Jump to content

Registered users (members) don’t see this ad!

Sign in to follow this  
jboogs1zzfe

Turbo Charging My 1zzfe 2000 Corolla

Recommended Posts

https://www.corolland.com/forums/index.php?...hl=supercharged

Lol, this is your exact same topic from last summer jbooqs. I just found that out when I was doing searching for old topics on "supercharger".

 

 

I sometimes wonder why people would want to add a turbo when a SCer kit was made by TRD. As far as the engine being able to handle the extra power, TRD has tested it. It can hold a little boost.

 

I would personally do the SCer option because a turbo with a MBC can over boost when it gets too cold out. It would be too easy to ruin the engine with a turbo and it's too tempting to turn the boost up.

 

If someone really has money for a full turbo kit, then why not keep the rolla stock and buy a Mustang for going fast? I got a good fox body 5.0 for 4800. By good I mean, hardly any rust, tons of mods, fast, and low original miles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trap
https://www.corolland.com/forums/index.php?...hl=supercharged

Lol, this is your exact same topic from last summer jbooqs. I just found that out when I was doing searching for old topics on "supercharger".

 

 

I sometimes wonder why people would want to add a turbo when a SCer kit was made by TRD. As far as the engine being able to handle the extra power, TRD has tested it. It can hold a little boost.

 

I would personally do the SCer option because a turbo with a MBC can over boost when it gets too cold out. It would be too easy to ruin the engine with a turbo and it's too tempting to turn the boost up.

 

If someone really has money for a full turbo kit, then why not keep the rolla stock and buy a Mustang for going fast? I got a good fox body 5.0 for 4800. By good I mean, hardly any rust, tons of mods, fast, and low original miles.

That is my recommendation as well.

Use the Corolla as it was intended. If you want to go really fast or race, get a performance car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TRD makes a SC for the 03 and 04 corolla. Both of which uses the 1zzfe vvt-i engine. I thought the same goes for the 00-02 corollas as well. So why is it that TRD only makes a SC for 03-04 and no other corolla that uses the same exact engine (ie. 00-02, 05-07)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I sometimes wonder why people would want to add a turbo when a SCer kit was made by TRD. As far as the engine being able to handle the extra power, TRD has tested it. It can hold a little boost.

 

I would personally do the SCer option because a turbo with a MBC can over boost when it gets too cold out. It would be too easy to ruin the engine with a turbo and it's too tempting to turn the boost up.

 

If someone really has money for a full turbo kit, then why not keep the rolla stock and buy a Mustang for going fast? I got a good fox body 5.0 for 4800. By good I mean, hardly any rust, tons of mods, fast, and low original miles.

A Mustang? Maybe if I want a headache every 3,000 miles. That's why the resale values on Fords are hilarious. I could sell my 98' Corolla with 64k miles and probably pick up an 02' or an 03' Mustang with half the mileage for the same price. Ford = junk

 

 

As for turbochargers, I'm ususally against them and prefer superchargers. It's just my bias; most of the best performance cars like the Corolla Compressor, Lotus Exige S, or the Mercedes SLR use superchargers. Superchargers are generally less hostile towards fuel economy, wear-and-tear, turbo-lag, and other problems associated with turbochargers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, mustang is crap! and nothing else but

I've driven an 06 mustang and its 0-60 is gigglingly, and must not forget embarrassingly, slow. For a 4L producing ONLY 210hp is crap. 4L = more fuel. 210hp to a 3500lb car = slow accel. O yea, all body and no interior room.

Edited by twinky64

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, mustang is crap! and nothing else but

I've driven an 06 mustang and its 0-60 is gigglingly, and must not forget embarrassingly, slow. For a 4L producing ONLY 210hp is crap. 4L = more fuel. 210hp to a 3500lb car = slow accel. O yea, all body and no interior room.

 

 

No room?!?!? It's the biggest mustang ever. What do you want, a boat? It might only have 210HP, but it has 240 torque at 3500RPMs.

 

As for the Mustang being crap, it isn't. If it's a good year, they also hold gobs of value. It comes down to the popularity of the year. A clean fox body can hold well over 5K in street value, and some of the collectible fox bodys go for over 20K.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 9 year old Lexus SC400 makes 80 more HP, 60 more torque, accelerates over a second faster, gets better MPG, and its style is a hell of alot better. I would challenge it to a brand new Mustang anyday. The Mustang is bulky and pathetic looking. Muscle cars are so ugly, I don't understand how anyone could actually care for them. They are all looks and nothing to back it up except an overexhaggerated, inefficient engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My 9 year old Lexus SC400 makes 80 more HP, 60 more torque, accelerates over a second faster, gets better MPG, and its style is a hell of alot better. I would challenge it to a brand new Mustang anyday. The Mustang is bulky and pathetic looking. Muscle cars are so ugly, I don't understand how anyone could actually care for them. They are all looks and nothing to back it up except an overexhaggerated, inefficient engine.

 

 

And how much did the Lexus cost new compared to a Mustang. I really doubt that it could take on a new GT. Hell, I'd take you on in my POS Mustang.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was also suggesting buying a mustang instead of a turbo kit for a corolla. I guess if you want to talk about better cars, I guess you can't take your unlimited funds and buy a twin turbo supra, cause that would be better too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 98' SC400 with decent mileage is about $14000-$18000, still cheaper than a baseline new Mustang. Also the Mustang has had nearly a decade to work on developing more power and fuel economy. You cannot possibly deny American cars in general require more fuel consumption, more size, and more cylinders in order to compare to foreign cars. The sheer fact Ford needs a 4 liter engine to make just 210 HP is crazy. Even a 1992 SC300 used a 3L engine to make 225 HP, and now we are talking about a car 15+ years old!

 

The Avalon gets 22/31 MPG using 3.5L V6 to make 268 HP

The Crown Vic gets 17/24 MPG uses a 4.6L V8 to make 224 HP

 

The Tundra gets 16/20 MPG using a 5.7L V8 to make 381 HP

The F150 gets 15/19 MPG using a 5.4L V8 to make 300 HP

 

The Corolla XRS gets 26/31 MPG using a 1.8L I4 to make 168 HP

The Focus ST gets 22/31 MPG using a 2.3L I4 to make 151 HP

 

The 08' Highlander gets 19/26 MPG using a 3.5L V6 to make 270 HP

The Edge gets 18/25 MPG using a 3.5L V6 to make 265 HP

 

 

I don't know why you are so angry at me gvr in every topic I reply to, trying to pick at every little mistake I make to use to parade across the forum and make yourself feel better. If you are so upset by my SC400-Mustang comparison, then just look at these figures. This isn't even getting into other aspects like resale value, reliability, and durability. I'm sorry to have to break it to you, but Toyota beats Ford hands down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I was suggesting getting a used Mustang for going fast instead of trying to turbo a econobox. I could find a fast 5.0 for as much if not less then the true cost of adding a turbo and tuning a Corolla.

 

The end result would be two cars, each ment for doing what they were made to do. I didn't bring up fuel economy, compare the mustang to any other car. It was just a suggestion. When people blindly call the Mustang crap because it's a Ford, they are just blowing smoke. Ford knows how to make a V8. Their V8s can get over 300K miles and the police wouldn't buy them if they didn't hold up. I haven't had a single repair on mine since I bought it and I don't always drive it nice. The 5.0s hold up, and the 4.6l can if it's the right year. They used a cheap intake on them that can crack, but it's also a cheap part, so in the long cost of the car, it's still cheaper then many others.

 

Also, as for power verses engine size. The Mustang GTs have always run on 87 pump. Many cars that get more power out of a smaller engine require premium fuel. Mustangs are also pretty limited from the factory. It takes VERY little to get the new V6 and V8 to scoot pretty good. Also, you gotta understand that some cars numbers are still under rated. The current V6 is really close in the 1/4 that the 96-98 GTs were. If it were a 5sp verse a auto, I'd prolly take the new V6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A 98' SC400 with decent mileage is about $14000-$18000, still cheaper than a baseline new Mustang. Also the Mustang has had nearly a decade to work on developing more power and fuel economy. You cannot possibly deny American cars in general require more fuel consumption, more size, and more cylinders in order to compare to foreign cars. The sheer fact Ford needs a 4 liter engine to make just 210 HP is crazy. Even a 1992 SC300 used a 3L engine to make 225 HP, and now we are talking about a car 15+ years old!

 

The Avalon gets 22/31 MPG using 3.5L V6 to make 268 HP

The Crown Vic gets 17/24 MPG uses a 4.6L V8 to make 224 HP

 

The Tundra gets 16/20 MPG using a 5.7L V8 to make 381 HP

The F150 gets 15/19 MPG using a 5.4L V8 to make 300 HP

 

The Corolla XRS gets 26/31 MPG using a 1.8L I4 to make 168 HP

The Focus ST gets 22/31 MPG using a 2.3L I4 to make 151 HP

 

The 08' Highlander gets 19/26 MPG using a 3.5L V6 to make 270 HP

The Edge gets 18/25 MPG using a 3.5L V6 to make 265 HP

 

 

I don't know why you are so angry at me gvr in every topic I reply to, trying to pick at every little mistake I make to use to parade across the forum and make yourself feel better. If you are so upset by my SC400-Mustang comparison, then just look at these figures. This isn't even getting into other aspects like resale value, reliability, and durability. I'm sorry to have to break it to you, but Toyota beats Ford hands down.

 

If your going to compare cars, at least compare cars that are in the same class. Compare a focus SVT to a corolla XRS. Also, I'm not angry, you are making assumptions. You also seem to be posting for the sake of posting without putting much thought in to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A 98' SC400 with decent mileage is about $14000-$18000, still cheaper than a baseline new Mustang. Also the Mustang has had nearly a decade to work on developing more power and fuel economy. You cannot possibly deny American cars in general require more fuel consumption, more size, and more cylinders in order to compare to foreign cars. The sheer fact Ford needs a 4 liter engine to make just 210 HP is crazy. Even a 1992 SC300 used a 3L engine to make 225 HP, and now we are talking about a car 15+ years old!

 

I was wondering what the new cost was for a 1998 Lexus. I can't find that information, so here is a new SC

 

http://www.lexus.com/models/SC/detailed_specifications.html

 

Base price 65K.

 

Are you REALLY surprised that it is better then a V6 mustang?!?!?!?!? To keep it simple, I'll just say, you get what you pay for. You are pretty much trying to compare apples to oranges. It's simply not the same thing at all.

 

I won't deny that a import gets better fuel economy then a American V8, but the American version is cheaper. When you compare the true cost of ownership, well, that is a different topic.

 

If you want to talk about top end cars (Even though I was talking about a used mustang compared to a turbo kit) a new Shelby GT 500 would kick the snot out of a new Lexus for a lot less money. At my current age, I'd take the new Cobra over a Lexus too, even if money didn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ummmmmm......I dont just write stangs suck because they are fords. I say stangs suck because I've driven one and they do suck. I suppose American ideology of producing a car is muscle with no handling. A GT500 will ski all over the track because there is so much torque that all it does is just spin the rear tires. Its a good drag car and because it doesnt like to keep traction on turns I suppose its good for drift - the new hot thing now.

 

When i said that the stangs have no space, I meant the interior. The cabin is tight and small. the back seats have no leg clearance. My head hits the rear windshield. Its just not comfortable. period. I dont know about you, but I hate my head hitting the inside of my car. Its very torquey I'll give you that and I do agree. Its peppy no doubt. But I seriously think my corolla can keep up with an entry level stang v6 210hp.

 

I'm not assuming that Fords are bad. I think the new stangs look good in the front and sides. Its got a good retro look. I hated the 80s and 90s stang with a passion. But thats why its so hot, it looks good. If ford is producing such pieces of gold to ever set foot on earth, why are they asking toyota for help. Lowest sales ever for ford. And....its calculated 10 years before ford can make a profit again. Ford needs to build its rep. They can make a good car but no one will believe them because they dont have rep anymore. Toyota does and thats what matters. REPUTATION = TRUST/FAITH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

(Only shown to guests, not registered members.)


×
×
  • Create New...