Do you use the sump from the 1zz for the 2zz conversion?
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Or is that only really if you want to use the 2zz for the track?
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
The defacto standard is to put the 1zz sump because its baffled. Which is off because the Toyota design documentation for the 2zz states that they purposely removed the baffling to prevent oil starvation up to 1g corners
Does the 1zz sump bolt straight on or does it need fettling?
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Also by your previous statement, which is correct? Lol to use the 1zz or to keep the 2zz as Toyota says it's better?
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
The 1zz isn't so much 'baffled' as it has what is known as a 'windage tray'. This is there to limit the effect of piston movement on the oil in the pan.
For some reason, possibly the different stroke and rpm of the 2zz, Toyota found it counter-productive in the 2zz.
I do know that my local super tig-welder does loads of sumps for a local Lotus shop by welding in gated baffles and windage trays over the top of them. These go into 2zz engines in Elises.
The two sumps are identical in terms of bolt pattern.
Sump 'windage' is a complicated issue and it has quite an effect on BHP output at high rpm.
Yer takes yer pic, I reckon....
Hmmm my 2zz sump is in good condition. It was clearly designed for the car, so.I think I'll stick with it. I still have my 1zz if I feel the need to change or I could purchase a specialised one at a later date. I'm not intending on racing it, so I'd hope either should work fine for normal, if not enthusiastic driving
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
I kept the 2zz sump on mine, had the car on the track and it's been fine.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Quote from: Carolyn on September 20, 2018, 19:24Sump 'windage' is a complicated issue and it has quite an effect on BHP output at high rpm.
Can you explain why? Making the oil pump work harder or something?
Back pressure underneath the pistons.
Quote from: james_ly on September 21, 2018, 16:37
Quote from: Carolyn on September 20, 2018, 19:24Sump 'windage' is a complicated issue and it has quite an effect on BHP output at high rpm.
Can you explain why? Making the oil pump work harder or something?
From my understanding it is the crank working harder by having the oil cling to it. This is especially apparent during high rpms as it can rob power. If you read the 2ZZ white paper they claim they added the windage tray and did not use a baffle in the pan for high speed operation. The windage tray interferes with the oil that is being whipped and directs it back into the sump where it is needed.
Also the white paper mentions the oil returning to the sump as quick as possible.
I believe the windage tray that is part of the 1ZZ pan may interfere with this operation in a dynamic fashion and could potentially cause starvation.
Also I found out that the 1ZZ pan is not the same as a 2ZZ pan without the baffle. The stampings are different. The clearance from the oil pickup tube to the bottom of the pan is also different. I would trust the engineers unless it can be proven otherwise.
Quote from: Dev on December 12, 2018, 18:38
Quote from: james_ly on September 21, 2018, 16:37
Quote from: Carolyn on September 20, 2018, 19:24Sump 'windage' is a complicated issue and it has quite an effect on BHP output at high rpm.
Can you explain why? Making the oil pump work harder or something?
From my understanding it is the crank working harder by having the oil cling to it. This is especially apparent during high rpms as it can rob power. If you read the 2ZZ white paper they claim they added the windage tray and did not use a baffle in the pan for high speed operation. The windage tray interferes with the oil that is being whipped and directs it back into the sump where it is needed.
Also the white paper mentions the oil returning to the sump as quick as possible.
I believe the windage tray that is part of the 1ZZ pan may interfere with this operation in a dynamic fashion and could potentially cause starvation.
Also I found out that the 1ZZ pan is not the same as a 2ZZ pan without the baffle. The stampings are different. The clearance from the oil pickup tube to the bottom of the pan is also different. I would trust the engineers unless it can be proven otherwise.
Exactly my thoughts after I read that same whitepaper.
They have put some serious thought into changing that sump, so it seems daft to then slap the "older model" back on and think it's better. It SEEMS daft perhaps. Maybe it isn't?
Hmm....
Quote from: shnazzle on December 12, 2018, 21:28
Quote from: Dev on December 12, 2018, 18:38
Quote from: james_ly on September 21, 2018, 16:37
Quote from: Carolyn on September 20, 2018, 19:24Sump 'windage' is a complicated issue and it has quite an effect on BHP output at high rpm.
Can you explain why? Making the oil pump work harder or something?
From my understanding it is the crank working harder by having the oil cling to it. This is especially apparent during high rpms as it can rob power. If you read the 2ZZ white paper they claim they added the windage tray and did not use a baffle in the pan for high speed operation. The windage tray interferes with the oil that is being whipped and directs it back into the sump where it is needed.
Also the white paper mentions the oil returning to the sump as quick as possible.
I believe the windage tray that is part of the 1ZZ pan may interfere with this operation in a dynamic fashion and could potentially cause starvation.
Also I found out that the 1ZZ pan is not the same as a 2ZZ pan without the baffle. The stampings are different. The clearance from the oil pickup tube to the bottom of the pan is also different. I would trust the engineers unless it can be proven otherwise.
Exactly my thoughts after I read that same whitepaper.
They have put some serious thought into changing that sump, so it seems daft to then slap the "older model" back on and think it's better. It SEEMS daft perhaps. Maybe it isn't?
Hmm....
Actually I brought this up on Spyderchat two years ago and I was called out that I or anyone else does not know what Toyota intended so I quoted the white paper and there were plenty that were left a little speechless but ended up twisting the words to mean something else entirely to make the 1ZZ pan work into their logic. The white paper is specific and once I showed evidence of the pans being different and various other examples of windage trays used on other cars, the preponderance of the evidence should have been enough to cast doubt that you could potentially cause harm but unfortunately mental gymnastics tends to be favored because looking at something rather than understanding the complexities of oil sump design seems to be the norm.
The only fault Toyota made for the logically inept is not stating you shouldn't use the 1ZZ pan for a 2ZZ.
Having said that if you race any Spyder you should have an upgraded oil pan. If you drive on the street the stock oil pan is more than sufficient unless you run very sticky tires. For my needs I run a crank scraper and a lower pickup tube which also has directional baffles that prevents oil loading up on bays 3 and 4 and directs oil back into the sump. Its cheap insurance and I don't want an aluminum pan that can get damaged on the street.
Yeah but that's no fair @Dev, you're a wizard :)
Us mortals know no more than what the masses tell us.
I for one (if I ever need to) will be following your advice
Quote from: shnazzle on December 12, 2018, 23:30
Yeah but that's no fair @Dev (https://www.mr2roc.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=1962), you're a wizard :)
Us mortals know no more than what the masses tell us.
I for one (if I ever need to) will be following your advice
Im no such thing but thanks for the complementary words. Im just a guy trying to sort though this like everyone else. What I found most reassuring and why I commented is for admiration that you guys have already cast doubt based on logical reasoning from the literature and are willing to entertain caution especially when its something that none of us fully understand.
The 1ZZ pan was made in large abundance compared to the 2ZZ pan. If the 1ZZ pan had any kind of advantage or no change in the sump they would have used it. They fact that Toyota went though the trouble and expense of making a new stamping is another major clue that should not be overlooked.
I've tracked my 2zz a good few times for up to 2hrs at a time non stop with the 1zz sump (Rogue conversion and recommendation) and had no adverse consequences so far (2 1/2 years later) Decent oil with regular changes.... maybe there's not that much difference in the two if both have success stories?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I happen to have both sumps in my workshop.
I measured their dimensions. They are both 140 mm deep (depending on the exact spot you measure) and they are identical except for the internals. It's weird that upside down they look absolutely identical but the extra tin-work makes them different to the eye when they are the other way up.
I'm not saying that this cancels Dev's point that Toyota had their reasons for using a differing sump on the 2ZZ. With the higher RPM of the 2ZZ, the 'windage' factors will be very different.
I was just curious to see if the stampings were, indeed, different. As far as I can tell, they aren't.
BTW, I run lowered scoop and an extra baffle in my 1ZZs.
There you go!
So in summary, 1zz sump on 2zz is a cheap way to not blow up your engine, but there may be power compromises? And 2zz sump gives you the power, but you'll blow the engine on a track. Ultimate solution is a custom sump that gives you best of both worlds (Eliseparts? $$$)
Well that's what's under dispute.
The 2zz sump is specifically designed to cope with g-forces and the increased crank speed.
So, by that logic the 2zz sump on a 2zz should make it safer.
I don't really know why people started putting the 1zz sumps on
Quote from: shnazzle on December 17, 2018, 12:28
Well that's what's under dispute.
The 2zz sump is specifically designed to cope with g-forces and the increased crank speed.
So, by that logic the 2zz sump on a 2zz should make it safer.
I don't really know why people started putting the 1zz sumps on
Because they think they're baffled and will save them at high G?
Quote from: 1979scotte on December 17, 2018, 13:09
Quote from: shnazzle on December 17, 2018, 12:28
Well that's what's under dispute.
The 2zz sump is specifically designed to cope with g-forces and the increased crank speed.
So, by that logic the 2zz sump on a 2zz should make it safer.
I don't really know why people started putting the 1zz sumps on
Because they think they're baffled and will save them at high G?
Which was my understanding, but one has to wonder why Toyota removed the baffles specifically to prevent that.
I don't think this one is going to get an answer :)
Quote from: shnazzle on December 17, 2018, 13:11
Quote from: 1979scotte on December 17, 2018, 13:09
Quote from: shnazzle on December 17, 2018, 12:28
Well that's what's under dispute.
The 2zz sump is specifically designed to cope with g-forces and the increased crank speed.
So, by that logic the 2zz sump on a 2zz should make it safer.
I don't really know why people started putting the 1zz sumps on
Because they think they're baffled and will save them at high G?
Which was my understanding, but one has to wonder why Toyota removed the baffles specifically to prevent that.
I don't think this one is going to get an answer :)
Perhaps the answer is to fit the very expensive Elise parts sump.
The 1ZZ sump isn't really baffled. It has a windage tray with a small single baffle underneath. As much of he oil sits above the tray, that little baffle don't do much.
Truly 'baffled' sumps have gates or cylinders surrounding the oil pick-up.
Yes the 2ZZ revs higher, has a shorter stroke and bigger crank throw so the windage will be different. Perhaps Toyota (Yamaha) tried a 2ZZ without the tray and found it made more power, so they took it out.
Before anyone says Toyota wouldn't come up with such a 'half' solution (as opposed to a gated sump) remember the piston oil holes!!
I'd also suggest that 'doing track days' and hard racing are very different. What works for one may not work for the other.
Baffled and gated sumps with wipers and extra capacity are the norm for racing (unless you go for the ultimate racer solution, which is a dry sump).
Very few of us really drive hard enough to notice a difference in 'real life'. :)
Quote from: Carolyn on December 17, 2018, 13:33
The 1ZZ sump isn't really baffled. It has a windage tray with a small single baffle underneath. As much of he oil sits above the tray, that little baffle don't do much.
Truly 'baffled' sumps have gates or cylinders surrounding the oil pick-up.
Yes the 2ZZ revs higher, has a shorter stroke and bigger crank throw so the windage will be different. Perhaps Toyota (Yamaha) tried a 2ZZ without the tray and found it made more power, so they took it out.
Before anyone says Toyota wouldn't come up with such a 'half' solution (as opposed to a gated sump) remember the piston oil holes!!
I'd also suggest that 'doing track days' and hard racing are very different. What works for one may not work for the other.
Baffled and gated sumps with wipers and extra capacity are the norm for racing (unless you go for the ultimate racer solution, which is a dry sump).
Very few of us really drive hard enough to notice a difference in 'real life'. :)
So many truths in here.... So. Many
I can't decide if the Eliseparts sump I've got on my wish list is overkill/just being flash and if I should just replace the old one with a new, standard 1zz one. There's nothing necessarily wrong with the current one but it's 18 years old.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If go for increased oil content over 2zz, and maybe lower the pickup and widen it. A moroso or the likes. Not sure what the Elise parts one is like
Quote from: shnazzle on December 17, 2018, 19:56
If go for increased oil content over 2zz, and maybe lower the pickup and widen it. A moroso or the likes. Not sure what the Elise parts one is like
It doesn't state anything about the pickup but carries an extra litre of oil, had fancy baffles and gates and is Xylan coated... And has pre fitted bosses for temp sensor and return pipes should the mood take me. And a magnetic drain plug included "free"...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I found the Moroso sump lowered temperature on the engine. The Elise and Moroso sump are very similar bigger volume and windages but I have never noticed any power differences
No the pickup isn't part of the sump technically so that would be a DIY job. But, you really. Don't need it
Quote from: shnazzle on December 17, 2018, 20:19
No the pickup isn't part of the sump technically so that would be a DIY job. But, you really. Don't need it
Pickup or Eliseparts sump, bearing in mind they're the same price as one of Angelina Jolie's kids...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Carolyn on December 16, 2018, 10:59
I happen to have both sumps in my workshop.
I measured their dimensions. They are both 140 mm deep (depending on the exact spot you measure) and they are identical except for the internals. It's weird that upside down they look absolutely identical but the extra tin-work makes them different to the eye when they are the other way up.
I'm not saying that this cancels Dev's point that Toyota had their reasons for using a differing sump on the 2ZZ. With the higher RPM of the 2ZZ, the 'windage' factors will be very different.
I was just curious to see if the stampings were, indeed, different. As far as I can tell, they aren't.
BTW, I run lowered scoop and an extra baffle in my 1ZZs.
There you go!
Interesting that the 1ZZ pan you have appears to be the same as the 2ZZ without the windage section.
It is possible that there are 2 different 1ZZ stampings.
I want to share my post on Spyderchat where I derived my information from which is based on the other 1ZZ stamping where it was observed.
QuoteA couple of points here. I was in the middle of compiling some research but I will give up some of it here.
1. The white paper is the gold standard and now that people are aware of it, it magically becomes wrong by some. It's rare to have the manufacture call something out by name and often times they will leave it out if its not significant to mention.
Fortunately the person I presented this information to has more then two brain cells not to use the 1ZZ oil pan not because they believed me.
Even if the Toyota design team were to speak frankly on the matter there are still going to be people performing mental gymnastics to keep the 1ZZ pan because it looks right.
It would be idiotic to second guess the manufacture but if anyone wants to call them out the burden of proof it's on them.
Oiling systems are complex. There are many kinds of baffles and the one used by Toyota in the 1ZZ oil pan acts more like a windage tray trying to prevent oil from sloshing up on the crank and trying to keep the oil pickup tube from uncovering. The 2zz has a louvered windage tray on the ladder because that is how they designed the engine to combat windage and keep oil off the crank especially at high RPMs which is bad for the motors high speed operation. Louvered windage trays are precisely made to help fling oil from the windage cloud in an angle back to the pan. If there is an obstacle like the pan walls or some other interference it can cause that energy to be bounced back to the crank instead of being absorbed by the pool of oil in the pan making the situation worse. I believe the 1ZZ pan baffle is that obstacal and that is why they called it out by name why they designed the pan without a baffle for high speed operation to quickly return oil back into the pan. The problem some people have is not being able to visualize the amount of violence that goes on in the pan during it's operation which is best left to the those that understand fluid dynamics and not the ignorant enthusiast that think he knows better.
2. The 1ZZ and 2ZZ pans are entirely different stampings. It's not simply the absence of the windage tray which is welded in, it's a different pan.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v608/CanteringCait/Cars/IMG_5896_zps65878614.jpg)
This was observed and measured by Jhonson who noticed that:
a. The distance from the pickup tube to the floor of the pan is different.
b. There is a difference in the ribbing on the bottom of the pan.
c. There is a difference in the shallow part of the pan where bays 3 and 4 are.
Jhonson goes on to say that he doesn't know the reason why but there is often a good reason and it bares consideration.
The only reason why Johnson recommends the 1ZZ pan is simply because of what people on this forum were advising others to do before he came into the picture. I'm sure if he is presented with the white paper he would no longer recommend it.
3. The 2ZZ crank scraper will not work with the 1ZZ pan period. This is where Jhonson is wrong because he hasn't tested to confirm it doesn't work. The baffles on the scraper that vector oil back into the main part of the pan interfere with the 1ZZ baffle. So thats that and something I should have emailed Johnson to let him know. Another thing to note is that Johnson provides clay with the pickup tube adjustment kit to make sure there is enough clearance because he is concerned about depth issues because of the pan differences.
As far as the crank scraper goes and the reasons why I purchased it can be debated but I can say that I'm happy with it. It's not going to be as good as a larger sump but I don't require a larger sump. However the crank scarper I believe has a benefit of preventing the aeration of the oil and removing more windage off the crank far more effectively then the stock windage tray. The baffles that direct oil back into the sump rather then pooling up on the opposite side of the engine also help but in all honesty it is probably not needed in a street driven Spyder. I did feel the crank scraper from my old review to add a little power but that could be a placebo effect./quote]
That's very informative, Dev, thanks for sharing it.
One last thing I would add is that one of the 1ZZ parts that is commonly aftermarket (and often replaced) is the sump. So it's not surprising there'd be variations out there.
Quote from: Carolyn on December 20, 2018, 09:36
That's very informative, Dev, thanks for sharing it.
One last thing I would add is that one of the 1ZZ parts that is commonly aftermarket (and often replaced) is the sump. So it's not surprising there'd be variations out there.
You are most welcome and happy to share. One of the big problems on most car forums (not this one) is assuming all things are good or all things are bad without understanding the design goals of the manufacture. This car is more or less still a street car.
There's a lot of confusing, and conflicting information on the various forums about sumps, particularly around the 1ZZ vs 2ZZ sump debate.
There's two different engineering problems at play here which often get confused.
The first problem (the main one most people on here want to solve) is oil surging due to high G cornering.
The second being problems caused by windage - the main issues are; oil frothing up resulting in air being to be picked up and circulated, and oil spashing onto pistons causing more friction resulting in power loss.
The windage plate is bolted to the bottom of the engine block in the 2ZZ, rather than incorporated into the sump like in the 1ZZ. It's likely the 2ZZ needed a different 'windage solution' as the effects are much greater with higher revving engines.
The 1ZZ sump is an elegant little design as it cheaply and easily solves the windage problem, and has the added benefit of helping with oil surging.
It looks like they didn't want to use the 1ZZ sump on the 2ZZ engine as this would result in two windage plates which would slow down the return of oil to the pickup (as alluded to in the white paper).
I'm guessing this is why they also tweaked the pickup position, and increased the oil capacity slightly, to offset against loosing the oil surge benefits of the 1ZZ sump design.
In summary, it doesn't really matter which you go for, both are compromised in some way:
-1ZZ sump has slightly better oil surge protection, at the expense of slightly slower return to the oil pick up.
-2ZZ sump has slightly quicker return to the oil pickup, at the expense of slightly less oil surge protection.
Quote from: DropLinked on December 28, 2018, 19:08
There's a lot of confusing, and conflicting information on the various forums about sumps, particularly around the 1ZZ vs 2ZZ sump debate.
There's two different engineering problems at play here which often get confused.
The first problem (the main one most people on here want to solve) is oil surging due to high G cornering.
The second being problems caused by windage - the main issues are; oil frothing up resulting in air being to be picked up and circulated, and oil spashing onto pistons causing more friction resulting in power loss.
The windage plate is bolted to the bottom of the engine block in the 2ZZ, rather than incorporated into the sump like in the 1ZZ. It's likely the 2ZZ needed a different 'windage solution' as the effects are much greater with higher revving engines.
The 1ZZ sump is an elegant little design as it cheaply and easily solves the windage problem, and has the added benefit of helping with oil surging.
It looks like they didn't want to use the 1ZZ sump on the 2ZZ engine as this would result in two windage plates which would slow down the return of oil to the pickup (as alluded to in the white paper).
I'm guessing this is why they also tweaked the pickup position, and increased the oil capacity slightly, to offset against loosing the oil surge benefits of the 1ZZ sump design.
In summary, it doesn't really matter which you go for, both are compromised in some way:
-1ZZ sump has slightly better oil surge protection, at the expense of slightly slower return to the oil pick up.
-2ZZ sump has slightly quicker return to the oil pickup, at the expense of slightly less oil surge protection.
Exactly. This is what I have been trying to convey. There have been 3 2zz cars reported on Spyderchat that used the 1ZZ sump and had failed engines on the track. The 1ZZ pan at best doesn't solve anything and at worse is only making things sub optimal.
On the whole from what I read from one of the publications both the 1ZZ and 2ZZ were made to handle 1G sustained and for some unknown reason its a flaw by some when in actuality the goal has been achieved by engineers.
For the street it would be very hard to create a problem unless you are running low on oil which a few people have made the mistake.
For any track use you need to upgrade based on the kind of conditions and even an aluminum sump will just raise the bar but may not be enough depending on the track. The end solution will probably be the dry sump but that comes with its own issues in terms of reliability.
An aluminum sump seems like a great idea but they also have some disadvantages.