Tuner culture knows that for more than 100 years

a straight six will have the same throttle response. it's the lag that sucks

But 1,500hp on stuck internals BRA

​@@IIGrayfoxIIthey take about 600 safely before you have to build out the bottom end

@@ciancunningham2157 I was acting more like a typical fanboi.

Thank you .

la MR2 a aussi participé au 24h du man, mais avec le V8 de la lexus LS400 ce qui me faire beacoup rire, ma voiture et mon moteur on fait les 24h, mais pas ensemble 🤣

So, is that the same block as the Celica GT Four had, or not ? Thanks.

@@bustjanzupan1074 it might be- but it’s more similar probably to a variation of the MR2 Turbo black- they have been known to generate insane amounts of power in the neighborhood of 700+

@@JoseSantiago-hv3xm Thanks. So, the MR2 and the GT Four does not have the same block ?

A 1uz?

@@jacksin3323 3uz

@@Payday5 oh wow! I really almost bought a scrapyard 3uz for my swap too. I shoulda.

Best 4 banger toyota ever made and im pretty sure its the only engine ever built by toyota for the expressed purpose of professional racing.

They don't know their shit if they say that

​@@CelicAWD4age would like a word

@@Ae86Apexi the 4ag is good, yes, but its overhyped. Even the 20v version could have been better. And while it was used for racing, it was a street engine first. The 3sgte was built for pro rallying homologation purposes.

@@CelicAWD of course the Celica AWD account is gonna say that. I like touge. 4age may not make the same power but considering it's a 40 year old platform it's still incredibly reliable and the last big Yamaha motor that absolutely made good passes. I'm a ae111 fan and I love the 3sgte, but 4age will always be Yamaha/Toyotas crowning achievement. You bring up the fact that it was built for racing like that helps the argument. The fact that the 20v wasn't a race motor dropped in a street car makes it much more impressive then a motor built for the purpose of racing succeeding. Different strokes

I mean, it did but the reason why the fanboys love the supra in the first place was because of bonkers horsepower output from the 2j.

@@kilotiger7780 Oh yeah for sure.

@@spirovarelis9637While I can agree to some extent due to these cringy Supra JDM scene from tiktok and overhyping the 2JZ, there's some of us who just love the sound of boosted Inline Sixes while acknowledging and respecting the capability of engines like the 3SGTE and Honda K series

@@spirovarelis9637In the end, we all ain't shit without boost, but that's silly to say because the 3S and 2J were both overbuilt and designed specifically for turbo applications, right?

Put the work in exactly where? in Japan sure, but do you not realize the work the 2JZ put in for the drag racing scene for imports in America and around the world. It's single handedly put import racing on the map.

I’ve been tuning 3S-GTE nearly my whole life at this point, three of them out in my garage right now. It’s baffling to me that people don’t get it. Line up a 3S and a 2JZ and tell me what the differences are aside from the cylinder count. There aren’t many. I’d like a spline on my 3S oil pump drive like my 1JZ has but that’s about the sum of it.

​@negativeindustrial i need to tune my 3sgte on A Megasquirt2 if you are interested i need a tuner😢

its better if they didnt know it. so i can buy it at cheap price

Yeah no thanks. Keep the prices on the 2jz. I'm already seeing the GT4 celica go up in price and catch the eyes of the fanboy clout chasers

@@dylansandoval9841 yup fuck that noise, let everyone fan boy on the supra & 2jz...gt4's and 3s havnt sky rocketed in price compared to the other "hero" cars....they have gone up but not nearly as much

Yeah you’re goofy for that one

I would not make that mistake.

I'm staying with my 2jz engines and parts till I die....😂

I mean to be fair it went to a good cause😅

Damn bro, do you at least talk to that friend dad ?

Genuine question.... which racing Skyline has a V6?

@@s13180sxSR20DET A VQ30DETT powered R34 competed in JGTC's GT500 class in 2003. This is after a front-mid engine V6 TT was canceled during the design of the R34 Skyline. So yeah, the R34 was almost the proto R35, but it ended up getting canned because they'd have to open a new production line/plant for the new engines, so they said F it instead and did a one-off for a season or two (or w/e) of racing in their own homeland.

And you sir are wrong I could explain but it's to much to explain the v6 engine is one of the most imbalanced engines in existence

@@tobywilliam3538 Then build it like a busso. But there's no way you can tell me a V6 is worse than an inline 3, 4, or 5. Like I said, it's the most compact and power dense (for it's physical size and displacement ranges) piston engine design. That's the main upside. Followed by being simpler than a V8 or bigger.

the vr6 is another good example of this.

Outside of the fact Alfa Romeo used their own V6, the Busso, and not the PRV one, which has French and some Swedish roots (PRV for Peugeot Renault Volvo), you are right

@@oscaraurelio8869 Look it up. They ditched the Busso after three years because the 60° V6 was not optimal for power. 90° is what you want. They thought about a cut V8 from the Montreal but in the end went for a heavily modified PRV block.

Bmw also put a smaller engine in the homologation special e30 M3 vs the m20 for better weight distribution. It's technically a front mid engine car. The s14 motor in that car also is related to that m10 based and m12/f2 engine.

i put on a bigger turbo on my original 3sgte. went to multiple trackdays. cranked up the boost to 15psi with a stock intercooler. blew the graphite head gasket. that was 4 years ago. i finally gave it a rest this year after trying to send it to the moon with 20psi and a 600 mi road trip. nope. still drove til i removed it 😅

They can actually produce far more than that (650-750hp). The same engine inside the AAR Eagle mk.III which dominates IMSA back then uses an engine that came from the 3S family of engines.

it would be cool if they could fit it transversely :)

E503 that's what it was called. I forgot the name of it.

@@MrJamesshipman it was 503E.

3SGT not a GTE, the 3SGTE was the road going variant that derived much of its design from the 3SGT/503e engine, as did the rest of the Toyota S Engine family.

The differences between the 2.1L and 2.0L inline-4 engines of the Supra JGTC When you think about a racing spec Supra, it is a huge possibility to think immediately the iconic JGTC/GT500 spec of it. There’s also a huge possibility to remember that they were powered by an inline-4 turbo engine, instead of the OEM/factory-based 2JZ-GTE. But did you know that there were different versions of this 4cyl engine that powered the Supra JGTC cars? We explain: Back in the 80’s, there was Group C. The category grew, increasing interest from major manufacturers around the globe - and Toyota was one of them. With chassis being developed by DOME, Toyota (under Toyota Racing Development division, known by all of you as TRD) was in charge to develop a 2.1L 4cyl engine single turbocharged known as 503E, and eventually dubbed as 3S-GTM, 3S-GTE and/or just 3S-GTE. This engine also powered the monstrous AAR-built IMSA GTP cars from late 80’s and early 90’s. With this engine being specifically developed for sports car racing and knowing the regulations subjects from JGTC, Toyota was the first official thing to take advantage in an imminent engine swap in the championship, putting the 503E in their first factory-backed Supra GT chassis entered in the mid-season of 1994. This engine remained as it was from 1994 until 1996. The 503E (dubbed 3S-GT that moment) was also seen powering the Supra LM cars seen at the Circuit de La Sarthe during the 1995 and 1996 24h of Le Mans. The 503E was then dropped by 1997, when Toyota developed a new engine for the all-new ‘97-spec Supra, downgrading to 2.0L (actually 1998cc of displacement), and taking base from the 3S-GTE seen in the production version and specially the Celica WRC, known as 661E, and “re-engineered” for JGTC, 20kg lighter than the 503E, becoming as 171F, the official engine of the Supra JGTC by 1997 until 1999, where it was replaced by the 244F, after slightly modifications on the whole base. Still dubbed as 3S-GTE, the 244F base remained until 2002, where it was replaced by the variable-displacements V8 NA 3UZ-FE, putting the end in the 4cyl successful stories for more than two decade

@@Realtime1501 wow.

It became really expensive in the last couple of years. If I remember correctly, 5or6 years ago you could have bought a 2jz gte vvti in good condition for just 2000usd, now it's more than 6000usd and it's recommended to be rebuilt because how old it is and it's possible previous abuse

And 4200 vortec too

@@Low760 Ninja'd

There's a good video comparing many aspects of the RB vs JZ and it doesn't look good for the RB, lol.

Enough to get all the other teams to complain, lol

Correction, early 90's, current Nissan Motorsports suck now

@@davidchau3228 I clearly said in the 90s??? Even so I still enjoy Nisan motor sports. I know they took the Fuji Super GT last August

They're not that heavy, it's more that the weight is close to the nose and GT500 class was limited to 500hp, so them trying out a turbo 4 was a better bet, but Toyota eventually ended up going with naturally aspirated V8s after a couple years.

@@sigmaprojects280kg... c'est méga lourd 😅😅

@@alkane6467 They're lighter than the RB26. When compared to even a modern inline 6 like a B58 when comparing long blocks they're actually pretty similar. Also in GT500 like every racing league they have a weight minimum. Meaning you can't just make the car as light as possible, however what you can do is move that weight around. So some cars they'll be under the weight minimum so they'll place the weights in the race car where it works best for the chassis. Same with the engine, they'd have similar weight overall if they used an inline 6 no matter what due to weight minimums, but having a 4 cylinder is better for the obvious reason of the weight being closer to the center of the car.

Yes, Fred Gibson from Nissan Motorsport Australia said: "We were told we were getting a GTR [to replace the HR31 GTS-R] and the year we were getting it and *I assumed it would be a V6 engine* as straight sixes are bad for motorsport as they hang out over the front cross member and make the car front heavy." I.e., *even back in 1990* he thought inline-six engines were old-fashioned and he was expecting the new (at the time) R32 GT-R to have a V6 engine like the 300ZX.

I'm pretty sure JGTC didn't see the 503E it was 3SGTE, I think only the GTP cars and the Pikes Peak cars ran 503Es

​@@sigmaprojectsThe very first iteration of the 4cyl Supra GT500 in 1994/1995 uses a 503E

@@AbrahamArthemius Must have been very short run since you can see in the rest of the GT500 supras that had photos of the engine bay they had a 3S instead of a 503E. What team was it? SARD? They were one of the first to run a Supra in GT500.

@@sigmaprojects it was actually TOM'S and it was only used for a season or so. Toyota used 503E/3S-GT 2.1L from late 1994 up to the 1995 season, then starting in '96 Toyota uses the 171F/3S-GTE 2.0L. A tiny bit less displacement but they make up for it by being 20 kilos lighter.

@@AbrahamArthemius yea, those 503E engines are heavy. When you tear one down you can kind of understand why, they're extremely beefy. Looking back at some display photos, it does look like one museum said that SARD used a 503E one year.

il y a aussi eu les 661E ou les 171E plus proche du 3S-GTE de séris

so the block is not even the same?

@@kayvon_is_likes not even remotely the same. 503E was cast from something quite heavy and the water jackets and routing is very different. The material around the cylinders is quite different too. Can't swap pistons between the motors. The only thing that is the same is the bellhousing bolt pattern are interchangeable.

yea that was the limit. Toyota though eventually settled on the 4.5L UZ V8.

Dan Gurney's GTP cars? They ran Toyota motors.

Yup. That's Primarily the nature of 2Js because Toyota made it an equally square in Bore X Stroke. The powerband is more smooth and equally distributed across the rpm range (bigger displacement just adds more low end torque) Whereas the 1JZ revs higher and produces powerband in the top end of the rev range just like Nissan RB26DETT (Undersquare stroke)

But aye! That's just the base of the engine at work. Tuning, and aftermarket parts can change many aspects of your build, now you're able to slap in high lift duration cams and adjust boost and timing to move your sh*t up to the top range of the rpm. We've come so far haven't we lol

en 1997, c'était le 661E utilisé en WRC basé sur le 3S-GTE de grande série

He said the name wrong, the 503e also went by the name “3SGT” (although there were ofc some variations on the engine overtime that were under the same umbrella), point being that it the 503e and 3SGT are for all intents and purposes the same motor, the 3SGT was later the inspiration for the 3SGTE and the rest of the S engine family, which is why my 2000 Camry 4 cylinder auto has a 5SFE with an engine block that can handle 700hp+ 😂

@@griffins750 It's further confusing because Toyota liked to play with names for marketing. The 503E shares nothing with other 3S's and no parts are interchangeable. They only were used on GTP cars. With possibly that SARD had one in their Supra, but there's only one photo that I can track down that shows a 503E. It's quite easy to tell when it's a 503E because the heads have their own cooling system with a coolant manifold above the exhaust ports.

Not in the cost/performance ratio but objectively speaking it could be. 🤷

Going by history V8 would be a better bet I think. That's what they ended up running after a couple years of the 3S

Did you not understand that the 2J would have never been a good racing engine? And if Toyota used it the Supra would have been absolutely beaten to the ground.

That was later on I think

​@@kilotiger7780 - from 2003 until its replacement by the Lexus SC