2zz vs 1zz 95 octane fuel

[wilko59]

At work now but I'll have it on tomorrow dinner.

[Lee H]

Not a bad guess (I was  guessing 170bhp, 1ZZ I had was 160bhp).

Engine has a lot of miles on as well remember. I still stand buy no-one has made a genuine 190bhp on a stock ecu with a manifold that passes under the crossmember.

[jonty]

Thanks for posting Wilko! Interesting result.. You've basically got around half of the total benefit on offer, so it'll be interesting to see what you get with the Celica manifold!

[mr2will]

Lee

160 bhp was very good from the 1zz what mods did you have

Thanks

MRWIll

[Anonymous]

Mwr managed 215 very high tuned Na 1zz

[Lee H]

Lee

160 bhp was very good from the 1zz what mods did you have

Thanks

MRWIll

Crower cams
Power FC
Updated manifold with decat
Blitz exhaust
Injen intake

Cost the guy a lot to get up and running but again didn't feel that quick either.

[Escy]

Can't wait to see the difference with a celica manifold!

I'm not convinced it's all about the manifold anyway, the standard downpipe/midpipe with the CAT in is horrific, especially on a facelift where the bend is ridged and looks like an elephant's trunk. It's a combination of both this and the manifold.

[Anonymous]

Can't wait to see the difference with a celica manifold!

I'm not convinced it's all about the manifold anyway, the standard downpipe/midpipe with the CAT in is horrific, especially on a facelift where the bend is ridged and looks like an elephant's trunk. It's a combination of both this and the manifold.

I can imagine the cat is restrictive, yes.

I didn't realise there is a difference on facelift cars though? Have you got any pic of comparisons?

[Alex Knight]

I still stand buy no-one has made a genuine 190bhp on a stock ecu with a manifold that passes under the crossmember.

My car with the cheap eBay manifold (Topspeed).

[wilko59]

[Lee H]

I still stand buy no-one has made a genuine 190bhp on a stock ecu with a manifold that passes under the crossmember.

My car with the cheap eBay manifold (Topspeed).

129 at the wheels is nothing like 188 at the fly. Even the second graph shows more whp but only 166 at the fly.

[Escy]

Can't wait to see the difference with a celica manifold!

I'm not convinced it's all about the manifold anyway, the standard downpipe/midpipe with the CAT in is horrific, especially on a facelift where the bend is ridged and looks like an elephant's trunk. It's a combination of both this and the manifold.

I can imagine the cat is restrictive, yes.

I didn't realise there is a difference on facelift cars though? Have you got any pic of comparisons?

I can't find any photos of a facelift system as the bend is hidden by heat shields. The pre-facelift one is a normal bend, the facelift is a horrible looking ridged bend.  If you go Celica manifold you loose that whole pipe and need to make up your own (typically using a free flowing sports cat). My point being that the benefits (which are big) aren't purely down to the manifold.

[ChrisGB]

It's not just about gas flow, but inlet pulsing and exhaust scavenging. Running an engine effectively at high revs, the exhaust pulses have to be tuned to scavenge gases and generate / work with pulses in the inlet system to help drag and push gases into the cylinders. This means the exhaust and inlet systems are designed to work with the cam timings and durations. Unless an aftermarket manifold has been properly designed and dyno tuned, it simply won't be likely to run the full specified output, as this tuning is critical to engine performance.

[Alex Knight]

Very interesting video, especially from about 5:20 onwards, talking compression and octane:

[youtube:2a94mram]6bkDKqoGSdU[/youtube:2a94mram]

[KJPG]

Maybe I don't speak for everyone here, but I moved from a 1zz into a 2zz, transferring across my race exhaust onto a swap header, (not sure of brand but is one of the ones that can be used with a standard 1zz exhaust, not that anyone with a sane mind would use that awful POS but it has happened.) and the difference is huge for me. It has a decent induction system however the engine is otherwise standard.

I'm not sure if there could be some underlying issues with your engine or if your exhaust is in fact solid, rather than hollow, but a 2zz roadster should 100% be very noticably faster than a 1zz.

[KJPG]

Oh and I forgot to add, as it's a JDM engine on a matching ECU I've used 98ron since I've owned it, and as far as I'm aware the previous owner did as well.

[Dyn-Evo]

fwiw, I wouldn't run my TS-Compressor on 95 if I was planning any "spirited" driving....  s:roll: :roll: s:roll:  

Firstly, on the rare occasions that I have put 95 in it (The manual / inside the filler cap state 98RON), it has immediately sounded and ran noticeably poorer.....!

Probably down to ECU adjustments of fuelling and timing? Putting "proper" fuel in results in a much more "comfortable" sounding and running engine! (I only use VPower in it 95% of the time)

(I don't think you can buy 98 octane normally anyway? Super Unleaded seems to be 97..?)

Anyway..I digress..  s:D s:D  

The 2ZZ actually sounds "healthier" and drives MUCH better in "the zone" than it does at lower revs: I'm referring here to 5-8k RPM.

The downside of this is that the gearing for motorway cruising is far from optimal as it puts 70mph right in the "uncomfortable" zone..!

The 98 requirement is purely down to the unfinished job that TTE have done on the particular setup the Compressor has.
They're using the higher octane fuel to offset the possible (likely?) onset of detonation at higher revs: this is due to retaining the stock 2ZZ CR and fitting a Roots supercharger.....

...and NO Intercooler...!   s:roll: :roll: s:roll:  

Which explains the low boost application for the S/C (only around 6 PSI)...and the relatively modest increase in power over stock 2ZZ (215hp v 190hp).
But there IS a lot more torque lower down, as an upside!

If they'd done it "properly", and not just bolted some left-over kits onto a FL T-Sport Corolla, they could have got 245HP+ out of it easily, with relatively little hassle.

Basically, drop the CR to 9.5/1, fit a FMIC (or a W2A from the GT4), raise boost to 12+ PSI, and give the ECU a supercharger-specific map......? JD!   s8) s8)  

They did similar with the MR2 Mk1 Supercharger, after all.....and so did I...!   s:twisted: :twisted: s:twisted:  

(Even though I'm tempted to "play" with the Corolla,  I'm not even going there....  s:lol: :lol: s:lol:  )

[Dyn-Evo]

Higher-than-stock octane fuels really only have a benefit at high combustion chamber temps and high boosts on FI engines.

If you're running at top revs and with optimised timing, it will help prevent detonation occurring, but for normal day-to-day use, its pretty much money down the drain using 98 in a stock NA 1ZZ/2ZZ, I reckon?   s:? :? s:?  

Just my 2p-worth...   s:D s:D

[JoeCool]

Meh, I'm still going to run V-power or whatever they call it this week.

My justification is:

1) I buy a tank of fuel or 2 a month for the car, so I don't miss a few quid.

2) I firmly.believe (placebo?) that the car runs nicer on it.

3) the additive packages are different. I've actually cured running faults on other N/A engines with few tanks of V-power. I had a 3.8 Shogun in Australia that had been run on 91 all its life, and it had a strange hot start issue. Ran 2 tanks of V power 98 through it, and the fault disappeared never to return.

4) it's a 100k engine that gets beaten on. It deserves good.oil and good fuel.

That's my 2penned worth, I really don't see it as a waste of money as it buys me some peace of mind!

That said, I don't believe 95 will harm anyones 2zz.

And yes they are way faster than a 1zz.

[Dyn-Evo]

Yeh..2ZZ just seems to like V Power better than 95...

Mind you, VPower is 99....!   s8) s8)

[wilko59]

Right, Celica manifold fitted and a "frankenstien" style exhaust fabricated.  The power difference is now much more noticeable over the cheap manifold.  When not in lift there isn't really much at all between the two cars.  Now when in lift there is significantly more performance rather than just noise.

Best way to describe the sound of the exhaust is frenzied, beyond about 3k rpm it starts sounding like a fireblade.

Hopefully will be able to get both cars on the rolling road either Friday or Saturday so i'll post the printouts for comparison.

[Huambo81a]

Sorry to necro an old thread. I recently had a 2zz swap.

With a Celica manifold, sports cat, and Proflow backbox, a K&N Cone filter mounted behind the battery with good airflow, and an Apexi PFC.

It made 180hp on the dyno. But the owner was quick to say that his dyno always read down on others in the area. So it's up there.

It feels fast enough, and not just in lift. Between 3 and 5k its significantly more powerful.

Happy

[shnazzle]

I'm starting to think you need to rethink who is doing your mapping

[Huambo81a]

I'm starting to think you need to rethink who is doing your mapping

He said that he uses settings which he feels are more realistic, i.e more drag. He aknowledged that cars that were run on his dyno report figures lower than elsewhere. He feels that at completing places, they are inflating the figures to keep people happy, and he feels his dyno reads 8-10% lower.

What i took from that was, if i'd gone anywhere else it would probably be making more. Either way it's up there somewhere.

[shnazzle]

No not about that. More in relation to your other thread with fuel economy issues.

Dyno claims are pointless. Each dyno is different. The only dyno readings I can ever take seriously (regardless of the peak figure) are before and after graphs on the same day.

What's more worrying is that you had hesitation issues and now fuel economy issues.
If its over fueling across the board this isn't good either.