Close

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,272
    Rep Points
    450.4
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No

    S54 vs. 2JZ and GTR

    modded gtrs will kill a hpf car even a stage 3... because from a 40 roll you will still spin a little in the m3 and the m3 looses boost between gears the gtr does not... and they have virtually no lag.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Your big boy will lose to my little m3. Click here to enlarge

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    This all depends on the setup. If the HPF stg 3 car has big tires then you are wrong, much like a Supra all they need is traction. Except the S54 has much nicer powerband.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    2,997
    Rep Points
    1,193.8
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3 Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This all depends on the setup. If the HPF stg 3 car has big tires then you are wrong, much like a Supra all they need is traction. Except the S54 has much nicer powerband.
    Really?

    2JZ
    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge



    S54
    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Really?
    I did not mean to step on a nerve but it is a proven fact that the S54 head flows much better then a 2JZ. Sure the 2JZ has made more power, but thats mainly because the Supra has lots of room to fit a very large turbo. The biggest turbo Ive put on my car is a PT76 which is relatively small compared to big HP Supra's with 88's (which are not even the biggest). Also keep in mind alot of these 2JZ's have stroked motors, crazy cams and alot more done to it to defeat the power-band issue (lots of work to push higher rpms etc..). The S54's have pistons/rods only....

    The above dyno's have got to be the worst comparo's as they are all in mph. That is all subjective to gearing, the 1st dyno graph you should shows a gear that goes from 40mph to 180mph really? Obviously the powerband is going to seem nice as its widened out like that. All the Supra graphs you should are high mph pulls which will expand the powerband, the M3's you showed go up to 130mph in 4th gear only.

    I just dyno'd a week ago in 4th gear up to 130mph and my powerband was incredible even with the factory redline I was making full power for nearly 3k rpm!

    None of this is to say the 2JZ is bad, its incredible and Ive always been drooling over them.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Whats funny is that now that I really looked at the graphs you posted, you actually proved my own point.

    Check out the graph below of the supra you posted: Lets use the blue run which shows a better comparable number still making more HP then the M3 graphs you posted. At 100mph the Supra is making only 200whp! (really?? at 100mph 200whp??)

    Fine lets say you use the run that is making a whopping 1600whp, at 100mph it is still only making 600whp!

    Click here to enlarge


    Now look at the HPF M3 at 100mph its making 800whp! I think that sums up what I mean by the S54 having a better powerband.

    Click here to enlarge

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    2,997
    Rep Points
    1,193.8
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Like you said, think about the turbo. Look at the power difference between the two. The 2JZ obviously has a much larger turbo. You didn't step on a nerve, I would just like to see proof that once every last ounce of power is extracted that the S54 will have a better powerband than a 2JZ.

    I tried to find RPM X-axis but I couldn't, and even then it will change torque curve depending on gear.

    Why hasn't anyone touched the head yet on the S54? It looks pretty solid as is, but are there any with upgraded valve-train for comparison?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Like you said, think about the turbo. Look at the power difference between the two. The 2JZ obviously has a much larger turbo. You didn't step on a nerve, I would just like to see proof that once every last ounce of power is extracted that the S54 will have a better powerband than a 2JZ.

    I tried to find RPM X-axis but I couldn't, and even then it will change torque curve depending on gear.

    Why hasn't anyone touched the head yet on the S54? It looks pretty solid as is, but are there any with upgraded valve-train for comparison?
    This is really off topic now but oh well....

    Find a graph of a 2JZ with a PT76 or similar turbo, one that is making roughly 900whp, that way we can try to compare better. Also i still dont get the Supra gearing, what gear do they dyno in? Going up to 180mph?? Im guessing there are lots of variations, b/c of gearing swaps and auto/manual swaps.

    Why do you doubt the S54 having a better power-band? The S54 is a bit bigger and has a better flowing head. A 2JZ needs 42+psi to max it the same turbo on my car whereas my car maxed it out at 34psi (both cars making similar power but my car with 10-12psi less). Also my car has stock cams with hardly any adjust on them, with just pistons/rods.

    There are valve-train parts for the S54 but in stock form its just very good, good enough for people not to really touch them. VAC has stg 1-3 headwork, valve springs etc... I don't think anyone has put cams on the S54 with a turbo on it as well. Imagine how much that would even help spool up.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    116
    Rep Points
    67.4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3 Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Whats funny is that now that I really looked at the graphs you posted, you actually proved my own point.

    Check out the graph below of the supra you posted: Lets use the blue run which shows a better comparable number still making more HP then the M3 graphs you posted. At 100mph the Supra is making only 200whp! (really?? at 100mph 200whp??)

    Fine lets say you use the run that is making a whopping 1600whp, at 100mph it is still only making 600whp!
    Dude, these are single gear dyno pulls. 100mph probably corresponds to like 2k-3k rpm.

    On the street the supra will be shifting to stay in the high RPM band where the car makes power. Power will be >>>200rwhp at 100mph! Most likely >1000rwhp given those curves.

    I'm sure your M3 doesn't make ONLY 100rwhp at 45 mph LOL!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Dude are those dynos even in the 1:1 gear? What gear goes from 40-180? I was nearly pointing out the flaw in the comparison if those dyno charts. We can all dyno higher gears and show nicer powerband graphs. The only way to really compare this would be with rpm scaled dyno graphs with both cars having identical turbos, no major motor changes (stroking etc) and no other spool helpers.

    The S54 is larger, flows much better, has a higher stock redline etc. Even the stock double vanos seems to respond well to big hp, whereas 2JZ needs better cams. Why wouldnt the S54 have a better powerband?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    2,997
    Rep Points
    1,193.8
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3 Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Dude are those dynos even in the 1:1 gear? What gear goes from 40-180? I was nearly pointing out the flaw in the comparison if those dyno charts. We can all dyno higher gears and show nicer powerband graphs. The only way to really compare this would be with rpm scaled dyno graphs with both cars having identical turbos, no major motor changes (stroking etc) and no other spool helpers.

    The S54 is larger, flows much better, has a higher stock redline etc. Even the stock double vanos seems to respond well to big hp, whereas 2JZ needs better cams. Why wouldnt the S54 have a better powerband?
    I don't know why you keep saying this "stock better" stuff, S54s definitely didn't come turbocharged stock, and can't take much on stock internals as we all know. (yes, I understand it is relatively high compression)

    I will try to find a 2JZ with an 8000RPM rev limit and a PT76 or equivalent turbo. Also, later models had VVT-i, stretching the torque curve out even more, similar to Vanos.

    Your chart comparison doesn't really make sense considering the speeds. What I was looking at was the Power/Torque curve vs each other. As you can see, they look relatively close, with the Supra making more power in most cases, likely because of a bigger turbo/higher flowing exhaust manifold considering the extra space they have to work with.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    116
    Rep Points
    67.4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    If i've got to bust out some math I will...

    A stock trans/diff 335i in 5th gear (1:1) will go from 24.2mph@1000 rpm to 169.2mph@7000 rpm. That's with a 3.08:1 rear end.

    If the 335i reved to 8000rpm, it could get to over 193mph in 4th.

    As these curves are for a 1640rwph Supra tuned by Hennessey, I'm assuming this thing is built for speed. Likely a Texas Mile car. So the rear end is likely less than 3.08:1.

    So it's totally possible to build a car with a 1:1 gear that will go from 40 to 180. It's NOT a flaw in the charts. I'm sure the guys at Hennessey will set you straight if you give them a call.

    Why do you say the only way to compare would be cars with identical turbos? Obviously the Supras can support bigger turbos than S54 M3s and is one of the reasons they can produce such ridiculous horsepower.

    It seems pretty clear which engine is making more power...(i'll give you a hint, it's the toyota)

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    108,276
    Rep Points
    26,792.7
    Mentioned
    1793 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    268


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't know why you keep saying this "stock better" stuff, S54s definitely didn't come turbocharged stock, and can't take much on stock internals as we all know. (yes, I understand it is relatively high compression)
    It takes a heck of a lot on stock internals, what are you talking about? It has cracked 700 at the stock compression I believe. With a thicker head gasket to drop compression, who knows what it could hit. Very stout motor...

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Encino, CA
    Posts
    1,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 600whp S4 Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    modded gtrs will kill a hpf car even a stage 3... because from a 40 roll you will still spin a little in the m3 and the m3 looses boost between gears the gtr does not... and they have virtually no lag.
    GTR is making ~607rwhp and trapped 134mph. But, he just rebuilt his motor, so I think I'm toast next time lol


  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Doug007 Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If i've got to bust out some math I will...

    A stock trans/diff 335i in 5th gear (1:1) will go from 24.2mph@1000 rpm to 169.2mph@7000 rpm. That's with a 3.08:1 rear end.

    If the 335i reved to 8000rpm, it could get to over 193mph in 4th.

    As these curves are for a 1640rwph Supra tuned by Hennessey, I'm assuming this thing is built for speed. Likely a Texas Mile car. So the rear end is likely less than 3.08:1.

    So it's totally possible to build a car with a 1:1 gear that will go from 40 to 180. It's NOT a flaw in the charts. I'm sure the guys at Hennessey will set you straight if you give them a call.

    Why do you say the only way to compare would be cars with identical turbos? Obviously the Supras can support bigger turbos than S54 M3s and is one of the reasons they can produce such ridiculous horsepower.

    It seems pretty clear which engine is making more power...(i'll give you a hint, it's the toyota)

    First of all I meant the flaw is in the comparison of those charts. You cant compare powerbands of 2 dyno graphs when its in MPH and one car has a SUPER long gear as opposed to a car with regular stock gearing. Either way if you want to compare powerbands with those 2 charts you can see what car makes what at early speeds. Compare 100 mph numbers. Do you see the flaw now?

    Sure the 2JZ has shown alot more power but like I said thats pretty much only because of space limitations. No doubt the 2JZ makes insane power but do not underestimate the S54. The ratio of blown 2JZ motors to S54 motors is probably something like 50:1.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    108,276
    Rep Points
    26,792.7
    Mentioned
    1793 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    268


    Reputation: Yes | No
    The S54 has not seen the development the 2JZ has. However, the upside on the S54 is incredible. The valvetrain, heads, they are all superior to the 2JZ counterparts. The S54 is simply more efficient with boost. What turbo S54 applications have even touched the cams or heads?

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    2,997
    Rep Points
    1,193.8
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The S54 has not seen the development the 2JZ has. However, the upside on the S54 is incredible. The valvetrain, heads, they are all superior to the 2JZ counterparts. The S54 is simply more efficient with boost. What turbo S54 applications have even touched the cams or heads?
    Prove it. And no, making more power per psi with a HIGHER compression ratio does not count, for obvious reasons.



    BTW, the S54 one has one head. Click here to enlarge

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Prove it. And no, making more power per psi with a HIGHER compression ratio does not count, for obvious reasons.



    BTW, the S54 one has one head. Click here to enlarge
    I have the same compression as most Supra's and I make more power per psi. This is comparing to Supra's that dont have tons of work done to the motor. This topic is quickly getting pointless as you guys are simply not listening to the facts.

    THE S54 HEAD FLOWS BETTER THEN THE 2JZ HEAD. THIS IS A FACT.

    I found a good comparison but this Supra used a 100 shot of nitrous on this run. You will also see the powerband, same turbo on my car is at full spool at 5300rpm.

    Supra chart below:
    * Built bottom end (stock mains)
    * Stock head
    * Titan S2 camshafts
    * Ferrea dual valve springs
    * Precision billet 76mm turbo
    * Greddy exhaust manifold
    * Greddy intake manifold
    * 1200cc injectors
    * Weldon fuel pump
    * AEM EMS tuned by Alpha
    Notes: Car spun a bit, bottle pressure dropped, boost was 35.5lbs dropping to 33lbs


    Click here to enlarge

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    2,997
    Rep Points
    1,193.8
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Good to see some back-up data.

    And I agree, the stock S54 head will outflow the stock 2jz head.

    My point was, at each engine's absolute maximum power level with the most recent technology, I don't see the S54 having a better powerband. If that Supra head was ported/3 or 5 angle valve job/8000rpm limit the results would be much different.

    Maybe a better way of saying it is, I don't see why the Supra head could not be modified to flow as well or better than the stock S54 head, and the highest flowing 2jz's currently put out more torque than the highest flowing S54s. (I understand the S54 has had less development, only time will tell which comes out on top)

    I would like to know, is there a design feature of the S54 that the 2JZ can never match, even with mods, in order to be as efficient with the same turbine/compressor?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    108,276
    Rep Points
    26,792.7
    Mentioned
    1793 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    268


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Prove it. And no, making more power per psi with a HIGHER compression ratio does not count, for obvious reasons.



    BTW, the S54 one has one head. Click here to enlarge
    Multiple S54's would be referred to in plural, heads. As in, the development of all S54's and not in the singular of one motor Click here to enlarge

    Compression ratio does count but even so the S54 has to have better stock heads to make the power it is making in naturally aspirated form.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    108,276
    Rep Points
    26,792.7
    Mentioned
    1793 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    268


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    My point was, at each engine's absolute maximum power level with the most recent technology, I don't see the S54 having a better powerband. If that Supra head was ported/3 or 5 angle valve job/8000rpm limit the results would be much different.
    What happens if you take the S54 to maximum? Rev it out higher, and take those heads to the maximum? Either way, both motors will end up in a very high place when all weaknesses are addressed. The fact is, the S54 could run right with it and maybe even exceed it.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    108,276
    Rep Points
    26,792.7
    Mentioned
    1793 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    268


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I would like to know, is there a design feature of the S54 that the 2JZ can never match, even with mods, in order to be as efficient with the same turbine/compressor?
    The more you do this the more you are making the 2JZ like the S54 instead of the other way around.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    9
    Rep Points
    3.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No

    Question

    Why no mention of the stock S54 motor's rod bearing problems? (i.e. premature wear as reported by many users)

    Click here to enlarge

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    108,276
    Rep Points
    26,792.7
    Mentioned
    1793 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    268


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by iTuneCars Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Why no mention of the stock S54 motor's rod bearing problems? (i.e. premature wear as reported by many users)

    Click here to enlarge
    Where should it be mentioned?

    It was only an issue for early cars. BMW did a recall.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    9
    Rep Points
    3.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No

    Post

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Where should it be mentioned?

    It was only an issue for early cars. BMW did a recall.
    S54 motors failing prematurely due to rod-bearing problems (or Vanos breaking) should be mentioned anywhere because this is a good thread comparing popular motors and sharing is caring. Click here to enlarge

    Although 2JZ motors have 0.2L less swept displacement than the S54 motor, they do not have wide-spread rod-bearing problems nor variable valve timing failures, especially in stock form.

    Here is proof the S54 motor's premature Rod Bearing Failure also affects BMW S54 cars after 2005, so it's not just the "early" models.

    2007 BMW Z4 M Rod Bearing Fails and destroys stock S54 Motor:
    zpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=860093

    Z4M S54: Rod Bearings Replaced:
    zpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=607732

    Z4M S54: Rod bearings replaced again:
    zpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=883939

    If you track your Z4M and think your bearings are fine...:
    zpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=787684

    Z4M S54: Rod Bearings Replaced:
    bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=579615

    I'm sure more examples can be found online if one searches the "interenets" Click here to enlarge.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •