3SGE race motor

[GT4 20]

I am seriously struggling to find a V6 that will fit in the engine bay of my rally car project so looks like I will have to look down another route

One tempting 4 pot route is the 3SGE motor. Initial guestimates after taking very rough measurements from my GT4 show that there is huge potential for the motor to fit - length ways at least. However, given it's 15 deg or so attitude that it sits at, firewall clearnace may be a problem. I could get around that with a bit of further fabrication so not much of an issue TBH.

I'd look at a Gen 3 motor at the very least though a Gen 4 would be nice with its alloy block. Anyone know what the weight deifference is between the two? A Gen 3 motor would probably be easier and cheaper for locate though. I'd then look at the usual mods such as rods,incrteased CR, pistons, balancing, headwork, flywheel etc and run with an 8 - 9k rev limit. Throttle bodies would assist with getting sufficient air into the engine to help get decent power with an aftermarket ECU. I'd put the power down through the Rover gearbox which would need some thought to mate up, but would be worthwhile with it's Quaife internals.
Thoughts?
Gary

[RomanV]

There's no 3S with an alloy block - all iron.

There's plenty of potential with the VVTI engines... CelicaRA45 is making 240hp at the wheels with his NA 3S setup, still using VVTI.
It still has a great powerband too.
He was making less peak HP and less power across the board with fixed cams.

Also two guys from 6gc.net are making 197whp and 185whp with just bolt on mods.

Although it's some big money to get a VVTI engine sorted properly, as you'd need a motec computer to run the VVTI, if your mods go beyond the bounds of the factory ECU. (Which they would)
Unless you want to ditch the VVTI, but that's half the point of the motor.

A gen 3 engine would be hugely more cost effective though, but I would imagine that it's potential max power output would be less.

Depends on how much power you want, and/or how much you are willing to spend, as per all engine projects.

[GT4 20]

For the application I'm looking at, I see over 230bhp @ flywheel being a bit pointless as the car will be FWD. After all, not much point having all that grunt if you can't use it. The straight cut gears will reduce transmission losses and the close ratio gears will further improve performance anyway. It will only need to propel around 1000 kg worth of car too.
I may be undertaking a relatively complex conversion in some aspects, but when it comes to the motor itself, I really am looking for simplicity - for that reason a non VVTi would be my first choice.
Gary

[Mr Revhead]

i still say golf vr6 engine!!

[GT4 20]

i still say golf vr6 engine!!

Won't fit
Gary

[Mr Revhead]

bugger

2zzge has alloy block and can be 200hp with minimal mods

[GT4 20]

bugger

2zzge has alloy block and can be 200hp with minimal mods

How does it differ in size to the 3s? Know where I can find one for a reasonable price?
Gary

[Mr Revhead]

not a lot bigger i dont think
ill have a hunt if you want.......
another plus is the exhaust out the back and inlet in the front

[RomanV]

Yeah, will be better suited to quad throttles in a FWD car....
Alloy block is definitely a bonus, will give you more favourable weight distribution.

Remember that it's an NA engine.... You dont have the tire frying torque of a turbo engine, I think you will still be able to run some decent HP in a FWD setup. an LSD gearbox would be a must though, I would think.
I'm sure that the 2zz came with an LSD box in some cars, or at the least there is one available from TRD.

You cant get nice long straight intake runners in a FWD with the 3S, as you'll hit into the firewall.

No such a problem on the MR2, because you can just cut through into the boot.

But yes, 2ZZ might be a better choice.

[GT4 20]

Warwick. Yes please.
If I can get one for a decent price, then a 2ZZ would be the better option as you say.
Straight intake runners on a 3S wouldn't be too much of a problem. I'd just have the firewall modded to accomodate them

As previously mentioned, I will be using the Rover's PG1 gearbox. Why? Coz I have Quaife internals for it and the driveshafts won't need modding

If I was to go down the 3S route, given that I will be rebuilding it completely with flowed head, cams, pistons, rods etc, does it matter if I opt for a Gen II or Gen III as the base motor?

Gary

[GT4 20]

not a lot bigger i dont think

Is that including the motor length wise? Just that the 3S will just fit in the engine bay. Another 10mm and it would be too long.
Gary

[GT4 20]

Just found some 2ZZ GE specs...

Displacement (cc) 1795
Bore x Stroke (mm) 82 x 85
Compression 11.5
Valve Train DOHC 4 Chain Driven VVTL-i
Aspiration natural
Cylinder Block Aluminum w/MMC liner
Bore Pitch (mm) 87.5
Bore wall (mm) 5.5
Valve Dia. (mm) Int 34 Exh 29
Max Power 135kw/7600rpm
Max Torque 180Nm/6800rpm
Size (LxWxH) (mm) 652 x 608 x 659
Dry weight 115kg

652mm makes it too long to fit, so the 3S is looking increasingly like a good option for the application I have planned.
Gary

[fivebob]

If I was to go down the 3S route, given that I will be rebuilding it completely with flowed head, cams, pistons, rods etc, does it matter if I opt for a Gen II or Gen III as the base motor?

IMO yes, the Gen II ports are way too big to make a good NA motor. Gen III ports are smaller and will keep the intake velocity higher, and likely flow more than the Gen II.

[TRD Man]

Gary, don't let anybody tell you that more than 230hp is undriveable in FWD. It's not true.
And yes, the 2ZZge engine is a long one.

[Malcolm]

If I was to go down the 3S route, given that I will be rebuilding it completely with flowed head, cams, pistons, rods etc, does it matter if I opt for a Gen II or Gen III as the base motor?

IMO yes, the Gen II ports are way too big to make a good NA motor. Gen III ports are smaller and will keep the intake velocity higher, and likely flow more than the Gen II.

the gen 2 NA motor has smaller ports than the gen 3 (as can be seen on my website under the gen 3sge and 3sgte head comparison page)

I would suggest you talk to Lynn Rogers if you're serious about a built 3sge.

Since you're going to have to make an adapter plate anyway, why not tilt the 3s toward the exhaust side and put in some external oil drains from the head? it'll open up room for a better intake manifold and hang a bit more weight over the front wheels for grip

btw, does the rover have the gearbox on the passenger side?

[fivebob]

the gen 2 NA motor has smaller ports than the gen 3 (as can be seen on my website under the gen 3sge and 3sgte head comparison page)

That'll teach me for believing what I read on mr2oc.com

In which case there's probably not enough differences that will matter when it's modified to warrant the extra expense of a Gen III

[GT4 20]

Since you're going to have to make an adapter plate anyway, why not tilt the 3s toward the exhaust side and put in some external oil drains from the head? it'll open up room for a better intake manifold and hang a bit more weight over the front wheels for grip

btw, does the rover have the gearbox on the passenger side?

The stock motor actually sits slightly forward of the wheels so having it tilting back will actually put more weight over the wheels.

And yes, the gearbox is on the passenger side. If it was on the other, I'd be looking at a (dare I say it) Honda lump.


Fortunately I happen to know where there is a Gen II motor sitting around just waiting to be used

Gary

[KinLoud]

Do some research to back this up but...
The gen3 3sge has shim under bucket which means easier access to high revs without bits (shims) getting out of place.

I have a spare gen3 3sge sitting in my garage with factory intake, exhaust, engine loom (no computer), alternator, power steer pump and lots of other bits and pieces. Was bought as a spare for my racecar... but now I don't need it as the engine in my racecar is reliable.

Ken
Hamilton
021 408 863

[GT4 20]

Do some research to back this up but...
The gen3 3sge has shim under bucket which means easier access to high revs without bits (shims) getting out of place.

Sure does. Same as with my GT4 engine which now revs to 8k. See no reason why the Gen II head can't be made to run the same set-up.
Gary

[RomanV]

If I was to go down the 3S route, given that I will be rebuilding it completely with flowed head, cams, pistons, rods etc, does it matter if I opt for a Gen II or Gen III as the base motor?

IMO yes, the Gen II ports are way too big to make a good NA motor. Gen III ports are smaller and will keep the intake velocity higher, and likely flow more than the Gen II.

The ports on the gen 4 NA engine are HUGE in comparison to either, possibly even bigger than the gen 2 TVIS turbo head.

Which doesnt seem to make sense really.

I mean 4ages went to a small port design and made more power....
And 3S's seem to do the opposite.

I think that they get the velocity back with the fancy intake manfold.

I wouldnt reccomend the gen 2 engine at all.... the head and intake manifold look really crappy.

Gen 3 for sure.

Gen 4 ports