Celica 1.8 Vvti 140 Bhp Engine

[tubaman]

I have a 2002 Avencis 1.8 VVti with a power out put around 128 BHP, as this is essentially the same engine as the Celica, where exactly does the addition horsepower come from in the Celica ?

eg. uprated cam, exhaust, intake etc etc

[daktari]

I have a 2002 Avencis 1.8 VVti with a power out put around 128 BHP, as this is essentially the same engine as the Celica, where exactly does the addition horsepower come from in the Celica ?

eg. uprated cam, exhaust, intake etc etc

←

Probably a combination of these plus it is probably mapped differently.

[Cubic Incubi]

dude, what's the engine code?

this will tell wether or not its internals are the same.

is 128bhp at the wheels or crank? i would imagine crank, is that the listed figure or have you dyno'd the car?

[mikeb]

Probably just the ECU programming. Could possibly have different cam profiles too.

[Cubic Incubi]

not if its the 'same' engine, not all toyota 1.8 vvti engines are the same, for all we know it could be a different head or block.

so we need the engine code.

if its the same engine the cams will be identical, tolerances will be decided depending on difeerences in the way the car sits on the road, its weight, its cornering etc, that'll be the likes of ECU mapping.

such a big difference in power suggests its a completely diferent block or head, in which case the engine code will be different, then again 12bhp is easily able to be mapped with enough inducted air.

[mikeb]

not if its the 'same' engine, not all toyota 1.8 vvti engines are the same, for all we know it could be a different head or block.

so we need the engine code.

if its the same engine the cams will be identical, tolerances will be decided depending on difeerences in the way the car sits on the road, its weight, its cornering etc, that'll be the likes of ECU mapping.

such a big difference in power suggests its a completely diferent block or head, in which case the engine code will be different, then again 12bhp is easily able to be mapped with enough inducted air.

←

Well yes I was kind of assuming that he had established the engines are the same number. That does not mean that they have the same cams though. The difference between the 3s-ge in the gen 5 and gen 6 is partly down to having longer duration cams, but they are both 3s-ge engines.

Just checked, and the avensis does have the same engine. Both cars make peak torque (170 Nm) at 4200 rpm, so that implies that they have the same cam profiles. But the avensis makes peak power at 6k rpm, the celica at 6.4k rpm. This must be down to ECU programming, and could be different control of the vvti or fueling.

[Cubic Incubi]

Well yes I was kind of assuming that he had established the engines are the same number. That does not mean that they have the same cams though. The difference between the 3s-ge in the gen 5 and gen 6 is partly down to having longer duration cams, but they are both 3s-ge engines.

Just checked, and the avensis does have the same engine. Both cars make peak torque (170 Nm) at 4200 rpm, so that implies that they have the same cam profiles. But the avensis makes peak power at 6k rpm, the celica at 6.4k rpm. This must be down to ECU programming, and could be different control of the vvti or fueling.

←

ok, lol, i'm not following your posts mate to have a go - but

I never assume to large degree and if I do, I mention that I am merely speculating, theorising and hypothosising.

which is why I stressed that I was unaware of the engine code and wasnt to offer an in depth analysis until I was given the 'facts'.

The Generation 6 and Generation 5 celica 3sge's whilst 'similair' in design are 'different' - they are different 'series' engines which is why they have 'different' cams.

So your speculation is incorrect with reagrds to your 3sge statements.

If you have checked the spec for the avensis engine and have discovered the same engine code, that means nothing unless it is the same series of engine, now lets assums that it is the same series engine.

The reason the Avensis engine pumps less to the crank may be that it has a different exhaust or inlet manifold design and perhaps a different exhaust bore, but (and I speculate) if I assume that the engine and its external components are identical, the main difference is that the cars are 'different' and have different handling charcteristics and weights, so when engineering and designing the tolerances for the set up, the manufacturer decided that for longevity and adequate power for that range of vehicle within it's class, it was going to have fuel maps to a peak power of 128BHP and it also decided that if the car was uprated beyond that, the engine would not be as porductive.

For example, and again, I have not looked up the specification, as I feel it is up to the owner to provide such information for a in depth theory - but lets speculate that the avensis is a heavier car, if the ECU mapping allows for more fuel maps, the power band will extend further into the RPM range, and if it struggles to contiue making power, it will get hot and it will cause advanced engine wear - a basic engineering principal - UNLESS these factors are considered and you choose you oil properly.

And that is why it is different.

If my assumption and speculation regarding the inlet and exhaust manifolds and weight are proved wrong, then it will be a combination of those components in addition to ECU mapping and a combination of other factors which suggest beyond reasonable doubt that the two cars a in all eventuality 'different' therefore have different peak power. Perhaps the car has more equipment which requires powering by the ancillaries.

I hope that helps clear up some misconceptions.

cheers

[splash]

:bookworm:

[mikeb]

ok, lol, i'm not following your posts mate to have a go - but

I never assume to large degree and if I do, I mention that I am merely speculating, theorising and hypothosising.

which is why I stressed that I was unaware of the engine code and wasnt to offer an in depth analysis until I was given the 'facts'.

The Generation 6 and Generation 5 celica 3sge's whilst 'similair' in design are 'different' - they are different 'series' engines which is why they have 'different' cams.

So your speculation is incorrect with reagrds to your 3sge statements.

←

The gen 5 celica has the rev 2 3s-ge, and the gen 6 celica has the rev 3 3s-ge. They are both 'S' series engines as denoted by the 3S in the code. They may have used different castings etc, but all parts are interchangable between the revisions. AFAIK the rev 2 and rev 3 engines are effectively identical internally, apart from the cam profiles. The '3s' denotes the series and bottom end family, and the 'ge' defines the type of c/head (ge = 50 degree valve angle, fe = 22.5 degree in the s series 16v engines).

If you have checked the spec for the avensis engine and have discovered the same engine code, that means nothing unless it is the same series of engine, now lets assums that it is the same series engine.

←

They are the same engine code (1zz), so they are both from the zz series. They could be different revisions of the 1zz, but Toyota's 'revisions' are an evolutionarly process. They would never cast rev 1 and rev 2 parts simultaneously, that would make no business sense. The celica and avensis we are talking about are in production at the same time, therefore must share them same revision engine. Anyway, AFAIK the 1zz engine is still on it's 1st revision.

The celica and avensis both have the same engine internally (except possibly cams, but I doubt it). They both have the same bore/stroke and compression ratio. They are both 1zz blocks, and they both have the 'fe' head (I don't think there is a ge head for the 1zz).

The reason the Avensis engine pumps less to the crank may be that it has a different exhaust or inlet manifold design and perhaps a different exhaust bore, but (and I speculate) if I assume that the engine and its external components are identical, the main difference is that the cars are 'different' and have different handling charcteristics and weights, so when engineering and designing the tolerances for the set up, the manufacturer decided that for longevity and adequate power for that range of vehicle within it's class, it was going to have fuel maps to a peak power of 128BHP and it also decided that if the car was uprated beyond that, the engine would not be as porductive.

←

I seriously doubt that the reduced power is directly caused by a different exhaust bore or inlet manifold. The designers would notice such a large loss and re engineer the exhaust and inlet to not be a performance restriction. You don't really think that modern car designs could have such poorly performing breathing systems that the inlet and exhaust would be limiting factors in this case, do you?

I fully agree that the difference is brought about by the requirements of the two vehicles. But the way this is done is by selecting the appropriate cam profile and c/head design to move peak torque, peak hp, and change the power band. The c/head is the same, and the cams are the same (as I mentioned earlier peak torque is identical). The designers then go on to specify suitable inlet and exhaust systems for the engines power band.

For example, and again, I have not looked up the specification, as I feel it is up to the owner to provide such information for a in depth theory - but lets speculate that the avensis is a heavier car, if the ECU mapping allows for more fuel maps, the power band will extend further into the RPM range, and if it struggles to contiue making power, it will get hot and it will cause advanced engine wear - a basic engineering principal - UNLESS these factors are considered and you choose you oil properly.

And that is why it is different.

←

Sorry, but that's completely wrong. I agree that the avensis is probably heavier, but I have already established that they have the same engine mechanically. Your theory on limiting engine power due to the car's weight is silly. The load the engine see's will depend on the gear ratio's before the cars weight. And it would never get hotter in one car over the other - when you're making peak power for any significant time period with either car, you can be sure it's moving at sufficient speed to provide adequate cooling. If not then the cooling system is not up to the job, and the car will have serious problems when sitting in traffic etc).

If my assumption and speculation regarding the inlet and exhaust manifolds and weight are proved wrong, then it will be a combination of those components in addition to ECU mapping and a combination of other factors which suggest beyond reasonable doubt that the two cars a in all eventuality 'different' therefore have different peak power. Perhaps the car has more equipment which requires powering by the ancillaries.

I hope that helps clear up some misconceptions.

cheers

←

Again - the exhaust and inlet designs will not be directly limiting factors regarding peak HP. Unless Toyota's designers seriously messed up.

Maybe the difference is due to the avensis having 5 gears, the celica 6, so the avensis would benefit from a wider power band. This could be acheived by different vvti profiles?

Maybe it's done for emmissions purposes, to keep the avensis in a lower tax bracket?

Or maybe it's done purely for marketing, to make the difference between the 1.8 avensis and larger engined variants seem bigger?

Whatever, it's all down to the ECU programming.

[Kelvyn]

Whatever, it's all down to the ECU programming. 

←

I agree, the most likely reason is that its mapped differently to suit different useage requirements.

Most manufacturers try to commonise as many components as possible in order to reduce costs and maximise profits so there's every reason to suspect that physically both engines are the same.

It may well be possible to swap ECU's and release at least some of the extra power.

Vauxhall did a similar thing with the Frontera, it had a Vectra engine that was re-mapped to give more torque but less overall power.

[Cubic Incubi]

right this thread is now off topic and its getting silly.

the man who started the thread doesnt give a ubik - he was probably meaning 'the celica has more bhp...hmmm how and in relation what can i do to mine... hmmm.'

and since he hasnt come back because hes scared of the trolling he clearly could give two ubiks and its a waste of time, so he's got his feet up at home with his computer turned off and NOT trawling the internet to find the answers to his life and to present a cyber ego.

yes, i am a horrible nasty man.

thankyou please

not strong in the you force is mikey

[mikeb]

I don't think we're getting that far off topic. Maybe going into more in depth discussion than the topic starter was expecting though. I was genuinely interested in finding the difference between the two engines, so I looked up the specs, and then best I could tell was that they are mechanically the same.

I think it's possible to get even more the 140hp from this engine with an ECU chip. Usually chips are a waste of time, but I am sure I read on the MR2 forum about someone with an MR-S that remapped it and got >150hp. So that option is probably available to avensis owners too.

[Cubic Incubi]

yes, in theory if you allow for maps it could run 160 bhp but at some point the stock components are gonna say 'nah i've had enough mate'

especialy if it is pulling something whic puts more strain on the engine, and i reckon the reason the avensis has less of a power band is because either;

1. makes it more drivable across a broader range of users who will buy in the class

2. for some reason pulling the avensis at 140bhp will put too much strain on the engine for the same range of acceptable longevity for that particular engine

3. not discussed yet - better economy in its class

4. something is different and it is not the mapping (manifolds, exhaust etc)

whataya reckon at those options?

2.

[mikeb]

yes, in theory if you allow for maps it could run 160 bhp but at some point the stock components are gonna say 'nah i've had enough mate'

especialy if it is pulling something whic puts more strain on the engine, and i reckon the reason the avensis has less of a power band is because either;

1. makes it more drivable across a broader range of users who will buy in the class

2. for some reason pulling the avensis at 140bhp will put too much strain on the engine for the same range of acceptable longevity for that particular engine

3.  not discussed yet - better economy in its class

4. something is different and it is not the mapping (manifolds, exhaust etc)

whataya reckon at those options?

2.

←

I think Giddlepin has unichipped his MR2, and I can't find the thread where he discussed power output, but I think it was 150-160 hp. The rev limit hasn't been changed from stock, because the Unichip can't do that. So I can't see a 10% increase in power being a problem for stock components (as long as it's set up right). Maybe Giddlepin will make some comments on this.

It's not correct to say the avensis put's more strain on the engine because it is heavier. As the celica is lighter it would accelerate faster than the avensis for the same power input. But a 140 HP engine can't tell the difference between the weight of the car, it sees a different 'strain' in each gear for starters. All the engine see's is the load at the flywheel.

We have already established that both engines make the same peak torque (170 Nm) at the same rpm (4200). On this basis it is fair to say that they have the same cam profiles, so the avensis does not have a wider power band only a flatter one beyond 4200rpm.

The identical peak torque figures also rule out a difference in the tuned length of the inlet manifold. A no car manufacturer would engineer an OEM exhaust system that looses 12 hp over another.

The only place I can see the difference being is in the maps for fuel, ignition, and vvti. I think I have covered your list, except possibly the economy point, which I already mentioned in an earlier post (emissions/tax bracket).

Another (unrelated) example of using different ECU mapping purely for marketing purposes is the BMW Mini. The Mini One has 90bhp, the Mini Cooper has 115bhp. Both engines are mechanically identical, the only difference is in the ECU.

[Cubic Incubi]

Mikey -

Please - look back at the top of the thread - I asked which engine was in the car;

dude, what's the engine code?

this will tell wether or not its internals are the same.

is 128bhp at the wheels or crank? i would imagine crank, is that the listed figure or have you dyno'd the car?

←

You 'speculated' it could be this or that. this is your post wheras I asked for more information - you offered information merely upon a 'feeling' or 'whim' - possibilities. The guy wanted some established information, not probable's and possibly could be's

Probably just the ECU programming. Could possibly have different cam profiles too.

←

to which i replied;

not if its the 'same' engine, not all toyota 1.8 vvti engines are the same, for all we know it could be a different head or block.

so we need the engine code.

if its the same engine the cams will be identical, tolerances will be decided depending on differences in the way the car sits on the road, its weight, its cornering etc, that'll be the likes of ECU mapping.

such a big difference in power suggests its a completely diferent block or head, in which case the engine code will be different, then again 12bhp is easily able to be mapped with enough inducted air.

←

you went round in circles and began with a couple of 'speculations' and are no further forward.

We have yet to establish if its the same series engine for sure, head and block, same inlet and exhaust manifold and same exhaust bore. In addition as previously mentioned 'IF' it is identical in engine and component design that it only leaves ECU mapping for the reason I have mentioned. 'IF' the engine and components are the same, the designers limited the ECU for reasons to do with the cars inherant differences.

Whats wrong with that? its factual and not a possible theory - if everything else is the same except the rest of the ruddy car then it is logical to have a different map for peak power so it handles as Toyota want it to handle.

But this is all of course still speculation - which you obviously relish.

Why are you making a path to my door seemingly posting after me, quoting me with argumentative behaviour in a bid to show me in bad light?

[Black Knight]

The 1ZZ engine used in the avensis is essentially identical to the one used in the 1ZZ Celica/MR2. Same, Block, Head, Cams etc.

Not entirely sure where the performance comes from (can't remember last time I was in the engine bay of a MR2/Celica so can't remember differences in intake/exhaust system) but seem to remember most of it comes from the ECU mapping.

As for the comment:

"I seriously doubt that the reduced power is directly caused by a different exhaust bore or inlet manifold. The designers would notice such a large loss and re engineer the exhaust and inlet to not be a performance restriction. You don't really think that modern car designs could have such poorly performing breathing systems that the inlet and exhaust would be limiting factors in this case, do you?"

As I said I can't remember the comparative layout of Celica/MR2/Avensis but it could be engineering to cost. Could well be that it isn't worth the additional cost of a high efficiency inlet with free flow exhaust system on the bread and butter Avensis but when you need it on the sports range.

Example.

Mazda 6 1.8 120BHP

Toyota Avensis 1.8 127BHP

Mazda MX-5 1.8 146BHP

Toyota MR2 1.8 138BHP

If you already have higher outputs than comparative engines in your range (Ford Mondeo 125BHP, Nissan Primera 116BHP; check the back pages of any car mag and you'll see not many 1.8's are more powerful) then why incure the expense of a higher performance intake system.

However in the case of the MR2 you're trying to stay with one of the class leaders so you need that extra expense to stay competative and since you can charge a premium on this type of product you can pass that expense onto the customer

[Cubic Incubi]

It's not correct to say the avensis put's more strain on the engine because it is heavier. As the celica is lighter it would accelerate faster than the avensis for the same power input. But a 140 HP engine can't tell the difference between the weight of the car, it sees a different 'strain' in each gear for starters. All the engine see's is the load at the flywheel.

←

If an Avensis is less aerodynamic or heavier or doesnt handle as efficiently, this adds more resistance to all moving parts to attain the same peak performance in a power band - thats just simplistc basics, lighten your car and make it handle better, make it more aerodynamic and it will travel faster and sharper because of less resistance, taking into consideration handling and weight differences it is safe to assume that it will be mapped with less peak power for longevity, the Avensis is also designed as a family car and assumes a heavier payload than the Celica - obviously, also I imagine the Celica is lighter and more aerodynamic and handles better - and I think i'm just repeating myself realy My ST185 loses .7 seconds Qtr mile with a full tank apposed to a nigh on empty tank. Weight displacement affects handling, all this resists the engines attempts to provide power to move the vehicle. BASIC auto understanding and one of the cornerstones of modifying.

If the manufaturer mapped it for these reasons and you up the peak power with mapping, without doing the handling pack and thinking aerodynamice (srings aid handling and a drop aid aerodynamics) you will need an oil with less deterioration relating to shearing of the oil, you are now looking at longevity beyond the manufacturers spec, this is when modifying becomes either good or poor. You can quickly muck up what Toyota designed and intended, so you have to understand the most basic principals at least before you modify even the mapping in my humble opinion. The engines are identical - except for the fuel system. And I would definately imagine mapping.

Now that you've calmed down Mike, I thought I had better return to answer 'accurately' apposed to offering my 95% right theory, fuel system makes up for the other 5%.

cheers

..................

Blacknight,

great to see other model owners in the celica forum, i feel it important to share knowledge regading engines used in other models, afterall the engine is the key to the car.

lets have a look at JAE, will be good to settle this.

right lets compare the specs taken from this link http://www.globalcar.com/datasheet/Toyota/...sis1.8VVT-i.htm -

2003 Avensis VVti

Code: 1ZZ-FE

Manufacturer: Toyota

Type: S-4

Wet sumped

DOHC

16 valves total

4 valves per cylinder

Bore x stroke: 79.00mm × 91.50mm

Bore / stroke ratio: 0.86

Displacement: 1794 cc 109.47 cu in

Compression: 10.00:1

Fuel system: SMPFi

Aspiration: Normal

Catalytic Converter: Y

Max. output: 128.8 PS (127.0 bhp) (94.7 kW)@6000 rpm

Max. torque: 170.0 Nm (125 lbft) (17.3 kgm)@4200 rpm

Coolant: Water

Specific output: 70.8 bhp/litre

Specific torque: 94.76 Nm/litre

0-100km/h: 10.3 s

Quarter mile: 17.10s

Top speed: 200 km/h

CO2 emissions: 171 g/km

Power to weight: 102.01 bhp/ton

Kerb weight: 1245 kg 2744.75 lb

1999 Celica 140

Code: 1ZZ-FE

Manufacturer: Toyota

Type: S-4

DOHC

16 valves total

4 valves per cylinder

Bore x stroke: 79.00mm × 91.50mm

Bore / stroke ratio: 0.86

Displacement: 1794 cc 109.47 cu in

Compression: 10.00:1

Fuel system: EFi

Aspiration: Normal

Catalytic Converter: Y

Max. output: 141.9 PS (140.0 bhp) (104.4 kW)@6400 rpm

Max. torque: 170.0 Nm (125 lbft) (17.3 kgm)@4200 rpm

Coolant: Water

Specific output: 78 bhp/litre

Specific torque: 94.76 Nm/litre

Performance

0-100km/h: 8.7 s

Quarter mile: 16.40s

Top speed: 204 km/h

CO2 emissions: 185 g/km

Power to weight: 118.14 bhp/ton

Kerb weight: 1185 kg 2612.47 lb

Look at power to weight ratio

The Avensis estate has the following differences Kerb weight: 1295 kg 2854.98 lb, CO2 emissions: 172 g/km, Power to weight: 98.07 bhp/tonns. With the same engine, Because of the extra weight it has lost power to weight brake horse power, the Celica is 60 kg lighter, has 13bhp more and has a power to weight: 118.14 bhp/ton, thats more gain per tonne than the peak power gain, it therefore is aerodynamicaly more efficient. In addition the wheel base, width, height and length are different so is the handling.

So, lets look at the external engine components at JAE :D

In the mean time - the fuel system in the Celica is EFI - in the Avensis its SMPFi, so we must consider the fueling aspect also, perhaps that is why is has a lower peak power.

easily missed by others perhaps when looking comparing specs if they became derailed into debate rather than accurate findings. As I have only just decided to look at the varying specs as the theme and 'feelings' in the thread have now subsided, it has now attracted my full attention as it has worth - this stone was looking as though it was going to left unturned until another Avensis owner was good enough to add to the topic, which spurned me a little, because of 'genuine' interest, and i'm always glad to help fellow Toyota Owners.

For some reason, it had been more necessary to defend myself from argument and being quoted rather than looking at the necessaries.

Who wants to research the fuel system differences now I have discovered a DEFINATE difference in components and its now not as much of a speculation, we're probably onto the hub of the matter - in addition to what I have previously mentioned, as it still needs 'reason' to have less power! Toyota aint stupid ;) :D

thanks again blacknight ;)

cheers

[Cubic Incubi]

I was genuinely interested in finding the difference between the two engines, so I looked up the specs, and then best I could tell was that they are mechanically the same.

It's not correct to say the avensis put's more strain on the engine because it is heavier. As the celica is lighter it would accelerate faster than the avensis for the same power input. But a 140 HP engine can't tell the difference between the weight of the car, it sees a different 'strain' in each gear for starters. All the engine see's is the load at the flywheel.

The identical peak torque figures also rule out a difference in the tuned length of the inlet manifold. A no car manufacturer would engineer an OEM exhaust system that looses 12 hp over another.

←

By all means reply, its your right of course, but I dont like being constantly quoted in order to argue my thoughts - especialy if it goes off topic - just add your own please mate ;) as it's rather uncomforatble to find the subject changes from finding facts to trying to prove others wrong, this is not the ethos of TOC, the club is a friendly and informative environment and the topics are important not disproving others theory. I've learnt more by being wrong than I have by being right and this type of posting is neither a line of enquiry or informative.

Merely adding your own for consideration is enough in my humble opinion without all the quotes focusing on others - again, its uncomfortable and frankly personaly threatening and takes away my relaxed experience of this forum.

If an Avensis is less aerodynamic or heavier or doesnt handle as efficiently, this adds more resistance to all moving parts to attain the same peak performance in a power band - thats just simplistc basics, lighten your car and make it handle better, make it more aerodynamic and it will travel faster and sharper because of less resistance, taking into consideration handling and weight differences it is safe to assume that it will be mapped with less peak power for longevity, the Avensis is also designed as a family car and assumes a heavier payload than the Celica - obviously, also I imagine the Celica is lighter and more aerodynamic and handles better - and I think i'm just repeating myself realy My ST185 loses .7 seconds Qtr mile with a full tank apposed to a nigh on empty tank. Weight displacement affects handling, all this resists the engines attempts to provide power to move the vehicle. BASIC auto understanding and one of the cornerstones of modifying.

If the manufaturer mapped it for these reasons and you up the peak power with mapping, without doing the handling pack and thinking aerodynamicly (springs aid handling and a drop aid aerodynamics) you will need an oil with less deterioration relating to shearing of the oil, you are now looking at longevity beyond the manufacturers spec, this is when modifying becomes either good or poor. You can quickly muck up what Toyota designed and intended, so you have to understand the most basic principals at least before you modify even the mapping in my humble opinion. The engines are identical - except for the fuel system. And I would definately imagine mapping.

We have yet to establish the route the spent gasses take from the head. Only - I have covered all other 'reasoning' and have found the 'difference' in the engine fueling system. I no longer merely speculate

Now that you've calmed down Mike, I thought I had better return to answer 'accurately' apposed to offering my 95% right theory to only be focus'd on instead of the topic, fuel system makes up for the other 5%. Any discrepancies in my input is spent gas route and restriction.

cheers

..................

Blacknight,

great to see other model owners in the celica forum, i feel it important to share knowledge regarding engines used in other models, afterall the engine is the key to the car.

lets have a look at JAE, will be good to settle this.

for now, if I may retrace my steps before I was compromised and the thread went doo lally. (no offence to anybody)

not if its the 'same' engine, not all toyota 1.8 vvti engines are the same, for all we know it could be a different head or block.

so we need the engine code.

if its the same engine the cams will be identical, tolerances will be decided depending on difeerences in the way the car sits on the road, its weight, its cornering etc, that'll be the likes of ECU mapping.

←

right lets compare the specs taken from this link http://www.globalcar.com/datasheet/Toyota/...sis1.8VVT-i.htm

2003 Avensis VVti

Code: 1ZZ-FE

Manufacturer: Toyota

Type: S-4

Wet sumped

DOHC

16 valves total

4 valves per cylinder

Bore x stroke: 79.00mm × 91.50mm

Bore / stroke ratio: 0.86

Displacement: 1794 cc 109.47 cu in

Compression: 10.00:1

Fuel system: SMPFi

Aspiration: Normal

Catalytic Converter: Y

Max. output: 128.8 PS (127.0 bhp) (94.7 kW)@6000 rpm

Max. torque: 170.0 Nm (125 lbft) (17.3 kgm)@4200 rpm

Coolant: Water

Specific output: 70.8 bhp/litre

Specific torque: 94.76 Nm/litre

0-100km/h: 10.3 s

Quarter mile: 17.10s

Top speed: 200 km/h

CO2 emissions: 171 g/km

Power to weight: 102.01 bhp/ton

Kerb weight: 1245 kg 2744.75 lb

1999 Celica 140

Code: 1ZZ-FE

Manufacturer: Toyota

Type: S-4

DOHC

16 valves total

4 valves per cylinder

Bore x stroke: 79.00mm × 91.50mm

Bore / stroke ratio: 0.86

Displacement: 1794 cc 109.47 cu in

Compression: 10.00:1

Fuel system: EFi

Aspiration: Normal

Catalytic Converter: Y

Max. output: 141.9 PS (140.0 bhp) (104.4 kW)@6400 rpm

Max. torque: 170.0 Nm (125 lbft) (17.3 kgm)@4200 rpm

Coolant: Water

Specific output: 78 bhp/litre

Specific torque: 94.76 Nm/litre

Performance

0-100km/h: 8.7 s

Quarter mile: 16.40s

Top speed: 204 km/h

CO2 emissions: 185 g/km

Power to weight: 118.14 bhp/ton

Kerb weight: 1185 kg 2612.47 lb

Look at power to weight ratio

The Avensis estate has the following differences Kerb weight: 1295 kg 2854.98 lb, CO2 emissions: 172 g/km, Power to weight: 98.07 bhp/tonns. With the same engine, Because of the extra weight it has lost power to weight brake horse power, the Celica is 60 kg lighter, has 13bhp more and has a power to weight: 118.14 bhp/ton, thats more gain per tonne than the peak power gain, it therefore is aerodynamicaly more efficient. In addition the wheel base, width, height and length are different so is the handling.

So, lets look at the external engine components at JAE :D

In the mean time - the fuel system in the Celica is EFI - in the Avensis its SMPFi, so we must consider the fueling aspect also, perhaps that is why is has a lower peak power.

easily missed by others perhaps when looking comparing specs if they became derailed into debate rather than accurate findings. As I have only just decided to look at the varying specs as the theme and 'feelings' in the thread have now subsided, it has now attracted my full attention as it has worth - this stone was looking as though it was going to left unturned until another Avensis owner was good enough to add to the topic, which spurned me a little, because of 'genuine' interest, and i'm always glad to help fellow Toyota Owners.

For some reason, it had been more necessary to defend myself from argument and being quoted rather than looking at the necessaries.

Who wants to research the fuel system differences now I have discovered a DEFINATE difference in components and its now not as much of a speculation, we're probably onto the hub of the matter - in addition to what I have previously mentioned, as it still needs 'reason' to have less power! Toyota aint stupid ;) :D

thanks again blacknight ;)

Had I not been infringed by just having being released from hospital after an operation, I would had answered with more accuracy sooner, I was however side tracked.

Glad to be able to assist now that I am fitter.

cheers

Karl

[mikeb]

Why are you making a path to my door seemingly posting after me, quoting me with argumentative behaviour in a bid to show me in bad light?

←

I haven't 'post after you' (until now that is). All my previous posts were trying to explain points I had already made after you had attempted to rubbish them with your condescending remarks and personal attacks, rather than any scientific explanation.

And it was you who trashed the thread that I started on engine warmup by ranting and raving and personal insults, to the point that the thread had to be deleted.

I was prepared to let this thread here disappear after your above comment, but it seems you have dug it up again in a further attempt to discredit me.

In the mean time - the fuel system in the Celica is EFI - in the Avensis its SMPFi, so we must consider the fueling aspect also, perhaps that is why is has a lower peak power.

easily missed by others perhaps when looking comparing specs if they became derailed into debate rather than accurate findings.

←

Could you please tell us what SMPFi strands for and what EFI stands for, in the above context?

Off the top of my head (I wouldn't want to be accused of blindly looking up specs on the 'net again, although it seems that's what you did here ), I suspect that SMPFi stands for 'Sequential Multi Point Fuel Injection'. I can promise you that the celica has sequential multipoint injection too. The reason they are listed differently is due to slight inconsistencies in the site you took the spec list from, at the end of the day they are both EFI.

The differences between the avensis and celica engines are electronic, in the ECU, like I said right at the beginning of this thread (having bothered to find look up the specs at that stage to help the original poster, where you just reworded his question and turned it back on him, and later flamed me for trying to actually answer it).

[tubaman]

I'M THE GUY WHO STARTED THIS THREAD !

Whilst it has been interesting reading your various responses & technical points, I really would like to get hold of a few of you and bang your heads together as a few of you seem to simply like arguing just for the sake of it.

The BHP I quoted for the standard Avencis was at the flywheel you donut ! I'm not wasting my time digging out the engine number as it's pointless........it would simply give you guys more to argue about.

[Spuffington]

I quite agree.

[knowlson]

Whilst it has been interesting reading your various responses & technical points, I really would like to get hold of a few of you and bang your heads together as a few of you seem to simply like arguing just for the sake of it.

←

The above says it all really ;)

carlosfandango and mikeb relax take a deep breath and step away from the keyboard.

Any more toys being thrown out of the pram moments and I will close this <_<

[Cubic Incubi]

look guys, i'm trying to be helpful, but i dont appreciate being focus'd on and my posting being constantly quoted to argue and disprove what i have tyoed and i have a right to say so.

I asked mikeb last week not to go on and on quoting my posts as i found it uncomfortable and i didnt want to get worked up as i had just came out of hospital after an operation and was in bed recouperating. he however ignored my request and for some reason forgot about the topic and just wanted to argue the toss. on many threads not just this one, thats called trolling a club member in my book.

I have too a step back from the keyboard and i have took a deep breath, i'm still a home on painkillers and still cant be bothered with antagonistic confrontation.

I definately do not like having it suggested that I need my head cracked and you can take your frustration at starting a topic and then ignoring it to find the thread has been 'lively' and deal with it without suggesting my head requires a smack.

the topic was started, i was focus'd on by mike and rather than look accurately at the vehicle technical specs and realise the difference was the fuel system he focused on everything i had posted and why it was wrong.

that is trolling a club member and i have a problem with that. anybody want to deal with that issue? got any remarks knowlson?

close the thread if you want to, no loss for me. I'm an adult not a child, I want to discuss not be hounded round the different threads by someone who wants to quote everything i write to prove me wrong and apose my experience and involvement in the forums..

FYI i had to complain to managment with regards to this line of behaviour as he started a thread aimed purposefully and directly at further drawing me into argument after he went off topic in another thread that i started, even asking him politley not to and apologising to him for having a go - explaining my medical condidtion and the med's I was on - but he still went round the threads and quoted me and attempted to disprove me rather than offer a answer to the topic.

its simply a matter of respect, i asked him not to do it and he insisted on arguing my points raised. of course i understand discussion is part of a public forum, i'm not stupid or new to the celica on line world, i am however relatively new to toc with heavier input and if i feel hounded on the thread i wont bother from now on, i'll go back to GT4OC and talk about increased handling and torque.

the guy asked a question. i answered it, eventualy after being hounded. so now he knows why the cars are different. its the fuel system and the entire car the engine sits in.

cheers.

[knowlson]

that is trolling a club member and i have a problem with that. anybody want to deal with that issue? got any remarks knowlson?

←

Show me the posts where a user is trolling and I will look into it

[Cubic Incubi]

as explained in my new introduction thread..... in not looking to make a bigger fuss about this than already has been. Lets just say i've landed back in the forum with a bit of a bump.

have a look. i really dont bite :D