My FD 2jz swap :-)

[bimbleuk]

Sorry, am I right your running a 1JZ in yours?...

As Rob says I have two cylinder heads but only one cam = LS V8
 
I worked out my parts costs to  around 9K (inc the RX7) to do the basic conversion and as I did most of the work ther wasn\'t much labour on top. However after adding up the extras such as flush headlights, composite seat, manual rack, pedal box, GAZ suspension, poly bushes etc. I\'m certainly over £12K.
 
If anything the cost of the LS engine has gone up unfortunately due to demand in the US and short supply over here. So if I was to do the conversion again my short list would be the following.
 
LS3, 1JZ/2JZ, 1UZ-FE & AJP V6
 
Out of those in stock format the LS3 has the most power. The 2JZ has the biggest potential. The 1U-ZFE would be the cheapest to buy but the AJP V6 has the most up to date design.
 
So sticking to NA as I\'ve done both turbos and superchargers many times the AJP V6 is now my personal choice.

[Anh]

To state that balanced weight distribution is a meaningless paradigm shows at least respectable grasp of lanugage but extremely poor understanding of motor vehicle dynamics.

I said the 50:50 weight distribution is a meaningless paradigm, are the spring rates going to be equal? What about with driver on board and fuel? What about the distribution during cornering? Corner exit? Braking? What about the load distribution when you take account of lift or downforce? Different load distributions will alter the way how a car corners, brakes or accelerates, there is no ideal or "balanced" number - it is not as simple as that.

I will stop there because ...

To be honest, if you want to make yourself look daft on the internet, could you not just post a video of youself on YouTube with your c0ck out like everyone else and leave us here on the Rotary forum alone? It\'d probably be better for all of us

Now I don\'t need to address every sentence of bolleux you just posted at me, simply because you have demonstrated that resorting to personal jibes have completely undermined whatever arguement regarding the topic you are trying to make here.

I dont need to tell you that you\'re wrong, you can do that yourself if you actually calm down and use your brain before posting.

Regards...

[Nik da Greek]

I was perfectly calm, and I did use my brain. That\'s why my reply was funny, unlike yours that tbh was so dull I can\'t even remember the middle part ten seconds after reading it :Snoring.

Anyway, thanks for stopping by again, don\'t let the door hit you as you leave :WaveBye

[Anh]

I was perfectly calm, and I did use my brain. That\'s why my reply was funny, unlike yours that tbh was so dull I can\'t even remember the middle part ten seconds after reading it :Snoring.

Anyway, thanks for stopping by again, don\'t let the door hit you as you leave :WaveBye

Nothing worse than a bad comedian.

[Nik da Greek]

Nothing worse than a bad comedian.

I dunno, I can think of a few things worse... bad losers for a start :rolleyes: Then a pretty broad spectrum of worse things with like paedophiles at one end and people who desecrate perfectly good RX-7s by putting stupidly unsuited engines in them at the other :Nono!

[Will66]

I think the term weight distribution is misleading.  To be totally correct it\'s a 50:50 mass distribution front to rear, laterally you\'ve got a slight issue with the driver on one side but otherwise it\'s pretty close and since the distribution along the long axis of the car is far more significant in terms of performance I\'d say it\'s relevant.  As for spring rates, they\'re going to be better able to perform as required because they\'re not having to compensate for unbalanced mass, similarly for cornering differences.  In fact since it\'s a road car you\'re probably going to give it spring rates and damper settings to ensure that in extremis it loses grip at the front first rather than at the rear because if you do lose grip and cannot regain it, putting the front of a car into something like a lamp-post is infinitely preferable for passenger safety than going into it sideways or backwards.

As for the whole engine swap idea.  I am not one to mess with the rotary engine but I can see the appeal of a V8 conversion in an RX although it creates a very different animal, the LS V8 is a powerful, compact powerplant which is often hampered by shoddy vehicles to run in but has plenty of power potential.  Putting it into an RX7 creates something interesting as you\'re putting a different compact powerful motor in to replace another one.  Putting a 2JZ into an RX7 is just odd as far as I am concerned, principally for the following reason, The Toyota Supra.  It\'s a different animal from the RX7 to be sure but whereas the LS V8 could have come from a pick up or a large saloon, to get a 2JZ you\'re pulling apart a Supra or an Aristo or something equally interesting.  Surely if you want a big power 2JZ it would make more sense in a Supra?  Especially since although it doesn\'t handle as well as an RX7 the Supra has been designed to cope with a 2JZ from the outset and I reckon that an RX7 with a 2JZ would probably be no better handling than a Supra anyway.

[BlitzBoy]

I said the 50:50 weight distribution is a meaningless paradigm, are the spring rates going to be equal? What about with driver on board and fuel? What about the distribution during cornering? Corner exit? Braking? What about the load distribution when you take account of lift or downforce? Different load distributions will alter the way how a car corners, brakes or accelerates, there is no ideal or "balanced" number - it is not as simple as that.
.

Yes agreed on all those variables as well, but lets be honest most people who do engine conversions will not bother about changing spring rates , damper settings, load\\weight distribution etc etc.

They will just plonk the engine in by hook or by crook and say job done

They will keep the same suspension setup , weight distribution etc etc as the stock setup which is setup for the rotary as Mazda designed, hence why most engine conversions will understeer into a hedge lol

And if they did do it properly eg moving the 2jz further back, sitting the engine lower, custom subframe,custome spec coilover suspension, sump, redistributing ancliaries and the like,corner weighting etc etc, it would cost a pretty penny and it would be cheaper by miles by keeping the rotary and modifying correctly with a single turbo conversion to 500bhp

[Anh]

I dunno, I can think of a few things worse... bad losers for a start :rolleyes: Then a pretty broad spectrum of worse things with like paedophiles at one end and people who desecrate perfectly good RX-7s by putting stupidly unsuited engines in them at the other :Nono!

What has peadophilia has to do with a 2JZ engine swap?

Honestly you have issues and trying disguise it as internet wit is a bit sad IMO.

Regards ...

[Anh]

Yes agreed on all those variables as well, but lets be honest most people who do engine conversions will not bother about changing spring rates , damper settings, load\\weight distribution etc etc.

They will just plonk the engine in by hook or by crook and say job done

But that is not down to you to dictate though?. At the end of the day, not everyone will want the last vestiges of steering response, sharp yaw behavior handling - that is a subjective matter.

The 2JZ (or any decent inline 6) will give that inline 6 sound and the smooth surging power delivery of one, if someone wants that in combination of the FD\'s body, then why not?

They will keep the same suspension setup , weight distribution etc etc as the stock setup which is setup for the rotary as Mazda designed, hence why most engine conversions will understeer into a hedge lol

And if they did do it properly eg moving the 2jz further back, sitting the engine lower, custom subframe,custome spec coilover suspension, sump, redistributing ancliaries and the like,corner weighting etc etc, it would cost a pretty penny and it would be cheaper by miles by keeping the rotary and modifying correctly with a single turbo conversion to 500bhp

Understeer is not caused by having large engines mounted at the front, it is caused by loadings and the contact patch sizes of the front relative to the rears and this variates when you are accelerating or braking.

Use wider front tyres, you reduce the slip angles and increase contact patch area. Contact patch area will not give you more grip since you got more mass to deal with, but it will not lose grip (understeer) as you have more mass to load that extra contact patch area with.

But at the end of the day, if someone just wants a 2JZ for the sake of having it, then the discussion here about handling is more or less now moot.

[Will66]

Understeer isn\'t caused by just having large engines at the front, but loadings on the front are caused by large engines at the front and running larger wheels and tyres increases your unsprung mass and rotating masses which also compromises the suspension behaviour.

As you say if they want a 2JZ for the sake of having a 2JZ then it\'s all good.  But that\'s about the only reason to have one over a 13b, a 20b or an LS.

[rwdwiganer]

I think the term weight distribution is misleading.  To be totally correct it\'s a 50:50 mass distribution front to rear, laterally you\'ve got a slight issue with the driver on one side but otherwise it\'s pretty close and since the distribution along the long axis of the car is far more significant in terms of performance I\'d say it\'s relevant.  As for spring rates, they\'re going to be better able to perform as required because they\'re not having to compensate for unbalanced mass, similarly for cornering differences.  In fact since it\'s a road car you\'re probably going to give it spring rates and damper settings to ensure that in extremis it loses grip at the front first rather than at the rear because if you do lose grip and cannot regain it, putting the front of a car into something like a lamp-post is infinitely preferable for passenger safety than going into it sideways or backwards.

As for the whole engine swap idea.  I am not one to mess with the rotary engine but I can see the appeal of a V8 conversion in an RX although it creates a very different animal, the LS V8 is a powerful, compact powerplant which is often hampered by shoddy vehicles to run in but has plenty of power potential.  Putting it into an RX7 creates something interesting as you\'re putting a different compact powerful motor in to replace another one.  Putting a 2JZ into an RX7 is just odd as far as I am concerned, principally for the following reason, The Toyota Supra.  It\'s a different animal from the RX7 to be sure but whereas the LS V8 could have come from a pick up or a large saloon, to get a 2JZ you\'re pulling apart a Supra or an Aristo or something equally interesting.  Surely if you want a big power 2JZ it would make more sense in a Supra?  Especially since although it doesn\'t handle as well as an RX7 the Supra has been designed to cope with a 2JZ from the outset and I reckon that an RX7 with a 2JZ would probably be no better handling than a Supra anyway.

Lol, yes I could describe an Aristo as interesting... but what a waste of that magnificent engine ;-) coupled to a 2 tonne US-style cruiser, complete with air-con and an \'i\'m overweight and too fat to change with stick\' box...
Buying a Supra would be \'easier\' but conveniently I am good friends with the owner of an engineering company, and this to him is like playing with lego compared to previous projects he has carried out. A \'BPU\' Supra for 10k?... No thankyou. I\'d just keep the 2wd Datsun.

[tinker-27]

It\'s funny how every body would never put a heavy engine in a car but are quite happy to run stretched tyres,wrong geometry,cheap wrong rate springs and shocks,cheap .... tyres, people are never going to agree on these conversions etc but I wish they would get there facts right ie engines made pre Jesus the ls is a newer design than the rotary if you are being picky , and longer than a straight six !! Have you ever looked in a engine bay , out of interest I have fitted a ls1 into a supra for a guy , you can stand in front of the engine !! . Fds can suffer from under steer anyway but I have never had problems but I run good tyres and I don\'t stretch them "to look good or fit the wrong offset on the car", when wiff bits ran there car in time attack they suffered badly from understeer still rotary powered .

[RobMatthews]

There is only one way to prove this argument, go build it, and beat us around the track...

[tinker-27]

The year I did TOTB mine was the quickest over all three sections and craig wins time attack did very well in time attack , but you all love v8s now there is the 2jz to hate !!!!!:Thumbs-up

[Carbon RX]

can someone remind me to the name of this forum again...

I just read this whole thread thinking some entertainment factor may arise.... afraid not....:Nono!

can someone link the pistonjockeysclub.com pretty please!