For the love of a tractor engine: The life and times of the 18R-G

[o_man_ra23]

Shifty,

For the purposes of motorsport categories, the capacity of the engine is rounded UP to the nearest 100cc. Hence an 18R at 1968cc is called a 2.0Ltr. Thus 2127cc (yep your math is right) of the 92mm bore is in the 2.2Ltr classes, and is accepted as being 2.2Ltr not 2.1Ltr.

Stroking the motor will increase static compression as you will increase the volume of gas being squished, while the volume it gets squished to stays the same. This will improve torque across the board, however will have a negative effect on revving due to increased horizontal movement of the conrods. You also need to look at what bearings/conrods are available, as offset grinding requires thicker bearings to take up the slack of the grind. I would personally steer clear of the offset grind. You should be able to get 2.4Ltr without it anyways, as the 22R came with a 91.9mm bore.

The other thing you need to look at with the 22R crank is the front pulley and timing gears, and how they are mounted, as well as ensuring the bearings are in the right spots. If you are using Arias pistons, you could get the piston pin to block surface distance altered to suit the conrods you want to use. I have heard that 16R conrods are what you want for the stroker motor, however you will need to research this more.

[Shifty]

That might be how they look at it for motorsport (although I reckon it goes by exact CC anyway), but it seems like a lot of people are using "2.2lt" as a bit of a claim to fame as very few people seem to mention actual cc... honestly I (and probably a lot of other people) took that 2.2lt meant something like 2190cc as would be "the norm". Doesn't really matter, just a point of interest and a reason to research things rather than just believe people who "know".

So, with the 22R crank not seeming the "best" option, how strong are 18RG and normal 18R cranks? If they're an "unbreakable" item (eg. when properly prepped are they completely reliable to say 9000rpm in an atmo motor or say 350-400rwhp in a turbo motor?), then I might persist with the 2127cc thing.

I believe my motor has the original 18RG crank and 18RG rods. Is there any way to confirm for sure? It was rebuilt into an 18R block before I purchased it so it's a bit of a mystery box. Same question for rods. I'm intending to get rods for it as I assume the stockers are no good for a 9000rpm atmo engine or a turbo engine of anything more than say 200rwhp.

I don't mind putting rods in it, but I'd rather save the money if they're 100% not necessary.

[JustenGT8]

Yup, 22R crank does not need to be offset ground. From my old build specs:

3.5mm overbore, skirt relieved about 1mm for big-end throw clearance. Crank is a modified 22R, widened main journals, slightly widened big-end journals, shot peened. Rods are 18RG side ground, polished, shot peened, ARP rod bolts. Pistons are 22R shallow-dish . standard rings. Head is std 18RGEU, with big-bore ACL gasket.

I have this engine sitting in my KE10 at present. Dead No.4 rod but crank looks OK. I'll do a freshen up and i have a new set of 22R oversize pistons to go in to bump up the comp ratio...should be a ballsy n/a 4 cyl with torque to burn....will be great for smoking 4AGZE and 4AGTEs

[JustenGT8]

That might be how they look at it for motorsport (although I reckon it goes by exact CC anyway), but it seems like a lot of people are using "2.2lt" as a bit of a claim to fame as very few people seem to mention actual cc... honestly I (and probably a lot of other people) took that 2.2lt meant something like 2190cc as would be "the norm". Doesn't really matter, just a point of interest and a reason to research things rather than just believe people who "know".

So, with the 22R crank not seeming the "best" option, how strong are 18RG and normal 18R cranks? If they're an "unbreakable" item (eg. when properly prepped are they completely reliable to say 9000rpm in an atmo motor or say 350-400rwhp in a turbo motor?), then I might persist with the 2127cc thing.

I believe my motor has the original 18RG crank and 18RG rods. Is there any way to confirm for sure? It was rebuilt into an 18R block before I purchased it so it's a bit of a mystery box. Same question for rods. I'm intending to get rods for it as I assume the stockers are no good for a 9000rpm atmo engine or a turbo engine of anything more than say 200rwhp.

I don't mind putting rods in it, but I'd rather save the money if they're 100% not necessary.

Stock 18RG rods are good for 8000rpm and as much hp as you can imagine Have never seen one let go...even that 18RG altered runs the stock rods and that is making very very serious power.

[roadkill]

Hi,

i ***think*** i do. I'll check tonight along with everything else that i have to do.

bEn

RT104GT,

There are two versions of the long manifold.

I want to get my hands on an 88211 manifold as that's what best suits my plans.




If anyone has an 88211 manifold, please let me know. It is long and water heated.
I would be willing to swap for one of my shorter manifolds if need be (which fit better in Celica engine bays).

[o_man_ra23]

I am currently building my 2127cc (2.2Ltr) 18R-GTE to 9000rpm turbo spec with factory rods and crank, Arias pistons, ARP fasteners throughout and Cometic head gasket. The cams will probably limit me to less than 9krpm, and the turbo is only good for 16psi, however the bottom end is being built to take a lot more.

So should I say I have a 2.13Ltr motor?? To what accuracy do you announce the capacity?? Engine capacities have always been under their claimed size, by varying margins, so why should this be any different?? Factories use the motorsport method with all their cars (how many cc's is a 6.0Ltr CommonWhore V8?? Or the 350/351 V8's, both were claimed at 5.7Ltr, yet there is a whole cubic inch - 16+cc - difference)

[damian]

i think what was meant by the question was that on a forum like this, we expect things to be a bit more exact, rather than the bullshit numbers the manufacturers give us.

I was of the same (misguided) opinion that a 2.2L was pretty close to 2.2L, not closer to 2.1L.
I understand the 18R-G is actually 1968, but that is pretty close to 2L so it makes sense.

like kw for instance, the numbers mentioned by manufacturers are at the flywheel, not the rear wheel. I've always thought this a scam

Moral of the story - you learn something new every day

[Shifty]

I am currently building my 2127cc (2.2Ltr) 18R-GTE to 9000rpm turbo spec with factory rods and crank, Arias pistons, ARP fasteners throughout and Cometic head gasket. The cams will probably limit me to less than 9krpm, and the turbo is only good for 16psi, however the bottom end is being built to take a lot more.

So should I say I have a 2.13Ltr motor?? To what accuracy do you announce the capacity?? Engine capacities have always been under their claimed size, by varying margins, so why should this be any different?? Factories use the motorsport method with all their cars (how many cc's is a 6.0Ltr CommonWhore V8?? Or the 350/351 V8's, both were claimed at 5.7Ltr, yet there is a whole cubic inch - 16+cc - difference)

I'm starting to pick that you like to argue

Anyway regardless of the technically correct way to look at it I'd generally expect an engine of a given capacity to be no more than (say) 20-30cc short of the claimed capacity, and if so I'd expect it would be referred to as the rounded down size.... and in most cases this is the way that the factories do it too. I used to have a bike that was 1402cc. Should I have called it a 1.5 litre? Not likely!

I would be very surprised if any mroe than 1-2% of people disagreed with me on this.

[JustenGT8]

arrgh, pointless argument elsewhere. This isn't a poopra thread where e-wangs are compared

[lilcrash]

JustenGT8 - agreed

a stroked/bored 18r is a 2.2 and thats the end of it from my opinion. back to the 18rg discussions.

[o_man_ra23]

I'm starting to pick that you like to argue

Hello pot...

[damian]

nope, apparently that's not the end of it...

edit - grabs popcorn

[lilcrash]

Lmao. I have a bag of malteasers

[river]

Hi,

I would be very surprised if any mroe than 1-2% of people disagreed with me on this.

I guess you better be prepared to be surprised then. The difference, despite the pedantic desire to go to the nearest cc, is still small and will make minimal difference on power output. 2200 vs 2127 is 3.4%.

arrgh, pointless argument elsewhere. This isn't a poopra thread where e-wangs are compared

Agreed

a stroked/bored 18r is a 2.2 and thats the end of it from my opinion. back to the 18rg discussions

Yep. Let's move on.

seeyuzz
river

[Shifty]

I am currently building my 2127cc (2.2Ltr) 18R-GTE to 9000rpm turbo spec with factory rods and crank, Arias pistons, ARP fasteners throughout and Cometic head gasket. The cams will probably limit me to less than 9krpm, and the turbo is only good for 16psi, however the bottom end is being built to take a lot more.

Out of interest, what turbo are you running?