2020 Supra B58 Engine Teardown - First Look - Better than the 2JZ?

[Carnut1]

Some very cool tech in this engine. I am not a fan of the integrated exhaust manifold. I also wonder how durable that rocker ratio changing system is on the intakes.

The integrated exhaust manifold is for turbine response. They are minimizing the volume between the exhaust valves and the turbine.

With a log style integrated exhaust manifold? I hate it. Impossible to port. I guess if it is designed well from a volume/ flow standpoint it will work with higher than stock output. Thanks, Charlie

[peejay]

the chain at the back of the engine , this was only done initially for a crash rating , and has cost them dearly on the 4cylinder diesel .

Chain on the back makes a lot of sense for NVH and packaging reasons. The majority of the chain noise can be lost in the bellhousing, and the cam sprockets can be in the back over the transmission instead of up front fighting the hood and the radiator for room. I also have a sneaking suspicion that it cuts harmonics down a lot, since the drive end is attached to that big mass known as the rest of the drivetrain.

People hate rear chain engines because they're hard to service. But to be honest, when most modern cars need a chain when they are EASY to service, the whole car gets thrown away, so it's immaterial.

[volodkovich]

To me this isn't a true performance engine. Its well built and engineered no doubt, but performance is well down the list over emissions and economy. Makes sense too, as its just the 540i / SUV engine, nothing 'special'v by modern engine design really. I'd like to see the S58 version that will be in the M3.

It is interesting to me that the newer engine designs are going back to a deep skirted block with individual main caps with little or no bracing - BMW B58, Mercedes M139, Toyota 8AR etc. Anyone have any thoughts on why they have stopped using the integrated main cap girdle split at the crank centerline?

Regarding the integrated exhaust manifold, it seems to be the way they are all going these days. They work well for boost response and emissions but have limitations on race engines - interestingly the Mercedes AMG M139 has conventional ex ports with a nice looking investment cast short-runner turbo manifold. 416hp from 2000cc, highest power/L production 4cyl. I suspect the performance was higher on the priority list for that engine.

[gunt]

the timing chain in the diesel has been known to fail before 25k , although very rarely in the 6cyl diesel ,
as regards theres an unreal amount of crap that has serious issues in the range of engines .

i would put it that the log in the head is far more of manufacturing cost / speed, less materials , less components to fail , mating surface , as i'd say back to back you could get the std manifold design far better for emissions due to individual cylinder mapping .

but consider all these engines have the NOX catalyst , which could be viewed will help clean up the flaws in this and they pull back the cost with this of the emissions set up which is mandatory

[peejay]

the timing chain in the diesel has been known to fail before 25k , although very rarely in the 6cyl diesel ,
as regards theres an unreal amount of crap that has serious issues in the range of engines .

i would put it that the log in the head is far more of manufacturing cost / speed, less materials , less components to fail , mating surface , as i'd say back to back you could get the std manifold design far better for emissions due to individual cylinder mapping .

but consider all these engines have the NOX catalyst , which could be viewed will help clean up the flaws in this and they pull back the cost with this of the emissions set up which is mandatory

Why are we concerning ourselves with a Diesel engine?

I wouldn't doubt that a 4 cylinder OHC Diesel would have timing chain issues. There's a lot of beating on the crank going on.

[LoganD]

To me this isn't a true performance engine. Its well built and engineered no doubt, but performance is well down the list over emissions and economy. Makes sense too, as its just the 540i / SUV engine, nothing 'special'v by modern engine design really. I'd like to see the S58 version that will be in the M3.

This engine is better than any engine you've ever worked with modifying. It's amazing to me that people are shitting on engines that can make so much power so easily.

It is interesting to me that the newer engine designs are going back to a deep skirted block with individual main caps with little or no bracing - BMW B58, Mercedes M139, Toyota 8AR etc. Anyone have any thoughts on why they have stopped using the integrated main cap girdle split at the crank centerline?

It's cheaper and stronger. Also, one less leak path.

Regarding the integrated exhaust manifold, it seems to be the way they are all going these days. They work well for boost response and emissions but have limitations on race engines - interestingly the Mercedes AMG M139 has conventional ex ports with a nice looking investment cast short-runner turbo manifold. 416hp from 2000cc, highest power/L production 4cyl. I suspect the performance was higher on the priority list for that engine.

Mercedes would like to have an integrated exhaust manifold on the M139, but it's a cost/tooling issue. They need that head, which the basic tooling for is used on many of their 2.0 engines, to fit in a bunch of different chassis. That means you need to be able to move the turbo around. BMW have done this in the past with their turbo I-6s.

A turbine works on pressure drop, so you want to keep the volume down and the temp high.

[hoffman900]

To me this isn't a true performance engine. Its well built and engineered no doubt, but performance is well down the list over emissions and economy. Makes sense too, as its just the 540i / SUV engine, nothing 'special'v by modern engine design really. I'd like to see the S58 version that will be in the M3.

This engine is better than any engine you've ever worked with modifying. It's amazing to me that people are shitting on engines that can make so much power so easily.

There seems to be a lot of that here.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

To me this isn't a true performance engine. Its well built and engineered no doubt, but performance is well down the list over emissions and economy. Makes sense too, as its just the 540i / SUV engine, nothing 'special'v by modern engine design really. I'd like to see the S58 version that will be in the M3.

This engine is better than any engine you've ever worked with modifying. It's amazing to me that people are shitting on engines that can make so much power so easily.

There seems to be a lot of that here.

More R&D in that engine than all 1960's era muscle car engines combined (probably by many multiples).

[Sparksalot]

So... the games have begun.

That there is more R and D in this engine than all from the "muscle car engines combined" is a throwaway. Different times! Things were different then. I was there then as I am now and have witnessed and done the whole nine yards.

Fifty years later we have analytical tools at our disposal no one could possibly have dreamed of. They are used for design and can hone design to where it needs to be to accomplish meeting a set of specifications with the most economical solution, that's how good engineering and business is accomplished. That alone suggests this engine was engineered to low price with fine engineering. That's what keeps companies in business.

The 2JZ was done when all of those tools were not available: it was overbuilt for reliability and well done for those of us who discovered how strong it was and turned it into a beast.

[WoundUp]

Doesn't the NA V6 Camaro use an integrated exhaust manifold? They picked up something like 7% more flow on the intake and 10% on the exhaust from that change alone.

It appears that it also benefits NA engines. So it's not just a turbo deal, it would seem.

[JoePorting]

This engine seems to be needlessly complicated. For example, why not just use a typical screw on oil filter? Why reinvent how the front damper attached to the crank? Timing chain in the back sounds like a bad idea when something breaks. Seems like a bunch of engineers decided to do everything different just to be different.

[Kevin Johnson]

... Why reinvent how the front damper attached to the crank? Timing chain in the back sounds like a bad idea when something breaks. Seems like a bunch of engineers decided to do everything different just to be different.

It was a modular engine design (3, 4, 6) and, as has been pointed out, linking both skirts in a contiguous casting at the pan rail is stronger. Once that decision was made the path of insertion/installation becomes important so that constrains the fore and aft crank extremities.

I like that BMW still uses bearing inserts with locating tangs but creates them in such a way that they do not interfere with the bearing surface itself.

[peejay]

This engine seems to be needlessly complicated. For example, why not just use a typical screw on oil filter?

You'll find that with very few exceptions, European engines will use cartridge filters. IIRC it is something to do with ensuring that all waste products can be incinerated.

Personally, I prefer them. No need for a filter cutter. And if you're cheap, you can pull the filter, eyeball it, and put it back in for another 3,000mi

[bentvalves]

the oil filter being cartridge style is nothing to even bat an eye at, no big deal!

the plastic intake plenum, rear timing chain, and NASA valvetrain however........

its cool, its going to make a bunch of steam modified, and times are a changing.

I'd prefer RB26/2JZ late 80's tech any day because of the shear simplicity. Only thing those two are missing are direct injection.

I bet the bores in this engine are Nikasil plated as well, which is obviously advantageous from a durability standpoint.

[hoffman900]

The rear timing chain reduces camshaft angular velocity due to being closer to more inertia mass. As you can imagine, the camshaft accelerates and decelerates with each power pulse. Those camshaft numbers you painstakingly dial in? Yeah, well, due to changes in angular velocity, the timing is going to be different over the length of the shaft due to twisting. Furthermore, the lobe may be accelerating / decelerating at different points and can add to valvetrain stress and instances of float. This is why a 1cyl needs a smoother profile than a twin which needs to be smoother than an I4, and so on and so forth.

All of this is well documented. There are several Formula One white papers on this and why they were coming up with camshaft dampers, quill drives, etc... Honda has also documented how adding weight to camshafts and the timing gear reduce angular velocity changes by over 25%. This increases the rev ceiling for a given valvetrain / lobe / spring design, which obviously increases performance (and reliability).

Unfortunately here, people poo poo things that are different, when they should be asking “why?”, “what are they trying to solve?”, “can I solve that same problem on my application?”, “can I realize a solution to increase performance?”, but nope. It’s new and “complicated”, so that means it probably sucks.

Does this effect what most work on? Absolutely. This all lead me to ask Billy Godbold some questions, and he said they have noticed better dynamics on the Spintron by bolting unfinished cam masters to the front cam sprocket, and is why he recommends a heavier steel cam sprocket. They have also pointed out how cam driven oil pumps (like on a Sprint Car) work as cam dampers as well... and allow them to use more aggressive lobes, reliably, than they would be able to use otherwise. And keep in mind, the Spintron is a steady state force, no power pulses like on a firing engine.

I think one thing that defined a Bill Jenkins and Smokey Yunick and defines guys like Jon Kaase are open, inquisitive minds. Solutions to a problem, like Toyota has done, should get your gears turning (pun intended) and think about what is going on.