Jump to content
SAU Community

Fj20e+t ?

baffy

By baffy,
in Classic & Vintage (1950's-1980's)

 Share

Recommended Posts

baffy Apprentice

baffy

Posted
Posted

Hey guys figured this is probably the best place to post this.

Picked up an FJ package today, to myself appeared to be a regular FJ20et my room mate has had a few and thought it was factory turbo also.

Now i got it home and started stripping it down to to gauge its condition better and see if it needs a rebuild.

The first sign i found was the exhaust manifold studs are M8 rather than M10.

The most obvious sign was the inlet manifold has 'eccs' rather then 'turbo' stamped on it, the guy i bought it off said the inlet had been changed to make it fit better in the engine bay as its apparently smaller?

The oil feed for the turbo appears factory to me, not just a random hole drilled and tapped into the block. But this is my first FJ so im not sure if they use the same block NA and turbo?

When i pulled the rocker cover and sump off, i found the head has recently been rebuilt and new pistons installed (standard rods)

So basically, in your opinions does this sound like an NA engine with a turbo added? and is there an easy way to tell?

Also has anyone heard of this being done before and the results, shortened life span etc?

The engine will be going into my machinist in the next few days to be gone over thoroughly and compression ratios etc determined.

Anyways thanks for reading my novel look forward to learning a few things.

Cheers

Baffy

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/340213-fj20et/
Share on other sites
tir31 Experienced

tir31

Posted
Posted (edited)

bit hard to tell if the engines not original unopened as parts couldve been swaped but yes with the smaller exhaust studs i would say the head is n/a tho turbo cams couldve been swaped in? or not. the oil feed is a banjo bolt on drivers side of block near starter and oil return is a large barbed fitting in block on passanger side just under stock turbo position > on an n/a block the boss is there but blank but would be possible to fit these with drill and tap tho would be easier to T oil feed off oil sender and return to mod'd sump like z18et and L6turbo motors. i havnt pulled my n/a engine apart but been told rods r slightly smaller, oil pump is smaller and pistons are different to change comp ratio. block casting,crank and bare head suppose 2b the same. my n/a engine has the short rocker cover not the normal high 1s and yes intake manifold has different word cast init, s12 silvia has shorter runner length.

hope thats some help

jon.

Edited by tir31
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/340213-fj20et/#findComment-5505316
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Latest Posts

    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...