rpm to make shifts smoother?

Actually, yeah that's what I've been thinking. It's the only explanation that I can see, that would make sense as to why the HP is lower, but max torque is same amount at the same place!

Back to my original point, I thought that the beams engines would produce more outright power. The factory literature rates them at around 200bhp? My gen 3 is fairly standard - it has the standard ST202 exhaust manifold and a stock-ish exhaust but still puts out 95-100fwkw which is similar to what your dyno graphs show. With all the extra features you listed before (and the considerable difference in price) I just thought there'd be a greater difference in performance.

I hope you took notice of the part where I said that my dyno plot only goes up to approximately 5400-5500rpm.
I'm making 113kw by 5500rpm, I have no idea what it makes further up the rev range, but given the trends in the graph (HP and torque still pointing upwards)
I'd expect it to be making a fair bit more than that by ~6-7000ish.

EDIT: time for some maths.
Most beams engines regardless of hp at the wheels, still make max hp and max tq at 7000 and 6000rpm repsectively.

Okay, so 113kw at 5500rpm. That's 151hp @ 5500rpm, and 158 ft lbs of torque.
Lets assume that I'm still making 158 ft lbs by 6000 (which is a fair assumption?) I'd be making 180hp at the wheels, and that's at the point of max torque, not max HP.
HP would continue to rise as torque dropped off, it usually dips right off by 7200-7300 or so.

/EDIT

I'm going back to the dyno fairly soon to get a full reading, now that I think I've got the problems fixed.

I'd expect a healthy beams engine to be making anywhere between 170 and 180hp at the wheels, with basic mods. Any less, and I'd be investigating what's wrong.

[urantia]

I need to know guys, Alcy, roman Andy, your all running aftermarket ECU? or stock ECU?

This is aw11man's dyno graph on the first post, the first dyno graph was using the stock aw11 air piping. (has anyone see just how restrictive that is??)

The better reading is with a much improved air intake system. The exuast came with the engine and was fabricated from the seller possible a restriction i'm not sure. But yeah the Ecu is an auto version and i suspect it's just had it's nuetral start switch pins bridged which shouldn't really be an issue to the engine if other toyota ECU's are anything to go by.

He does have an idle issue at the moment so this may be related to why its a tad down on power. I only installed it and had to go back to tas never even got to exerience the beams properly becuase the VVTI plug was broken and needed a replacement.

Sounds like some good extractors are the way to go with possibly further improvements to be made to the air intake system. (and fix the idle) and see how it goes.

I think a healthy stock beams motor should make around 108-114rwkw (not talking about any mods, just pure stock form)


By the way andy the beams block is stronger then the gen3, its probably the strongest S block made.

[aw11man]

About the vvti solenoid not kicking in, that happened to me when we put the engine in managed to break the connection somehow but it went into safe mode and there is no way it was putting down 90 odd kw even at the flywheel untill it was replaced, managed to get one off celica ra45.

Just wondering if there is anyway to tell if the ecu in definatley auto?, unless all caldinas are auto.

Im still not ruleing out some other gremlin restricting my power, ive never had a smooth idle as there is a constant hunting more so after warm up, also when cruising somtimes the exaust tone changes like the ecu is becoming indecisive with its mixture, if u know what i mean. Was thinking throttle position sensor but no codes as yet.
On top of that the engine is probably approaching 100,000k's.

I guess i could consider a set of decent extractors and 2.5" exaust, how much for a set of toms?.

Roman, hopfully u have located the prob and cant wait for your next dyno sheet.

[Roman]

To be honest I'm not sure where or if you can get the toms extractors, my engine came from Japan with them.
I know that you can get pheonix power extractors for them which are supposed to be pretty good, I can find contact details if you're interested?
Also I know of someone running HKS extractors on his gen 3, apparently gen 3 and 4 exhaust manifold stud patterns etc are the same... dont quote me on that however, I havent seen them side by side.

Yep I'll keep you all posted when I head to the dyno again.

All Caldina ECUs are auto by the way, there was never an M/T Caldina GT.

My idle is pretty much the same as yours by the sounds of it!
At first it used to barely idle and sometimes stall, and now it idles high. I'm suspecting that the crankcase ventilation valve is maybe letting air into the manifold when it shouldnt, because I cant find any vaccuum leaks elsewhere.

I thought that it was probably idling poorly thanks to the superlight flywheel, but I'm not sure why it's idling high now.
I'm going to replace the PCV valve with my spare one some time during the week, and see if that helps.

I'm running the factory ECU for a manual transmission SW20, and the wiring loom to suit.

I'd love to get the modified powerFC that's plug and play for the redtop, but its a bit pricey.

Also aw11man, any chance of you posting a pic of your intake setup?
I'm assuming that you've got the airflow meter lodged in the correct sized pipe, from the Caldina intake box?

Also, have you checked for error codes?
It might help highlight any issues.
The ECU might be looking for the ABS sensors, or autobox, or traction control inputs, or.... something. Worth a try anyway.

[Roman]

The PITA thing about the beams airflow meter, is that it looks like this:



and often doesnt come in the pipe that it should. (Which is what happened to me)

The factory Caldina ariflow meter is positioned here:



You can see that it's in the first part of straight pipe, just after the airbox.
I wonder if the airbox helps dampen any pulses or reverberations that might upset the reading that it gets?

Here's my setup:







My engine was converted to a MAP sensor when I got it, so I had to buy the AFM, and then mount it in the pipe that was included.