3.4 build, worth doing or not ??

Hi Guys

Over the next year or so I'm wanting to build myself a new engine. More of a challenge for me than anything else really. The ideal senario would be a 3.4ltr stroker kit, BUT is it actually worth all the extra money in comparison to a built 3ltr.

I know I'll get a quicker spool as my turbo is quite large (GT42-76 with 1.28 A/R), but are there any other benifits of the 3.4 over the 3.0.

I've got a spare bare block so I wouldn't need to remove my own engine until it's built so that's good news. I also have a good spare crank for a 3.0 but odviously that will need changing for a 3.4.

Any opinions would be greatly valued and taken on board.

Thanks

John

There a bit of info on here, with comparison data vs a 3.0:

http://www.supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?480370-3.0L-vs-3.4L-comparison...details-inside...

im not going to be much help, but if i was going to do an all out build , id bore it bu leave the stock sroke is 3.2 possible just from boreing ?

im not going to be much help, but if i was going to do an all out build , id bore it bu leave the stock sroke is 3.2 possible just from boreing ?

No it's not possible. I'm sure 3.1 is the largest rebore possible which is .04" bigger, please someone correct me if I'm wrong here.

There a bit of info on here, with comparison data vs a 3.0:

 

http://www.supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?480370-3.0L-vs-3.4L-comparison...details-inside...

That's great info thanks bud.

By the looks of it I'll get faster spook by around 800rpm and not a great deal else to be honest.

I totally love how my car drives at the minute, it's very streetable and when it comes onto boost it's gradual until just over 4k then it comes in hard. Reading between the lines I think I'd be a fool to change the setup at all apart from sticking a built 3.0ltr bottom end in there with the same ratios as stock just for piece of mind really.

Also thinking along the lines of costing, this will save me 2.5 grand not having to buy a crank.

But you know you really want to build an .04" bigger, stroked 3.5ish litre with shim-less buckets and a dry sump.

But you know you really want to build an .04" bigger, stroked 3.5ish litre with shim-less buckets and a dry sump.

Don't get my wrong David, the appeal of it being in my eyes the ultimate supra setup is eating away at me. By ultimate setup I mean "3.4, big single, manual, TRD wide-bodied, Aerotop".

But financially I think I'd just be spending the extra thousands for pub talk if you know what I mean.

I really do love everything about the drive of my Supra, so to change it would be crazy. It could end up being a huge regret just to say I've got a bigger stick, so to speak.

I agree, just teasing.

I agree, just teasing.

Tinker lol

The Titan built KDW 3.4 seemed to do pretty well once Ryan mapped it

The Titan built KDW 3.4 seemed to do pretty well once Ryan mapped it

Totally agree Wez BUT I've no interest in that much power, mine is ridiculous as it is. And to pay well over 5K just so my turbo spools quicker is madness. At 900hp I've got NO traction issues what so ever so for me the drivability is perfect. I think I'm best off just dropping a built short block in with my current setup.

Totally agree Wez BUT I've no interest in that much power, mine is ridiculous as it is. And to pay well over 5K just so my turbo spools quicker is madness. At 900hp I've got NO traction issues what so ever so for me the drivability is perfect. I think I'm best off just dropping a built short block in with my current setup.

John,

That post would suggest to me that you should stick where you are (if you can)..

You could easliy spend a sh!t load of money and end up with a car that is less enjoyable to drive. People always want what they haven't got, not many people find perfection....

H.

I say a built 3.0ltr is the way to go. We simply do not have the roads to exploit what a 3.4 can do over a 3.0. Too many pot-holes, speed cameras, NA's, etc.

Built 3.0 IMO.

If you are happy with the spool time stay with the 3.0L, I want to go with a bigger turbo myself and still want the big power band, I will most likely go 3.4L and 80mm turbo soon, if I can get a setup with the same size power band that I have now I will be happy.

Your best bet might be to build a 3.0L and raise the rev limit so you get the big power band.

If you have the money I would go for it. The strokers improve the engine in everyway, more torque and more bhp across the rev range, lower down where you need it on a road car to. I've driven similar spec cars back to back on the road, one standard stroke and the other 3.4 and the difference in low down response was amazing,perfect for a road car. I really miss that low down torque my car had when it was 3.4, I'm just about to start building a new engine for mine with custom Mahle stroker pistons, Carrilo rods and BC crank actually. Wont be done untl next year though, just doing it on the side when I can.

i would go for 3.4 if i had the money but then i would go manual too. think of the extra torque it would produce, it would snap necks mate,

My take is it's a long stroke engine anyway, an even longer stroke will up the torque (more lever arm effect) but they are nothing like as smooth or free revving as a 3 litre stock stroke engine. There again the 3 litre is a shaker compared to the ultra smooth 2.5 litre 1JZ. Boring to get the biggest possible bore in the 2JZ block may gain you a few cc's capacity, but it also potentially makes the bores less stable because they are thinner. I would want to sonically check a block for core shift before boring more than 86.5 on a race engine. It is very hard to find anyone truly competent at line boring steel main caps in the UK. I know two places, both are expensive. It seems a popular mod when fitting a stroker crank. If I went to the expense of a stroker engine I would have Farndons or Arrow in the UK make me one, rather than risk a Chinese one. I would also buy the caps in the UK, but never having seen cap walk, or a broken cap with a stock block, I'd be in no hurry to fit steel main caps, eve on a serious engine. For a road car a stroker might add yet more torque, but at the cost of smoothness. For a race engine I would rather turn the stock stroke engine a little faster and keep the piston and rod loads lower.

I still think a big block N/A Chevy would be nice, no less economical, and a far better road car engine than a mega HP huge turbo 2JZ, with all its lag and near vertical power curve An LS9 would be even nicer... Amazed no one has done this given the money thrown around at times. They have "proper" torque curves

But Chris, the sound, THE SOUND of the V8 is just not "supra" :-D

I friend of mine (well, actually I have two who did it) spend 10-20k£ on building a HKS stroker. He matched that with a pair of HKS Twins (don't remember their name, GT2835 or something) and that made 700-750hp. That was a "low" state of tune and it just runs very very well. Everything was build to handle much more and the car was used more or less as a daily driver. No dyno queen or 10 minutes warmup before driving. Just start it up and go. Nothing broke and only complaint was the price. So, if you want to go "exotic" supra, then that is - in my mind - the way. But make sure to not save anywhere. Get supporting mods, do got for 1000 hps, as that will ruin it as a drivable car on the road. Don't do this for the hp bragging right but to get the ultimate, muscular 2JZ. Expect running costs to rise due to clutches and so on. I know tripple plate HKS clutches aren't cheap.

I am not so sure Hodge, you already have a fantastic setup.

Maybe worth going out in a 3.4 with a similar turbo to see if it does anything for you?

Can always do it as a project to "suck it and see". If you don't like it, sell it on for what you paid and chalk the time you spent building it down to "playing"

Depends what your aim is, a project, or power. They seem to be different targets. I would take Scott's advice. He is like a guru of knowledge, or is the saying a book of knowledge, hmmm, or is it, a leaflet of knowledge.

FWIW I don't think the cost to benefit ratio is worthwhile of 3.4 over 3.0 L.

If your gonna stick to the same size turbo just keep it to a 3.0

If your future plans involve a turbo 80mm and upwards its worth considering a 3.4.

Turbo technology is advancing so quickly nowadays that the spool benefit is only a factor when your gonna be going over 1000whp.

Even then setups like Jamie's make it seem alot more worthwhile to save and stick to a 3.0.

Forge the 3.0 and with the money saved you can buy a billet version of your Turbo and the car would be an awesome 1000hp car.

Have you seen the Spool on Kims 3.4l 88mm Turbo. I want to know if its his turbo or 3.4.

If your gonna stick to the same size turbo just keep it to a 3.0

 

If your future plans involve a turbo 80mm and upwards its worth considering a 3.4.

 

Turbo technology is advancing so quickly nowadays that the spool benefit is only a factor when your gonna be going over 1000whp.

Even then setups like Jamie's make it seem alot more worthwhile to save and stick to a 3.0.

Forge the 3.0 and with the money saved you can buy a billet version of your Turbo and the car would be an awesome 1000hp car.

I really dont see what the arguement is, if you can afford it then yes, its a no brainer, I know from personal experience how good these are, it just comes down to money at the end of the day.