Beams 3s-gze (yes Its A Z)

[Lonewolf84]

Saw in another thread someone tossing up whether to go with a 3sgte or a blacktop 3sge. I know the beams motors run high compression but i wanted to toss an idea out there to gather your opinions on it.

Initially i thought, hey lets chuck a turbo on a blacktop running low boost and throw the works of anti detonation technology at it, which would in itself make for a weapon of a car, but high maintainence and probably still very unstreetable as would only run on Race gas or Alcohol.

Then i thought, how would i go putting a supercharger on it? I dont know a lot about superchargers (that why i'm asking for opinions), but they should run cooler than turbos, and provide more low end power than top end, which conflicts with the blacktop as it likes to rev.

With that logic, my idea. Put a beams engine in the MR2, and set up 2 seperate induction systems. One which would be short and tuned for Mid-high Rpm use and would run as NA. The other induction system set up for low-low/mid end power and hooked up to a low boost supercharger. From there, you would have the engine see the supercharger from idle until xxxx RPM and from there swap over to NA (kinda like a vtec system but instead of swapping rocker ratios were swapping from Forced induction to Naturally Aspirated). Something would further have to be done to remove the load of the supercharger on the engine so it drains almost no power. The end result would be a more streetable engine not held back by the limitations of a supercharger. Heh if you disguised the supercharged intake well enough you could probably get yourself entered into nat aspirated racing classes, but such a setup would be eaten alive in a forced induction racing class.

That's the idea i had. To me it sounds logical and doable if a little complex, but is my logic correct or not?

[Bibbs]

Most high compression engines will take 6psi .. which is a big power hike. I've an S2000, and from 250ps standard, an 8psi charger would add over 100ps to that.

How about a rev4 turbo block (with forged internals), massive turbo and then the Beams head?

You could then tune the low cam to be a good runner until the turbo spools and kicks into the high cam?

And why go NA on the highcam? You'd loose a load of power. I think the Levin engine (4-agze) had the charger on a clutch. So you could (with some jiggery) turn it off/on.

[boundsw]

Could use a really big HG to lower the compression, then make up the power with boost, or get some forgies made to lower the compression, you can tell some companies what ratio you want.

EDIT : With the beams head like Bibsb says, i rekon that would be best !

[Lonewolf84]

Is the Cyl head the Only reason the beams is such hot property? If thats the case then i might very well take your advice bibbs. I have shyed away from turbo cars for insurance reasons as well as the fact that its hard to find a turbo vehicle (not just MR2's) that hasnt been modified, and normally, modified cars get thrashed, especially if younger ppl own them.

[Bibbs]

As far as I know the Beams is just the dual VVTi head for the 3S block ..

You'd need a MoTec of similar and a damn good tuner.

I'd suggest a rev4+ block if you can, apparently the rev3's suffered from weak cylinder walls ..

Good luck, it's the engine I always wanted (with a nice GT35 or something). I know Turbo's are SO cheap in Oz too .. I've got a few websites if you are interested.

I'd also go fo a 2.2 stroker kit .. with a good map and forgies you'd be over 800 easy :D

[bfuller]

Hey guys :D

First of all, from an engine management standpoint, switching between a forced induction and naturally aspirated map halfway through the rev range at wide open throttle is going to cause more confusion in any ECU than the pope and osama getting married

Secondly, the supercharger is going to produce so much more power than any "hot cam" will ever do - its just not worth it.

The sensible approach to tuning any engine is always a tradeoff between outright power, and ultimate response. No toyota engine is capable of producing 500hp plus at 3k rpm onwards - its just not going to happen.

The best way to make really good power and retain good drivability is to do your homework and pick a good sized turbocharger for a well built engine.

Having said that - making big power on a high compression beams engine with forced induction isnt impossible, but it will require seriously high octane race fuel, and a tuner that the UK just doesnt have. ie, what Bibbs said!

You always here stories of huge power from various cars over the pond..

The honda guys in the US are making 800bhp on a 1.6 engine with 10:1 compression - but in reality, you'll never hear of those engines being driven to work everyday, and the talent that it takes to build and tune them just doesnt exist here.

Cheapness

Speed

Realibility

^^ choose 2 of the above - you can't have 3 :)

The average imagination of the car enthusiast is never going to create an amazing power combination - it always seems like a good idea in your head, but in real life, its just a waste of money - trust me, i've been there, done that!

Its always good reading good tech posts though - so let the discussion continue..

Ben

[Bibbs]

Hey Fuller !!

Yeah, I was basically saying that a 2.2 3S-GTE can get you to the 800+ range (there is some US bod with over 1000 apparently .. but then he owns a tuning shop).

The VVTi would then enable you to put in two cam profiles, one set for a "good" power curve, and then another set for a "hi flow" power curve ..

It's would need a LOT of engineering and a LOT of tuning .. but it would be immense.

And I recon would be about £20,000 to build and tune ..

[bfuller]

Hey Fuller !!

Yeah, I was basically saying that a 2.2 3S-GTE can get you to the 800+ range (there is some US bod with over 1000 apparently .. but then he owns a tuning shop).

The VVTi would then enable you to put in two cam profiles, one set for a "good" power curve, and then another set for a "hi flow" power curve ..

It's would need a LOT of engineering and a LOT of tuning .. but it would be immense.

And I recon would be about £20,000 to build and tune ..

Hey Bibbings!

Hope you are well mate :D

Back on topic ^^, as Ben and Ben said - there's power to be made but you'd be better off spending your money on an Elise or an S2000 ;)

Or an S2000 Turbo - the mind boggles at how good that would be, dont you think Ben?

Ben

(Bwahaha how very confusing...)

:D

[Bibbs]

A blown F20C will make daft power .. been reading up on the engine.

Forged crank, conrods, slipper pistons .. it's well OTT.

And no, I'm not doing it. I'm slapping a few Apexi things on and a decat/straight through single exit. And that it.

[Jones~32]

You always here stories of huge power from various cars over the pond..

The honda guys in the US are making 800bhp on a 1.6 engine with 10:1 compression

:o Tell me more! :D

[screechmr2]

the american figures are calculated differently than in the uk, so that 800 is a much inflated figure over what it would produce in the uk.

[bfuller]

Sorry for the thread revival..

the american figures are calculated differently than in the uk, so that 800 is a much inflated figure over what it would produce in the uk.

This is wrong, 1 horsepower is one horsepower - anywhere in the world.

The only reason people in the UK think this is because thats what they're told.

But chasing huge numbers is bull**** anyway - there's no fun in driving a dyno queen :D

Ben

[AE82 GT]

no no my friend, US Horse power is like KPH to MPH.

100 US HP is equivlant to 50 UK BHP

take that from someone who knows,

And those owners on American hot rod seemed to think they could

get 1500 from a 350 small block chevy V8 - I think not.

[EarL]

No toyota engine is capable of producing 500hp plus at 3k rpm onwards - its just not going to happen.

Agreed...

The honda guys in the US are making 800bhp on a 1.6 engine with 10:1 compression - but in reality, you'll never hear of those engines being driven to work everyday, and the talent that it takes to build and tune them just doesnt exist here.

Agreed...

The average imagination of the car enthusiast is never going to create an amazing power combination - it always seems like a good idea in your head, but in real life, its just a waste of money - trust me, i've been there, done that!

Agreed...

Its always good reading good tech posts though - so let the discussion continue..

Agreed...

Back on topic ^^, as Ben and Ben said - there's power to be made but you'd be better off spending your money on an Elise or an S2000

Utter boll*x!

Bibbs having an S2000 or not would never persuade me to spend money on one. Thay might make 250ps (1 PS = 0.98632 BHP) as standard, but it wouldn't stand a chance alongside a Rev 3 stock for stock, and tuning wise, you'd probably have to spend twice what you spent on your 3S-GTE to ge the same power hike. And an Elise might handle like a race car, but it doesn't have the legs to keep with a tubby on a long run.

no no my friend, US Horse power is like KPH to MPH.

100 US HP is equivlant to 50 UK BHP

take that from someone who knows,

And those tossers on American hot rod seemed to think they could

get 1500 from a 350 small block chevy V8 - I think not.

Their dyno's are calibrated differently, but 1 hp is 1 hp here and in the states, and there's PLENTY of 350ci chevy's and fords that make more than 1500hp (some over here!).

Just my two cents/penneth ;)

[Bibbs]

Back on topic ^^, as Ben and Ben said - there's power to be made but you'd be better off spending your money on an Elise or an S2000

Utter boll*x!

Bibbs having an S2000 or not would never persuade me to spend money on one. Thay might make 250ps (1 PS = 0.98632 BHP) as standard, but it wouldn't stand a chance alongside a Rev 3 stock for stock, and tuning wise, you'd probably have to spend twice what you spent on your 3S-GTE to ge the same power hike. And an Elise might handle like a race car, but it doesn't have the legs to keep with a tubby on a long run.

I had a mild tuned rev2 .. I recon it would have been 270/270 at the peak (never did get the IC or hybrid on). But the S2000 @ 247bhp is a lot quicker .. in a straight line the MR2 would have the top end to beat the S2000 convincingly, but the car in general is not as well setup.

My MR2 has, Toyo's, lightweight rims, coilovers, extra braces front and rear, and all the daft things like CF bonnets and front spoilers and it was a damn fast car round the twisties.

But the S2000 with stock everything & dodgy tyres is a quicker car. The balance is better, the suspension is better, it's a lot easier to drive on the limit. Even with Vtec vs Turbo, the Vtec is easier to keep on the boil.

Then add to that the fact it's 10 years newer, 100kg lighter, proper 50/50 distribution. Overall it's a better package. The only issues I have with it is it needs to look a bit more agressive. But that's beeing taken care of.

Tuning wise, the S2000 is a hard thing to tune, I recon an ectra 20 bhp max could be got out the car without blowing it. Add an SC (£3k) and you've got over 300wbhp .. to get that out of a Rev3, you'd need turbo, IC, injectors, clutch etc .. so not much different than the £3k on the S2000. But the MR2 will then be a nightmare to drive, where the S2000 would still be fine.

I've got both on the drive .. and I know I'd still get in the S2000 every morning whether I was off to the corner shop, off for a 500 mile trip or off to a racetrack.

Horses for courses.

[EarL]

Then add to that the fact it's 10 years newer, 100kg lighter, proper 50/50 distribution. Overall it's a better package.

I've got both on the drive .. and I know I'd still get in the S2000 every morning whether I was off to the corner shop, off for a 500 mile trip or off to a racetrack.

Horses for courses.

10 years older and still better looking.

If yours is not well set up it's down to you mate. For a start, 18 inch rims are going to crucify the handling.

I've driven both, in standard and modified guise, and I'd choose my tubby EVERY time!

[Bibbs]

As I said .. different cars for different people. At the moment there are so many more +ives that -ives. Loving HID lights, double wishbones, 50/50 weight, proper drop top, no turbo issues, lightness, responsiveness ..

The MR2 is so common now, was one of the reasons I didn't buy a rev5 when I came to upgrade my car .. and I've had 14", 15", 16" 17" and 18" rims on my MR2's over the years. And the lightweight BBS 17" were by far the best (better than the racing 16" Enkie's I replaced them with).

And better looking? defo not in stock form .. I think a stock MR2 looks SO anorexic it's silly, with it's tiny wheels and mk2 fiesta headlights. Eye of the beholder and all that ;)

The MR2 is a nice mid engine shape, but is starting to look dated.

I will always have a soft spot for them, but I've a new mistress now, she's younger, better looking, smaller and more enerjetic (she's nearly always topless and a lot easier to throw about too).