HiluxSurf SSR-G
Senior Member
did you also port the intake/exhaust manifolds? a friend told me that that would also help and that they also port and polish the valves and valve seats
Jerod's Supercharged T[u]RD Build
- Thread starter gamefreakgc
- Start date
phattyduck
Elite Member
I don't like the placement on any of the top mount turbos. I'd consider a mid-mount (right in the downpipe area), but intake-side piping would be a huge pain.
The supercharger is a clear win for reliability (fewer parts), packaging and linear/predictable power. If you want to go big power (say, >100hp over stock), then the turbo makes more sense due to the efficiency improvements.
Or motor swap and maybe power adders from there (2jz or 2uz)...
-Charlie
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
I did not as it was not cost or time effective. I've had the intake manifold off before but with the black 4th Gen superchargers the runners going to each cylinder that cannot be ported due to their location it would not work well. It would go from little pipe, to big ported intake manifold. That's not good for performance.
A pair of ported cylinder heads was over $2000. Also not worth it.
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
MAF tuning is an ongoing struggle. My latest irk is that I can either get near 0 fuel trims under vacuum or an enriched cold start. Tried getting near 0 fuel trims and the thing would shake at 15-16 AFR at cold start, that wasn't going to work. Tried to get the cold start right at closer to 12 AFR, but the vacuum map was wonky and bogged down the engine at low RPM due to massive fuel trims. I think I have a compromise, I ended up enriching the O2 sensor at vacuum from 500-1000 RPM's to about 14.2. Calmed down the fuel trims which allowed me to get a decent enough cold start AFR. The warmer weather is also playing havoc on the tune but it's good enough for now.
MAF tuning is tricky.
MAF tuning is tricky.
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
Trying out something new today. I ordered a set of NGK Ruthenium plugs from Rockauto.com for $55: More Information for NGK 92400, part number FR7BHXS. These are two steps colder than stock, comparable to the heat range of IK22's. They are different than any other plug I've tried so far (IK22 and IK24) in that they have a smaller ground strap that extends over a ruthenium tip and are purposely made for forced induction engines like mine. Here's a shot comparing the old IK24's to the ruthenium:
There's all sorts of info about them here and how the spark kernel travels faster due to less obstruction. Ruthenium HX™ Spark Plugs | NGK Spark Plugs. Going to drive these for a few days then get some logs to see how it performs. Unfortunately, my old ones were already showing considerable wear after only 17K miles. Some of the gaps had opened to 0.039 in. I've noticed in my engine once they open larger than 0.035 I start to lose power. You'll also see below I had some considerable carbon buildup on the insulator on plug #5 (bottom left in the photo). The black isn't a shadow, that's carbon buildup. I think IK24's are slightly too cold for my engine.
There's all sorts of info about them here and how the spark kernel travels faster due to less obstruction. Ruthenium HX™ Spark Plugs | NGK Spark Plugs. Going to drive these for a few days then get some logs to see how it performs. Unfortunately, my old ones were already showing considerable wear after only 17K miles. Some of the gaps had opened to 0.039 in. I've noticed in my engine once they open larger than 0.035 I start to lose power. You'll also see below I had some considerable carbon buildup on the insulator on plug #5 (bottom left in the photo). The black isn't a shadow, that's carbon buildup. I think IK24's are slightly too cold for my engine.
19963.4lsr5
New member
#5 cylinder may be where most of the oil from the drivers side valve cover vent ends up......
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
19963.4lsr5
New member
You could also go coil on plug.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
That's a lot more work than I'm willing to do! Can't go standalone if I ever want to register my 4Runner either. I haven't really found any real issues with the stock 4Runner's ignition system, more of an annoyance than anything that it eats spark plugs.
19963.4lsr5
New member
You’re in California. Ok.
I thought about paralleling the 12v to a second coil on the drivers side using coils from a newer Kawasaki or a Ford or mopar that uses coil on plug.
You could also put an MSD6 on each coil. That will put the spark voltage above 60,000v. I thought about this also and I think the MSD box is carb compliant. Finding the room for 3 MSD’s might be difficult. I’ve used them a lot over the years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
phattyduck
Elite Member
That would still eat spark plugs, which is the issue he is having. I don't think he has ignition break-up issues when the plugs are in good shape.
-Charlie
19963.4lsr5
New member
It would allow for more gap erosion before the misfires start from the higher combustion pressures.........
Plus from experience the Mopar coil on plug from the 4.7l will fire an 1/8” gap with zero misfires.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
I like the ideas! Always open to learning new things and tackling issue from another angle. These plugs lasted me 2 1/2 years, so if that means I do plug changes every 2 years or so I'm ok with that. Not like it's hard or anything, not like my dad's GMC where you have to remove the steering column and both front wheels to get to the spark plugs!
19963.4lsr5
New member
I’ve been so close to pulling the trigger on 3 MSD6 boxes to see if I get a mpg improvement. Or a DIS4 used. But the DIS4’s are expensive.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
On other engines I've worked on it's much easier to get an MPG improvement. Not so much on the 5VZ-FE. The only things that have made a difference was the headers, exhaust, and ethanol-free fuel. Despite the massive changes I've made I still get 19/13 MPG highway/city with 17.2 combined average. Best ever (not on fuelly) was 21.5 MPG on ethanol free Oregon 93 octane. Man that was a fun road trip gunning that thing!
19963.4lsr5
New member
On other engines I've worked on it's much easier to get an MPG improvement. Not so much on the 5VZ-FE. The only things that have made a difference was the headers, exhaust, and ethanol-free fuel. Despite the massive changes I've made I still get 19/13 MPG highway/city with 17.2 combined average. Best ever (not on fuelly) was 21.5 MPG on ethanol free Oregon 93 octane. Man that was a fun road trip gunning that thing!
My last two tanks with 89 were 21.2-21.5mpg.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
Well, I have bad news for us data-driven analytic people. I've been doing my tuning and Virtual Dyno runs on a nearby road just outside of my neighborhood. The road is 2 lanes but wide enough to be 5 lanes so it's safe enough for me to avoid obstacles at speed if need be. This winter, some potholes and ripples in the road have developed and is causing wheel slip on my 4Runner when I hit them going 70-80 MPH. This causes RPM spikes as I lose traction and is playing havoc on my AFR tuning as well as the data for Virtual Dyno. I tried again last night and got a 20HP spread between back to back runs because of this. I can actually see the RPM spike in the data. Wasn't so much of an issue when this thing was slower ha. At this point I have to wait and see if they pave the road (Roseville recently paved their half of the road recently) or find another tuning location for dyno runs. I still plan on installing the 2.0" pulley again soon though, now that I've got an intake and exhaust to handle it's voracious appetite for air.
I had hoped to post up a chart with the addition of the recent Ruthenium spark plugs but I can't get consistent and reliable data. My unscientific personal opinion is seeing a slight increase in MPG's and a recovery in power due to my old plugs being worn out. Not sure if there's a power gain though, if there's one it is too slight for me to notice.
I had hoped to post up a chart with the addition of the recent Ruthenium spark plugs but I can't get consistent and reliable data. My unscientific personal opinion is seeing a slight increase in MPG's and a recovery in power due to my old plugs being worn out. Not sure if there's a power gain though, if there's one it is too slight for me to notice.
Last edited:
phattyduck
Elite Member
I have a feeling you've tapped out the flow due to the the cams/heads and you won't see much gains... crossed fingers I am wrong!
-Charlie
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
I have the high-lift cams that blew up my last engine still in the shed if I want to try! Shim spacers + old tired valve springs = quick engine death. I also have a much larger 5 GPH methanol nozzle in the mail. I'm running about a 3 GPH right now. If I can tune it right it might allow for a denser charge and help fight the extreme heat the 2.0" pulley creates.
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
I almost destroyed my supercharger today.
I installed the 2.0" pulley back on the supercharger last night and installed a 5 GPH methanol nozzle to go with it. The pulley went on further than before but I left a 1-2 mm gap between the pulley and the supercharger snout. Destroyed the 2.1" pullet taking it off, the metal was too soft and the pulley had seized up on the snout.
I took it out on the road this morning. Did some incremental passes with more and more throttle. Seemed a little sluggish but I blamed that on the tune that was probably too rich due to the larger methanol nozzle. Decided to do a WOT run and it ran poorly. Was way down on power so I decide to call it quits and look at my data logs for answers. About 500 ft from my house I heard a awful grinding noise coming from the supercharger. I get it in the garage and open the hood to see that the 2.0" pulley had not only contacted the snout, the heat and friction had actually started melting the pulley!!
The back side of the pulley had been completely stripped off. The problem is that the center of the pulley is supposed to sit flush on the shaft stop, allowing the key and nut to hold it in place. The 2.0" doesn't fit on the shaft stop so it's allowed to drift. Mine shifted to the supercharger snout and contacted and it all went bad from there. To quote myself from 3 years ago:
Add me to the list. I'm settling for now with my 225 ml/min or 3.5 GPH nozzle and the 2.1" pulley, once my new one arrives. That will give me roughly 15% methanol fuel to 85% pump gas which is what most companies recommend. And I just hope that my supercharger didn't sustain any long term damage. It's more expensive than the engine!
I installed the 2.0" pulley back on the supercharger last night and installed a 5 GPH methanol nozzle to go with it. The pulley went on further than before but I left a 1-2 mm gap between the pulley and the supercharger snout. Destroyed the 2.1" pullet taking it off, the metal was too soft and the pulley had seized up on the snout.
I took it out on the road this morning. Did some incremental passes with more and more throttle. Seemed a little sluggish but I blamed that on the tune that was probably too rich due to the larger methanol nozzle. Decided to do a WOT run and it ran poorly. Was way down on power so I decide to call it quits and look at my data logs for answers. About 500 ft from my house I heard a awful grinding noise coming from the supercharger. I get it in the garage and open the hood to see that the 2.0" pulley had not only contacted the snout, the heat and friction had actually started melting the pulley!!
The back side of the pulley had been completely stripped off. The problem is that the center of the pulley is supposed to sit flush on the shaft stop, allowing the key and nut to hold it in place. The 2.0" doesn't fit on the shaft stop so it's allowed to drift. Mine shifted to the supercharger snout and contacted and it all went bad from there. To quote myself from 3 years ago:
Add me to the list. I'm settling for now with my 225 ml/min or 3.5 GPH nozzle and the 2.1" pulley, once my new one arrives. That will give me roughly 15% methanol fuel to 85% pump gas which is what most companies recommend. And I just hope that my supercharger didn't sustain any long term damage. It's more expensive than the engine!
Last edited:
