Ultimate Celica: 2ZZ-GE or 3S-GTE?

Many of you have seen shots of the intriguing 'Ultimate Celica' gracing the covers of magazines over the past year. Created by various Toyota affiliates, including TRD and Rod Millen, this car is said to be the best of the best, when it comes to company modded Celicas. It's no wonder, with half a grand of horsepower sent to all 4 wheels (497 hp @ 8000rpm; 345 lb-ft @ 5500rpm). Not only does it fly like a champ car, but it sure looks like one too. The intricate blend of street car/CART of the front clip is undoubtedly one of a kind.

Appearances and numbers aside, I ask you to take a deeper look into the wondrous machine. Yes, it has the all wheel-drivetrain from the older Celica GT4/all-trac models. Therefore, it has the same 3S-GTE, but with heavy modifications. Toyota has spent a great deal of time developing the 2ZZ-GE which powers the newer production Celica GTSs, but in this case, all that is turned aside in favor of old news.

Now, was it the right step for these well funded companies to pop in a tried and tested engine instead of attempting to unleash undiscovered power from a new 'techier' one? Everyone already knows that the 3S-GTE's nice iron block can put up with intense forced induction. No one knows much about the 2ZZ-GE. Why didn't they try to work with fresh meat instead of giving us the same old (heavy emphasis on the 'old') meal? With an aluminum block, VVTL-i, and a 6-speed rowboat, there MUST be something TRD and Rod Millen can do to find added power--with or without a turbo.

What do you guys think? Right or wrong move on the step backwards?

Food for thought: Is it just me, or does anyone else think that this masterpiece Celica seems like a miniature Toyota GT-ONE? Perhaps the vertical wedge headlights came off the GT-ONE and found its way into the production office on Calty's new Celica. Or perhaps vice versa. This aspect combined with the CART bumper, fender fattening, and rear spoiler make it seem even more like a mini-GT-ONE.

A rear view:

The shot from this angle really shows the emphasis on the fender flarings:

As does this one. Take note of the brake rotor engraved with Toyota's logo. Superb:

With the exception of highly-supportive seats and an integrated roll cage, the interior doesn't show much change--signifying the purpose of this car is to tear up roads, not sit in shows. (Unfortunately, it is. :( )

This parting shot shows the major definition of the reshaped front bumper and the swept angle of the rear spoiler that flows with the rest of the car.

Maybe they used the old drivetrain because they wanted it ready to go so darn fast. I remember this car was on the show circuit right after the regular street "Next Celica" debuted. Perhaps performance development for the new engine wasn't as swift as they expected, and they had deadlines to meet in getting something to wave around at the car shows. Now that it's out and, well, good, maybe what they can do with the new engine pales in comparison.

Sorry, man, I don't get the GT-One vibe from it. I do like what they did with the CARTish front clip, but I probably wouldn't buy it by itself.

I can't remember now, was that car at the L.A. Auto Show last January? I think I saw it, but now I'm not sure. I remember a regular version, a race-prepped version (I remember the race version in particular because I was impressed by the fake-out headlight decals :D) and one other. Was that it?

Yeah, it was at the Greater Los Angeles Auto Show. Can anyone answer a question for me? Why do you suppose L.A.'s show comes at almost the exact same time of Detroit's show? All the really good stuff, particularily concept vehicles and production debuts, end up there and we miss out. Why not have it 6 months later? Maybe it's the timing of the new year, and therefore the launch of new releases that forces both shows to open in the same month. Maybe they have an agreement to keep the Detroit one larger since that is where American automotive roots lie. Whatever the case, the organizers should keep in mind that Los Angeles was MADE for cars, and holds a huge number of car consumers in the U.S.

You know, I take back some of the stuff I said about the Ultimate Celica appearance. Automotive appeal is ever-changing and requires continuous acquired tastes. The way most odd cars look eventually grow on you, but as time progresses, I seem to grow away from the Ultimate Celica. Perhaps it was interesting at first, since the design was one of a kind, but now I'm getting sort of grossed out by the excessive sheetmetal treatment. But I still think that the headlights remind me of those from the GT-ONE. :D Of course, all similarity ends there.

Below: OK, so they are not exactly replicas, but the GT-ONE's fender+headlight shape kind of reproduces the Celica's vertical light. Of course, Toyota doesn't have a real universal corporate design, as opposed to the relationships between the LMPs and production cars of Nissan, Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Cadillac, etc.

Prehaps they used the old drive train becuase building a new custom one just for a one off show cars would be a little on the expensive side?
Or is this more than just a rather flashy show car, and is actualy intended for production?

That would be interesting. If it were produced, then there would be one too many Celica roosters in the hen-house. I don't know about other countries, but the U.S. already has the Celica "Action Package". Plus, where would the front license plate go?!!! Hahaha...

If anything, I hope the Celica TRD Sports M makes it into international production. The numerous subtle changes all add up to make an all around better car.

Originally posted by Moppie
Prehaps they used the old drive train becuase building a new custom one just for a one off show cars would be a little on the expensive side?
Or is this more than just a rather flashy show car, and is actualy intended for production?

I don't think that this was the case? They spent half a million dollars building this car as it is! I think they just went this route cause they already had all of the parts for the 3S-GTE to EASILY make the 500 hp target.

I agree with Morpheus, I think that "they" should've used production engine/drivetrain layout to build the car. This way they could've found the weak points, and improved on them for the aftermarket (TRD).

Right now Toyota has basically left it to "other" aftermarket companies to devolp parts for this wonderfuls sport compact. I am in the process of devolping a bolt-on exhaust (yes another one) and a header for this car as we speak. The car definately has a lot of potentional. I am now running consistant 14.6's in the 1/4 mile with just intake and exhaust.


Tim

Well said. Perhaps if they used the production engine, we would be seeing more parts for the new Celicas by now.

phaqgm, what do you think of the reversed engine design? I like the fact that the exhaust manifold is on the firewall side while the intake manifold is right behind the front bumper. Why didn't designers think of this sooner for transverse front-mounted 4-cylinder cars? Its makes everything flow so much smoother since fresh cold air can come right in (from the Celica's funky little center nostril), and the waste fumes can go straight out from behind the engine to the exhaust system. Plus, the functional (yes, Mustang lovers, theres a real vent there) hood scoop can channel cool air to those hot headers, thereby keeping the temperature down in the small engine bay.

I see that the new Integra/RS-X is using the exact same layout for the engine. Damn, these two cars are so similar. Many are immediately shutting out the GT-S simply because the Type-S has about 20 more horsepower on the Toyota, but they shouldn't forget that the Honda motor is still 200ccs larger. I'm sure if someone got around to stroking the 2ZZ-GE to match up, it would end up a step ahead.

There have been Renult and Fiats with the Intake at the frount and Exhaust at the back for some time, but they often have trouble with heat from the exhuast manifold making the cabin to hot, or messing with fuel and electrical lines running through the firewall. There's also the problem of the exhaust making a sharp bend to get away from the egine. If the exhuast is in the frount (ala Mini) the heat is disipated safely into the incoming airflow, and the bend under the frount of the motor donst have to be as sharp.
There are other factors, such as tradition, the old way worked so why bother changing it? I cant see any real advantages, other than easier access to the intake side of the engine for servicing.

Remember that the Celica was released while Honda still had the B18C engine, with 195hp in the Type-R teg, and this is the car it was pitched against. Similar hp numbers, but the Celica engine lacked in refinment, the High lift cam engagement point was a little high creating a good flat spot in the middle, and the gear ratios arn't that well matched, as a result the Honda engine is better. However remember that Honda have been playing with thier VTEC technology for nearly 20yrs, and have been making production engines in cars for over 11 years, thats quite a leap on Toyota in terms of experiance. Give Toyota another 2-3yrs though and they will be as good as the Honda engines, to the point that the two will be inseperable in terms of comparison.
The mighty B16a is possibly one of the greatest engines to come out of Japan in production trim, but the 4agze is in my mind the best engine to ever come out of Japan, it is just so open and friendly to tuning.

Originally posted by Moppie
There have been Renult and Fiats with the Intake at the frount and Exhaust at the back for some time, but they often have trouble with heat from the exhuast manifold making the cabin to hot, or messing with fuel and electrical lines running through the firewall. There's also the problem of the exhaust making a sharp bend to get away from the egine. If the exhuast is in the frount (ala Mini) the heat is disipated safely into the incoming airflow, and the bend under the frount of the motor donst have to be as sharp.
There are other factors, such as tradition, the old way worked so why bother changing it? I cant see any real advantages, other than easier access to the intake side of the engine for servicing.

Remember that the Celica was released while Honda still had the B18C engine, with 195hp in the Type-R teg, and this is the car it was pitched against. Similar hp numbers, but the Celica engine lacked in refinment, the High lift cam engagement point was a little high creating a good flat spot in the middle, and the gear ratios arn't that well matched, as a result the Honda engine is better. However remember that Honda have been playing with thier VTEC technology for nearly 20yrs, and have been making production engines in cars for over 11 years, thats quite a leap on Toyota in terms of experiance. Give Toyota another 2-3yrs though and they will be as good as the Honda engines, to the point that the two will be inseperable in terms of comparison.
The mighty B16a is possibly one of the greatest engines to come out of Japan in production trim, but the 4agze is in my mind the best engine to ever come out of Japan, it is just so open and friendly to tuning.

I am a little confused how you can say that the Honda engine is better based off of the transmission and layout? That does not make the engine. The engine makes the engine. I can tell you from personal experience that I have NO problem keeping the car right in the power band! Have you ever driven a Celica GT-S, or are just going by what the magazines say?

I can tell you that with just two mods (intake, and exhaust) I can pull consistant 14.6's in the 1/4 mile. Do you see GS-R's doing that? No. The fact is you can't compare the GT-S to the Type-R. They are two completely different vehicles. The only thing that they match are drive train configuriations and that they are both sport compacts. But the similarities stop there. The Type-R is a hand built, tweaked, limited production vehicle. The GT-S is not hand built, and is made for the masses.

The fact that EVERYONE must compare the GT-S with the Type-R tells me that Toyota did something right. Don't you think?

Have you ever seen the under body of a Celica? Did you know that the GT-S has 2.5 inch exhaust, and is quite free flowing (except for the 2 cats). Heat really isn't an issue in the Celica. The hood scoop on the car is functional. It actually pulls the heat away from the firewall. I think the reall reason that the engine has gotten turned around is for emission purposes. It is easier to get the first cat closer to the header (yes the GT-S has a factory header, not exhaust manifold). Which means the catalytic converter fires off faster.

Click here (http://www.remleyracing.com/dyno/) to see what happens to the flat spot when you have an aftermarket exhaust.

Originally posted by morpheusxiii

phaqgm, what do you think of the reversed engine design?



You know, I haven't given it much thought. I can tell you this though. It isn't that bad. It makes it harder for companies to develop a header (I am working on one). I guess there really aren't too many downsides, or upsides to the engine being the way it is.

One good thing though, like you mentioned is that the intake manifold can stay a little cooler, and the airbox pulls air right from the little grill :) Also, the path that the air has to travel is less, therefor it doesn't gain much heat along the way. Those are really the only things that I can come up with right now. Let me get back to you after lunch :D

Seesh, I complemet the celica and Toyota's engine building skills and you throw it back at me. :confused:

By comparing the Celica with the Type-R I think your paying the Celica a huge compilment, like you said the Type-R is hand finnished and made in very limited production numbers. While the Celica is mass produced, (although here the Type R has better sales) and the only real comparision with the celica is the GSR/VTiR/SiR Integra, whick in the US is not as fast in a straight line as the Celica. (The USDM GSR is a little slow, we get the JDM cars here.)

Iv never driven a new Celica, But I know ppl who have, and they all mentioned that the ratios dont quite match the engines power band. Basicly the Second set of cam lobes are to aggresive and engage to late, this is something Honda had trouble with when developing thier First VTEC engines for bikes, and something Mitsubishi had trouble with on the first MIVEC engines. Give Toyota a few years more to do a little more R&D and the problem will be solved, and they will have an enigne as good as anything Honda can produce. However it currently lacks the life of the 11 year old B series engine, just like Hondas ZC (non-VTEC DOHC) lacks the life of Toyotas nearly 20yr old 4age.

As for the fact that the celica comes with factory headers, well so what, My '90 SiR Civic has factory headers, and so does my mates 4agze powered '89 MR2, its something that most manufactors have been doing since the late 80s, early 90s and is nothing new.
Its a cheap way for the manufactors to regain hp lost to emissions control.

The placment of the cat closer to the exhaust ports has little to do with the way the engine sits in the engine bay, Honda have been doing this for years with the d seried engine in the Civic, and many european cars have also been doing the same thing, it does make aftermarket headers a little difficult, but its likly that the stock design is so good (its a Toyota remember) that after market headers wont give you any gains unless your changing the cams as well. I know several people ralling the 4age and all use the factory headers, as after market ones have often shown a drop in hp.

The celica is a great car, I never said otherwise. Its just that its something Very new for Toyota and as a result could use a little tweaking, just like any new car design from any manufactor.

:cool:

phaqgm took the words right out of my mouth. The only thing I can add about the engine layout matched with catalytic converters is that the superheated cats (which agreeably perform best when placed as closely as possible to the hot exhaust ports) stay away from the radiator, which is working to dissipate heat itself. As phaqgm stated, heat is not a problem. I've seen much worse underhood heat ailments on the long-nosed Supras.

And another thing, when did the whole Type-R issue come up? I never compared the Type-R (or the GSR) with the new Celica. I was talking about the numerous similarities between the new Type-S and the GT-S, as well as the one main difference: displacement. BUT, if you do want to compare apples to apples, try dueling the Type-R and Sports M. As I've said before in the GT-S thread, both are limited production high-sports models, but the Sports M retains some of the valuable creature comforts (if someone want a lighter car they can just remove the excess; it's not that difficult). Purpose built race car? That's a real load. The majority of the Type-Rs here are on the streets. I'd rather have the standard a/c and navigation system while cruising.

Originally posted by Moppie
There's also the problem of the exhaust making a sharp bend to get away from the egine.


Take a look at the piping; it never makes a sharp bend anywhere. Perhaps the older makes you previously mentioned had them, but I just don't see it. It has two major angles in the engine compartment, just like the two on the front mounted headers, but it actually flows much more progressively since it doesn't need to clear the bottom of the transmission, which the front ones do. Furthermore, with the less hardware under the engine/tranny, the designers have been able to lower the position of the engine, reducing the center of gravity.

Originally posted by Moppie
There are other factors, such as tradition, the old way worked so why bother changing it?


We all know the phrase, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Well then there wouldn't be any advancements in technology. If Honda wasn't out trying new methods, there wouldn't be a B18C. While on the topic of 'comparisons', I applaud new ideals and thinking, and am glad that Toyota has raised the bar, which has been set by Honda for so very long. As we all know, many of the japanese sports cars have been focused around turbocharging, minus Honda. Now they will be receiving some much needed competetion in the natural aspiration department.

Originally posted by Moppie
I cant see any real advantages, other than easier access to the intake side of the engine for servicing.


Try to be open minded. Besides the aforementioned cures for heat concerning the radiator, and intake heat transfer, think of forced induction possibilites. Right now, my mind's eye is sketching an visual of a turbo nestled back by the firewall, drawing in air from the larger Sports M's hood scoop, with a nearly straight downpipe exiting to the rear.

If Honda inline fours are your thing, you should accept this engine layout--the new Integra/RS-X DOES use it, as well. With the 20-year experience you continue to refer to, it seems funny how Honda is forming their future i-VTEC powerplants with characteristics from Toyota.

I don't like how that nose looks :apuke:

The nose:
Yes, it's extremely different and something that no one has ever seen before. But people shouldn't simply brush aside what's new and stick to the same old styles. It's impossible to know what is going to become the next standard, so people should try and stay open minded about what the industry presents. This particular front bumper seemed a little radical at first, but now the wild design is settling in. Remember Veilside, with their highly revolutionizing designs which FAR too many aftermarket companies have ripped off? That is the impact that styling can produce.

First of all i have to say I love the car. I live in colorado and big car shows are onething we dont have. We have te tri staeauto show but no concept cars are displayed so i am stuck looking and the photos of all the good ones on the net. I remember i was looking at all the cars of this last Auto show in LA and stumbled on to the pics of the Celica; three words, Creamed my Pants. The Celica in my mind is the perfect car. it combines speed, handaling, reliabilaty, comfort, and well it dosen't look half bad. ever since i bought my 87 i have been hooked. once again the car is one ofthe best i have ever seen.

morpheusxiii
Please reread my posts. I never said anything bad about the Celica, or Toyota engines for that mater. In my mind the Toyota 4agze is the best 4cly to have ever come out of japan followed by the Honda B series engines. I own a B series powered car and im building a 4agze powered kit car. Why not power the kit car with honda? I believe the 4agze has far more potential and is easier to work on and with.
I compared the Celica engine with the Type-R engine becuase its the only other engine out there that is in any way simlar, and it is certainly suprior, but its also been around a lot longer, as Iv said twice now give Toyota a few years and they will be as good as anything Toyota can make. (I never compared the two cars, the diffrence come down purly to personal choice)

To acuse Honda of copying Toyota with the new I series engines is just silly, after all didnt Toyota copy Honda First, or was it Henry ford copying Mr Benz by making a car with a piston engine.
All the manufactors play follow the leader, and they have been doing so for over 100 years, its nothing new.

I love the new Celica, Toyota went to long with out a sutible sports coupe, the old Celica model was just to heavy and to slow. The new one is a revelation, I would choose it any day over a GSR teg, but would choose a Type-R for the reasons you pointed out, I dont care about A/C and sat nav.

Now about the placing the intake at the frount and exhaust at the back.
I will repeat what I said earlier and add a little extra to aid your understanding.
Its nothing new. Many other companies including Renult and Citron have been doing it for at least 15yrs, The fact that Toyota and Honda have just caught on shows how far behind the Japanese are in terms of some technology, (while the lack of things like VVTi-L and VTEC shows how far the europeans can be behind).

There are several reasons it was never done before.
-Heat insulation around the exhasut manifold. As I said earlier many of the early Renults had trouble with heat getting into the passanger compartment, and wiring looms etc.
-The cost of manufactoring manifolds and piping in the required shape, and thier effectiveness.

Modern design has clearly got around these problems, allowing the manufactors for what ever reasons to run the exhuast manifold out the back of the head, and not round the frount.
(and they clearly have thier reasons, but unless someone knows one of the designers and accountants, we can only ever speculate)

I can think of few real world benefits, lowering the engene hight is one I didnt think of, and is a good one, but remember you still have issues with Driveshaft and diff placement. (think about where it all sits relative to where and exhaust runs).

There is often plenty of airflow up the back side of an engine block, and depending on the shape of any underbody panels it can be as much o more than your getting in the frount through the grill.
(EG S/C and Turboed MR2, Air is forced from underneath the car and out the top of the engine cover vents, and same thing happens on the Mitsi EVO's and the Subi WRX)
If however its as you suggested to keep the super heated cats working at a nice high temp, then how is your lovely heat hating Turbo going to run? There isnt going to much of a temp diffrence accross the exhasut turbine, and those bearings are going to need a lot of oil to keep them cool, and you still have to worry about piping it into an intercooler.

The only possible advantage I can see is it means the engine can be set further back to aid in weight distrubution, and you can use longer intake runners with a larger and less restrictive plenum chamber or Air box. However it means a corosponding loss of room for larger exhaust headers, and a Turbo install.

Its all about compromise, and for the next generation of Honda's and Toyotas it looks like they have chossen to compromise on exhuast for access to the intake. (remember that Toyota especialy has possible the worlds best Factory exhaust manifolds, I plan on using one on my engine.)

Thank you.
(now please read it again. :D )

Originally posted by Moppie
Please reread my posts. I never said anything bad about the Celica, or Toyota engines for that mater.

...as you should reread mine. I never proclaimed that you stated anything "bad" about the discussed topics. I started by simply making a comparison between the displacements of the 2ZZ-GE and K20C, and how identical they were other than the size factor. Everthing else was a response to a response.

Originally posted by Moppie
I compared the Celica engine with the Type-R engine becuase its the only other engine out there that is in any way simlar, and it is certainly suprior...

Once again, an engine more similar to the one in the Type-R is the one from the Sports M.

Originally posted by Moppie
To acuse Honda of copying Toyota with the new I series engines is just silly... ...All the manufactors play follow the leader...

No one is acusing anyone of anything, and "follow the leader" is pretty much the same thing I was referring to:

Originally posted by morpheusxiii
...Honda is forming their future i-VTEC powerplants with characteristics from Toyota.

Furthermore, some clarification about the new 'layouts':

Excerpt taken from Sport Compact Car: Features - RSX Type-S

"The two models [K20A, K20C] have completely different cylinder heads, sharing only the basic layout. Even that basic layout has changed from the B18, with the intake now on the front of the engine, and the exhaust out back. The rear-mounted exhaust allows the catalytic converter to be moved slightly closer to the exhaust ports without requiring a true-close coupled layout (with a front-mounted exhaust, the catalyst at this distance would end up under the oil pan, where it would heat the oil and cause ground clearance issues). The exhaust routing is similar to the new Civic and to Toyota's 2ZZ-GE Celica GT-S engine, with a short, low-mass tubular stainless-steel four-into-two manifold followed by an "e-pipe"--basically a large single pipe with a divider wall down the middle--in place of traditional secondary pipes. The e-pipe design reduces surface area so less heat is dissipated to the outside air. Heat loss is further reduced by making the outside of the e-pipe double-walled. All these low-mass, double-walled, low-heat-loss games are efforts to speed catalytic converter light-off. It obviously works, as both models meet strict Low Emissions Vehicle Level II standards."

--Dave Coleman


I am becoming slightly vexed by all that we have said. From this point, I will wait to respond when I have further data concerning our discussion, or reply when any of you have the same.

Cool, man.
There has to be some reason why its done, and there is deffinitly some reason why it wasn't done before. Manufactors arnt inclined to make radical changes to designe unless is there is the possibilty of a benefit. However what that benifit is could be anything, from easier faster serviceing, to more effeciant better working cats, or some cobination of a whole ot of diffrent factors.

I have an ask at the Honda NZ service center next time im there, there service manager is nice guy, and has been working for Honda for about 15yrs. It could be intresting to see if he has anything to say.

Hi everyone, new to this board.

Hmm, the Ultimate Celica was built as a promotional tool to generate good PR and interest in a the Celica. I think they have done a good job. The use of the turbo drive train and engine from the all-trac was more to do with reliable package and creating a buzz for sports car enthusists.

The 2ZZ-GE is a good engine, but the all-trac makes the car more exciting and gave it more impact, specs and performance wise. I think the amount of exposure the Ultimate Celica has paid for itself off in terms of cost to produce the one off special. I believe the car was built as a marketing tool and added street cred as well but to also encouraged potential new Celica buyers to the cars potential given the all-trac drive train/engine combo.

Hopefully the TRD NA engine package from Japan will be released sometime next year for the 2ZZ-GE. It is claimed to increase power to 230Hp.

Jason

Have you a link where I can see more about this TRD NA engine package in Japan?

How about the Celica Turbo shown in Japan? 200 bhp and 260 N*m torque. That would make it 200 bhp and 188 lb.ft torque.

http://www.toyota-stars.ch/images/Messen/MotorShowEssen2001/Silo/102-0221_IMG.jpg

http://www.toyota-stars.ch/Berichte/Messen/Essen2001-Silo.htm

F20C, thanks for the info and pics.

If you look closely at the engine it is only VVT-i on the engine cover. It is the 1ZZ-FE engine found on the new corolla, MRS and lower spec GT celica found in the US market. This engine stock is rated at 140hp. So what your saying is correct about 200BHP, thats a impressive jump in power.

Looking at the web address, that car is not in Japan but in fact Europe. Looks like probably Germany to be more precise. It has also the TTE bodykit and wheel combo on it was well which adds more weight to my assumptions. Does that mean TTE has a turbo kit they are developing for the European Celica? very interesting.

Morpheus XIII, I'll see whay I can do. The site is Japanese with very little info. but with pics of the parts. I'll try to find it for you. If you go to www.toysport.com, they prematurely listed it on there website for the 230HP TRD Jap spec 2ZZ-GE. So the kit is real. I sure it consists of new inlet and exhaust camshafts, header, valve springs and higher compression pistions.

Jason

M Spec

TTE is like TRD for Europe. The same company that drop a 4.3L V8 Kompressor into IS300.

F20C Thats but of an understatement, TTE is like TRD for Europe.
Thats like saying Prodrive (U.K) is similar to subaru's STI operation in Japan.
I know what you mean though.

Morpheus XIII, here are some links to some Japanese pics of the kit. Sorry they are a bit uncelar though. (out of my control)

http://www.page.sannet.ne.jp/hiron/celica/as01.jpg
http://www.page.sannet.ne.jp/hiron/celica/as02.jpg

One thing for sure is these parts are destined for the 2ZZ-GE.

Jason

Ahh, thanks for the info.

Yeah the Celica Turbo's engine seems to be the little brother 1.8L 1ZZ-FE. I wonder what was the reasoning for choosing that powerplant? Maybe that engine has a torquier nature than the 2ZZ-GE (and would yield better torque with the forced induction), or didn't need as much reinforcing as a 2ZZ would. Well, I for one, am glad they are working on something besides the same old stuff like the 2ZZ-GE.

Below--(from the same website) Damn that's a tight fit! You can barely see the turbine housing wedged in there, right up against the firewall. It's a good thing all Celicas have that functional hood scoop, so it can draw in cool air to force all that turbo heat out from underneat the car.

Actually, the turbo is on the GT because of the compression ratio. The GT-S has an extremely high 11.5:1 ratio and the GT has either a 10:1 or 10.5:1 ratio. If you look at most stock turbo cars (Eclipse GS-X for example) the compression ratio is more around 8:1. This is the reason why the GT-S engine is so hard to develop a turbo for and the GT a little easier. However, hope is on the way for us GT-S owners, there are some companies that have turbos in the works for our cars, lets just see how reliable and stable they are. I don't want 220+HP at the expense of 10+ years of lost engine life.

Originally posted by Da Kine Guy
I don't want 220+HP at the expense of 10+ years of lost engine life.

A better turbo doesn't mean longer engine life. It's the amount of boost you are constantly applying--weak turbos wear the engines a little, while powerful ones wear them a lot. Engine reliability concerning forced induction is directly related to the amount of buildup on the bottom end.

Do you think that adding a proven turbo kit that runs 6-8 psi of boost would hurt the engine much? If adding a turbo doesn't speed the aging process of the engine by much then maybe I should look into it a bit more.

6-8 psi isn't going to hurt much at all. That's the power rating of most superchargers--something that even factories are willing to have installed for you with no further reinforcements at the dealer (i.e. Toyota Solara and others). However there is one way to besure that you will have even more peace of mind: proper cooling. This includes intercoolers, oil coolers, turbo timers, and even blow-off valves, which are all win/win upgrades. Oh yeah and don't forget turbo cars need more oil changes than non-turbo cars, and also that it's not ideal to turbocharge a car that already has high compression, which may require at least flatter piston rings in a GT-S.