Lomeinhu
01-13-2002, 05:29 PM
I'm seeing a lot of dissatisfaction with our engines lately. Whether or not the complaints are warranted, I want to know something that is really the foundation of all of this trouble. Why did Toyota choose to put so much time and money into R&Ding the 1ZZ and the 2ZZ when they got the 3SGTE? Keep in mind that I'm not attacking Toyota (per se) for making this decision nor am I trying to convince anyone that Toyota will indeed produce aftermarket parts for our cars.
Here are some of my observations/confusions:
1. The Altezza in Japan has the 2.0L 3SGE (did I get that right?) with a 6 speed transmission. Now I believe that it has the VVTi technology in it. The engine has made the Altezza hugely popular and has been used previously in other Toyota cars with much success (albeit with a factory turbo). The Altezza was even named the best car in Japan (by whom I don't remember) a little while back. Some US magazines have even said that the I4 in the Altezza is superior to the I6 in the IS300 we get here (well, that's arguable). The way I see it, Toyota might have been much better off staying with an engine that they're not even close to retiring (since they used it in a brand new car) instead of feeling the need to develop the 1ZZ or the 2ZZ. If VVTi IS NOT in the Altezza's engine, I'm sure it's as easy of an 'upgrade' development as it was for the '97-'98 TT Supras. Plus, using common engines reduces develoment costs, dividing up production, future risks in new engine failures, etc.
2. If you take a look back at the history of 1ZZ and especially the 2ZZ so far, Toyota's had to cover the cost of this relatively expensive engine for a number of people (let's not get into who's fault is in the blown engines). I guess that Toyota couldn't have foreseen all that, but I'm sure it's common knowledge that with newer technology comes bigger risks (hehe, borrowed that from Spider-Man). The high cost, I'm sure, is a result of limited production, new technology, etc. If Toyota had used the proven 3SGE (or even a more advanced version of 3SGE), the parts would be easily replaceable and less expensive.
3. With the IS300 jumping up to the I6 derived from the NA Supra (which, BTW, has almost limitless tuning abilities esp. since Power House Racing has successfully swapped the Supra TT's engine and 6 speed trans into the IS), it seems logical that when Toyota was looking for a 4 cyl to use in a new sporty coupe, the best one that they got was the 3SGE, which may have been easily designed into the Celica in the first place. After all, the Altezza has very decent HP and torque outputs with this engine, so it really would have been ideal for a car like Celica, which was meant to compete with the Integra. It's almost a waste to have the 3SGE in just a few cars.
4. So here's what we have so far: A. Toyota surely wants to test the waters before jumping in completely, yet it chooses to make TWO new engines rather than use what they have. B. Meanwhile, Toyota wants to make a new corporate image, yet it stayed conservative and made the engines relatively limited in their potential. This paradox is the same as the one found in the 2ZZ: By reducing the displacement of the new engine from a previously developed 2.0L engine to a 1.8L, Toyota found themselves forced to make some kind of advancement to make up for the output disadvantage.
Problem 1: Why make a 1.8L engine instead of a 2.0L engine so that in the end you can say that you have a 1.8L that's mighty close to a 2.0L engine when you could have just started with a 2.0L? Maybe Toyota should've looked to VW's 1.8T for inspiration instead.
Problem 2: Why make 2 brand new engines when you're obviously still sticking with a perfectly capable engine that you have already?
It's hard to believe that the biggest reason for these 2 problem is because Toyota wanted to compete so directly head-to-head with the Integra that it went for the VVTL-i...well, if that's the case, then whoever did the industry research should be fired, b/c the RSX has a 2.0L engine as well as a more economically viable plan of sharing similar engines. Can you imagine the 3SGE in the Celica, AND the Matrix, AND the Corolla? From an industry point of view, I believe that Toyota could have been much more successful with the Celica had it used the 3SGE, even WITHOUT considering the tuning possibilities of the engine. To the people who know nothing of the 3SGE (or 3SGTE), it wouldn't matter which engine Toyota uses. To those who DO know about the 3SGE and 3SGTE, I think they'd be unbelievably happy to have it return to the US. This all boils down to this: the 3SGE is a much easier engine to DEAL with in general, and it's perfectly fine at accomplishing what's needed, so the 1ZZ and the 2ZZ are not really necessary.
Anyone wanna give me some insight into this?
Note: the 1ZZ is also used in Toyota's Premio, Corolla cars in Japan. The 2ZZ is also used in a version of the Corolla in Japan. They may be in other cars, too.
Here are some of my observations/confusions:
1. The Altezza in Japan has the 2.0L 3SGE (did I get that right?) with a 6 speed transmission. Now I believe that it has the VVTi technology in it. The engine has made the Altezza hugely popular and has been used previously in other Toyota cars with much success (albeit with a factory turbo). The Altezza was even named the best car in Japan (by whom I don't remember) a little while back. Some US magazines have even said that the I4 in the Altezza is superior to the I6 in the IS300 we get here (well, that's arguable). The way I see it, Toyota might have been much better off staying with an engine that they're not even close to retiring (since they used it in a brand new car) instead of feeling the need to develop the 1ZZ or the 2ZZ. If VVTi IS NOT in the Altezza's engine, I'm sure it's as easy of an 'upgrade' development as it was for the '97-'98 TT Supras. Plus, using common engines reduces develoment costs, dividing up production, future risks in new engine failures, etc.
2. If you take a look back at the history of 1ZZ and especially the 2ZZ so far, Toyota's had to cover the cost of this relatively expensive engine for a number of people (let's not get into who's fault is in the blown engines). I guess that Toyota couldn't have foreseen all that, but I'm sure it's common knowledge that with newer technology comes bigger risks (hehe, borrowed that from Spider-Man). The high cost, I'm sure, is a result of limited production, new technology, etc. If Toyota had used the proven 3SGE (or even a more advanced version of 3SGE), the parts would be easily replaceable and less expensive.
3. With the IS300 jumping up to the I6 derived from the NA Supra (which, BTW, has almost limitless tuning abilities esp. since Power House Racing has successfully swapped the Supra TT's engine and 6 speed trans into the IS), it seems logical that when Toyota was looking for a 4 cyl to use in a new sporty coupe, the best one that they got was the 3SGE, which may have been easily designed into the Celica in the first place. After all, the Altezza has very decent HP and torque outputs with this engine, so it really would have been ideal for a car like Celica, which was meant to compete with the Integra. It's almost a waste to have the 3SGE in just a few cars.
4. So here's what we have so far: A. Toyota surely wants to test the waters before jumping in completely, yet it chooses to make TWO new engines rather than use what they have. B. Meanwhile, Toyota wants to make a new corporate image, yet it stayed conservative and made the engines relatively limited in their potential. This paradox is the same as the one found in the 2ZZ: By reducing the displacement of the new engine from a previously developed 2.0L engine to a 1.8L, Toyota found themselves forced to make some kind of advancement to make up for the output disadvantage.
Problem 1: Why make a 1.8L engine instead of a 2.0L engine so that in the end you can say that you have a 1.8L that's mighty close to a 2.0L engine when you could have just started with a 2.0L? Maybe Toyota should've looked to VW's 1.8T for inspiration instead.
Problem 2: Why make 2 brand new engines when you're obviously still sticking with a perfectly capable engine that you have already?
It's hard to believe that the biggest reason for these 2 problem is because Toyota wanted to compete so directly head-to-head with the Integra that it went for the VVTL-i...well, if that's the case, then whoever did the industry research should be fired, b/c the RSX has a 2.0L engine as well as a more economically viable plan of sharing similar engines. Can you imagine the 3SGE in the Celica, AND the Matrix, AND the Corolla? From an industry point of view, I believe that Toyota could have been much more successful with the Celica had it used the 3SGE, even WITHOUT considering the tuning possibilities of the engine. To the people who know nothing of the 3SGE (or 3SGTE), it wouldn't matter which engine Toyota uses. To those who DO know about the 3SGE and 3SGTE, I think they'd be unbelievably happy to have it return to the US. This all boils down to this: the 3SGE is a much easier engine to DEAL with in general, and it's perfectly fine at accomplishing what's needed, so the 1ZZ and the 2ZZ are not really necessary.
Anyone wanna give me some insight into this?
Note: the 1ZZ is also used in Toyota's Premio, Corolla cars in Japan. The 2ZZ is also used in a version of the Corolla in Japan. They may be in other cars, too.