HELP ! Not sure about V6 conversion

[MID LIFE CRISIS]

Try get a spin in one before you spend the readies.

I'll happily take you out in mine if you willing to travel up to west yorkshire. And if you can bring proof you have appropriate insurance you can drive too.

I think 95+ 3vz models were 200hp as standard up until the 1mz alloy v6 was used. Not much changed, only bit I know is that the exhaust side of the heads were slightly better ported.

How about that ? To be offered a drive in someone's else's V6 is amazing, what a great guy ! Thanks mate. Have spoken to Matt at Rogue earlier in the week and he offered the same, and he's only 15 mins away. I really really appreciate the offer though, Thanks again.

Jayson

[MID LIFE CRISIS]

Many many thanks to you all , sorry i've not replied till now but i've been viewing bits on TwoBrutal and finding out info about the swap. Snazbaz has a great pic filled build, not seen it all yet though.

Jayson

[Rubber Chicken]

let us know what the drive's like?

[Poohbear]

great times bob, and excellent 60ft I here.
But it's obvious you can drive the v6 and the tubby owners can't drive there's on that day, LOL. The rev4 should be running 13.6-13.8 easy enough as standard. Lightly modded rev1/2s should be running the same or quicker.

Just to get this into perspective, in a straight line, the turbo should be and is faster.
But as Paul desribed, round the twisties it's no dout easier to drive the v6 faster than a stock tubby. Na natured and all.
but in the right hands, the tubby will be quicker.

I love the idea of the v6, and can't wait to here one in the flesh!!
Watched tons of videos tho, LOL.

I agree with what you say...but ultimately they all had the chance to drive under the same conditions as I did and were no quicker...I cannot believe it is entirely down to my driving skills (last time I dragged a car was 28 years ago).

What I will say is that in both of my decent runs the V6 pulled out an fair advantage over the first 1/8th of a mile but lost some of that over the second 1/8th I think probably most of this is related to the NA gearbox having good ratios in the lower gears. Maybe this is related to the times that I got in relation to the fairly standard turbo guys??

I'm not a turbo hater, I can see the attraction of fairly easy power gains for the money spent, I've just never particularly wanted to own one. For me the V6 offers a good compromise between staying NA but also having some useful power.

When I was watching some of the other jap metal going down the track which included Civic TypeR's, DC5's, S2000's, sx200's etc and they were only making times in the 15's I felt pretty impressed by the car. Obviously a 250-350 bhp turbo MR2 is going to feel pretty special too, but then it should do having that level of power available.

As to the OP...get a drive in a sorted V6 that runs well and I'm sure you will be impressed.

Bob

[brgbrm]

I have both an na and a v6, and I think if you feel the normal na is fast enough, then you don't *need* to switch to the v6. If one is driving safely on public roads then I think the performance of a normal na is really good.

I really like both my cars, for different reasons. I kind of like the increased effort I have to put in with the 2.0l to keep the revs up, to get the most out of it, but on the other hand it's not, IMHO, adequate for a track, and I see my v6 as 80% road / 20% track.

Having said all this sensible stuff, moving to a somewhat different consideration, ie you are getting very old, do what I did and get a v6 while you can still appreciate it; to hell with sense - listen to the foxy stoat recording and be instantly smitten like I was!

[jimGTS]

it must be down to there lack of skills Bob caused stock rev3s do and should run mid to high 13s. Seen countless times.
Any mr2 pulling a sub 2sec 60ft time means it's launched well, so 28years or not, you obviously haven't forgot, LOL

Yeh it is kinda weird seeing other so called sports car making slow-ish times, makes you feel you've chosen well, LOL.

[MID LIFE CRISIS]

I have both an na and a v6, and I think if you feel the normal na is fast enough, then you don't *need* to switch to the v6. If one is driving safely on public roads then I think the performance of a normal na is really good.

I really like both my cars, for different reasons. I kind of like the increased effort I have to put in with the 2.0l to keep the revs up, to get the most out of it, but on the other hand it's not, IMHO, adequate for a track, and I see my v6 as 80% road / 20% track.

Having said all this sensible stuff, moving to a somewhat different consideration, ie you are getting very old, do what I did and get a v6 while you can still appreciate it; to hell with sense - listen to the foxy stoat recording and be instantly smitten like I was!

Bloody hell, I'm not THAT old ! lol

[antnkel]

"It's great to be able to beat slow-ish times" in "so called sports cars"
Some people will always be negitive about v6's no matter what.
Shame!

[Blacklightning66]

for 30 HP increase is it really worth the hassle?

I can add 3psi for the same power boost.

If i was going to V6 mine, it would have to have atleast 350HP and from a 3 liter V6 should be fairly easy to make, but for 188HP and a some more torque hardly seems worth it if only for the sound.

but to fit any FE engine Economy narrow-angle valve lump in place of a 3S is madness!

[splintermcinnes]

for 30 HP increase is it really worth the hassle?

I can add 3psi for the same power boost.

If i was going to V6 mine, it would have to have atleast 350HP and from a 3 liter V6 should be fairly easy to make, but for 188HP and a some more torque hardly seems worth it if only for the sound.

but to fit any FE engine Economy narrow-angle valve lump in place of a 3S is madness!

Pah! down with the haters!

its not really about the power figures, it becomes a whole different driving experience.

then as you say it is an ecoonomy drand engine, but with some light tuning and it'll keep up with the best of 'em! and like me with head work and cams you can unleash a lot more power from the block! mine will be a beast when shes done!

[Blacklightning66]

Id love the V6 if it was a performance engine out the box, but its not its a "cruiser" lump for blatting up and down motorways with easy/lazy driving.

a 3 liter V6 with performance heads should be doing 280HP all day long and love having the boobs ragged off it.

[splintermcinnes]

a 3 liter V6 with performance heads should be doing 280HP all day long and love having the boobs ragged off it.

She will be - and then some! hahaha!

[antnkel]

For a lazy fe engine it can keep up with the rev 1/2 tubby thats without any mods done.

[Blacklightning66]

For a lazy fe engine it can keep up with the rev 1/2 tubby thats without any mods done.

but it would have to try hard?, i can wind up my boost and leave it dead in the water...

For the price of doing the conversion for a piddaly 30hp increase and only 180lbs ft of torque (but far lower than the 3SGE so less gear changes for overtaking) To me its not cost effective.

Id want a vast power hike and far more revvy v6 - that would be amazing at a track day and the sound.

If you want to chuck a performance V6 in try and fit a 2.0 MIVEC V6 from a FTO - that is a fantastic engine, so usable, 200HP and revs to 9K and the sound is sexual! That is what I would fit for a sporty V6 not a low power 3.0 not built for sporty driving.

[antnkel]

You say the engine from the fto has 200hp thats not much different from 188 is it

[Blacklightning66]

You say the engine from the fto has 200hp thats not much different from 188 is it

And your completley missing the point, the MIVEC is a 2 liter high performance engine.

The Toyota V6 has another 1liter and can only manage 188hp as its not a engine suited to high performance driving, it ment to cruise in top gear at about 2800rpm and get good millage in a heavy car for old Japanese middle managment types, the engine is lazy and was made to have low down lazy torque, that is why it is a FE engine with restricitve heads and tame cams to cater for the type of driving it was made for- which IMO is not how you drive a MR2!

Splinters one that is being built sound like the type of Engine that will suit the 2, and if its done right should unleash hell!

Replacing stock with stock, dont think its worth the hassle.

If someone could tune the v6 to put out aroun d 320hp and rev to 8K Id fit one to my 2 with out question and ditch the turbo lump.

[Mikey P MR2]

Taking a v6 mr2 to Santa pod seems a bit of waste of time if it can only manage mid 14’s as most other Jap cars can manage this easily without having to have a £2.5k engine conversion done.
If you’re into going fast in a straight line a rev3+ tubby is the way to go, I think v6’s are best left to road use.

[splintermcinnes]

You say the engine from the fto has 200hp thats not much different from 188 is it

Mine was 202 bhp and 210 ft/lb's out the box!!

Blacklightning - i think you should try and get a ride a V6'd '2. more than enough to convice ya! All i saw was the foxxxxystoat vid and i wanted one - a ride in one would have definatly pushed me over the fence if i was umming and ahhing over it!

[antnkel]

For starters I have the 1mz engine which is about 200bh stock and has had some head work done as well as a couple of other mods which will see it well over 200hp

[Blacklightning66]

You say the engine from the fto has 200hp thats not much different from 188 is it

Mine was 202 bhp and 210 ft/lb's out the box!!

Blacklightning - i think you should try and get a ride a V6'd '2. more than enough to convice ya! All i saw was the foxxxxystoat vid and i wanted one - a ride in one would have definatly pushed me over the fence if i was umming and ahhing over it!

it would have to have over 300hp to make me want to ditch the turbo lump Im already running 13.1 SQM at 12 psi so its already much faster lol