Ported 2JZ / Ported 1FZ comparison

[MS-75]

Thought some may find this interesting.

Just got back final flow results for the porting profile that's been done on the head for my all-out 1FZ (landcruiser 4.5L inline 6cyl) buildup.

The 1FZ head has been ported as far as the casting will allow - same for the 2J in the comparison. The 1FZ could have gone to 2.5mm o/size valves, but we stuck with 1.5mm as that was as big as the stock sized seats would allow. The 2J will take larger valves also - but as a result it's a reasonable comparison between the two.

[Billzilla]

Thanks for that, very interesting.

[jeffro ra28]

What was the test pressure they were flowed at?

[MS-75]

I *think* it was at 25, but I'll have to check.

*edit*

28 I believe.

We may get it done on a bigger flowbench once all the ports and chambers are finished as the bench used was falling over at the big lift values.

[JZA70 R]

Is head flow relative to engine displacement? I would imagine you would engineer more head flow into a bigger motor? (talking factory heads/motor here)

Is the difference between the two about the same as the difference in capacity percentage?

Is this going to turn into a 1FZ > 2JZ thread? hope not that would be pretty lame...

[jeffro ra28]

I can see why the bench was falling over, 410 CFM at 28" is nascar, spintcar and v8 supercar territory for flow, although 2v.
Very impressive figures for a 4.5L engine anyhow, well done.

[thechuckster]

have you put this (along with the turbo data) into EAP to make an estimate on flywheel horsepower?

[oldcorollas]

Is head flow relative to engine displacement? I would imagine you would engineer more head flow into a bigger motor? (talking factory heads/motor here)

Is the difference between the two about the same as the difference in capacity percentage?

Is this going to turn into a 1FZ > 2JZ thread? hope not that would be pretty lame...

head flow is related to power... so in a way it is related to engine displacement.... unless you have a dirty great huffer on it....

TK? how are the intake/exhaust low ratios compared to "ideal" ?

[MS-75]

Is head flow relative to engine displacement? I would imagine you would engineer more head flow into a bigger motor? (talking factory heads/motor here)

Is the difference between the two about the same as the difference in capacity percentage?

Is this going to turn into a 1FZ > 2JZ thread? hope not that would be pretty lame...

The Toyota F heads are narrow valve angle setups for more compact packaging (cams close together with scissor drive between them) and chamber design aimed at good emission levels.

In standard trim they don’t flow well at all. The 1FZ standard ports flow a significant amount less than a 2J – but that’s not particularly surprising as they only make 165kw in stock trim.

What is nice is that with port work it came up to a much better figure over stock.

Of course the head is physically larger than a JZ series, which allows the ports and valves to be physically larger also – but in addition, on the intake side, the ports are at a 45degree angle down into the back of the valve which is responsible for the lions share of the big flow jump over a 2J. If you look at the exhaust side where the ports are horizontal, the 1FZ only has 12% or so on the 2J, but on the canted intake ports it jumps up to 35% more – I find the fact that the canted ports are worth well over 20% in flow the most interesting bit.

With regard to flow relative to displacement, the thing to remember about engines as their displacement increases is that the flow to displacement ratio generally drops away as the surface area to volume ratio of the cylinder decreases. More specifically this means that the ratio of combustion chamber area to displacement decreases as an engine increases in displacement.

Compare the head flow to displacement ratio in a small 4 valve motorcycle engine to the same ratio in a large displacement 4 valve engine and you’ll see such a relationship. (of course you have to be comparing similar head configurations and bore/stroke ratios)

To that end – if you look at the 1FZ and 2JZ disp/flow ratios, you’ll see that exact trend. Even with the better flow rates, the 1FZ has a poorer displ/flow ratio. For the 1FZ to maintain the same ratio as a 2J, you’d need 450cfm on the intake and 350cfm on the exhaust, which is just not practical – and if you were to then step back to a smaller displacement engine (say 1600cc), you’ll see the displacement to flow ratio better than the 2J.

It doesn't need to be a 1FZ vs 2J bitchfest - I merely thought it was a good comparison that highlighted that once the 1FZ was properly ported for all-out flow that it was able to take advantage of it's larger ports and valves and deliver flow results more representative of it's size when compare to a phscally smaller head.

The head flow figures, combined with the displacement, do mean that it will make more HP than a comparably modified 2J - but it's a physically bigger engine so that's exactly what you would expect. I also weighs close to double so isn't the most versatile powerplant!

As far as the in/ex ratio goes - the rule of thumb is that the exhaust flows 80% of the intake, so it's a bit off as the intake flow streaks away, but as the average is pretty nice it'll be sweet.

EAP is predicting about 1400hp at 32psi and 7700rpm or so.

[boxh34d]

I was going to say, if this is the "all out motor", then what was the last one. . . .
Until I read the last line, and it explained everything

[JZA70 R]

Thanks for your response, so the 1FZ block is iron like the 2J? ...would explain the weight!

What car is it going into? ...that extra weight would be useful in a drag car, keep the front wheels down hehe.

As far as the in/ex ratio goes - the rule of thumb is that the exhaust flows 80% of the intake, so it's a bit off as the intake flow streaks away, but as the average is pretty nice it'll be sweet.

Is this the case for N/A and F/I motors alike? or is this a F/I thing to increase gas velocity to spool turbos?

[oldeskewltoy]

The Toyota F heads are narrow valve angle setups for more compact packaging (cams close together with scissor drive between them) and chamber design aimed at good emission levels.

the intake side, the ports are at a 45degree angle down into the back of the valve which is responsible for the lions share of the big flow jump

sorry for creative editing....

Sounds like this was part of Bill's 7AF plan


and is part of my 4AFZE plan

[Duk]

Of course the head is physically larger than a JZ series, which allows the ports and valves to be physically larger also – but in addition, on the intake side, the ports are at a 45degree angle down into the back of the valve which is responsible for the lions share of the big flow jump over a 2J. If you look at the exhaust side where the ports are horizontal, the 1FZ only has 12% or so on the 2J, but on the canted intake ports it jumps up to 35% more – I find the fact that the canted ports are worth well over 20% in flow the most interesting bit.

http://www.gofastnews.com/showthread...al-Port-area-s
Gives an example of valve flow utilization to port angle diagram.

[oldeskewltoy]

brainfart -

http://www.gofastnews.com/showthread...-power-concept

In a 4AG head, could this be achieved by adding one O/S intake, and one O/S exhaust valve???

[Duk]

brainfart -

http://www.gofastnews.com/showthread...-power-concept

In a 4AG head, could this be achieved by adding one O/S intake, and one O/S exhaust valve???

I thought about doing that, especially as the big port heads have a noticeable angle/bias in them. That is, #1 port bias toward the front of the engine (from the flange to the valves) . #2 toward the middle