Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Shadow wrote:

TheBigBoy wrote:Ah there you go... 1200nm standard. But you realise non of this helps me unless I want to transplant your engine into my 80 series.

1HDFT is not far behind an FTE.

Just make sure you get a multivalve and your set.

axle torque means nothing unless you are comparing the SAME vehicle in the SAME gear (on the SAME dyno). an estimated converted flywheel figure is MORE accurate for comparison. the 1HD-FT(E) engines, internally standard, are good for a reliable 600 flywheel Nm which will provide around 1600Nm at the axle in 4th gear.

if you dyno in a low gear you will get a phenomenal torque figure for any given bhp figure, because power is simply force x velocity (in the case of a dyno, this means torque x rpm.)

the numbers aside, torque and power and not the only reasons to own a diesel. economy, range, longevity and reliability all factor into the equation. In my experience, diesels are also smoother, quieter and more "driveable" than similarly powered petrol engined vehicles. yes smoother and quieter. drive a couple and decide if it's what you want. they're not fir everybody. a lot of people are put off by the smelly oily fuel, the exorbitant up-front cost, and the horrible, rattly idle of diesels. good on them - it keeps them cheaper for the rest of us.



(I just bought my mrs a diesel for mothers day, she hearts it - 5l/100km, who wouldn't? especially with diesel and unleaded being the same price lately.)

Ok, Now I have to go right back through this post and find out what the best set up is. Garret T3 with a T4 compressor. 4 valve engine. Balance everything. HPC coated everything. Custom exhaust. Tweak/change the diesel pump. Liquid to air intercooler or custom exhaust manifold making it into a top mount turbo, closer to the air to air intercooler for less lag. Hmm lots to think about.

dumbdunce - Oh, I think Id have to rival you there. Mine is super silent and cant even tell its running when at lights. Very very smooth and usable power right through the rev range all the way upto 200kph. The 80 is going to be my only truck for the next 6 months. Then its going to become my toy and I dont mind what engine it has in it.

I just hope I dont cry and miss my V8 too much after all is said and done.

i plan on dropping an LS1/2 in my FJ45 toy.

but wouldnt have any other engine in my 100series.

TheBigBoy wrote:Ok, Now I have to go right back through this post and find out what the best set up is. Garret T3 with a T4 compressor. 4 valve engine. Balance everything. HPC coated everything. Custom exhaust. Tweak/change the diesel pump. Liquid to air intercooler or custom exhaust manifold making it into a top mount turbo, closer to the air to air intercooler for less lag. Hmm lots to think about.

lag isn't really an issue partly because there's no throttle butterfly. I've done front mount intercooler setups with fairly long runs of pipe that have actually improved lag especially on gearchanges - the volume of the intercooler + plumbing acts as an accumulator, effectively resulting in antilag. If you go top mount intercooler, go water to air - air to air will act as a heat source under a lot of conditions and actually heat up your inlet charge.

the only real reason you would high mount the turbo is if your chosen turbo simply won't fit between the manifold and the engine mount (a possibility if you ditch the CT26 exhaust housing and have to use an adaptor on the standard manifold). the kinds of mods you are talking about are big dollar but will yield very impressive results - if I was spending that kind of money I'd be disappointed with less than about 850Nm at the crank (over 2300 at the axle in 4th gear) and 1000 would be a real possibility.

Ill build the truck around the engine mate . I dont do thing by half's... Buy ill have to learn alot more about diesels before I go spending my money and know what the end result will be..

The torque readings on the graphs are a measurement of motive force applied to the rollers. Im sorry to dissapoint but it is not a true nm torque reading.

If you had 1300nm of torque at the rollers I'm sure a few things would be twisting.



Andy

So, Then all that torque talk is not worth a pinch then? It doesnt matter anyway. I was in my mate dad's 105 turbo diesel last night. I was impressed in the new engines (upgraded). But even though the torque is basically identical. Its got nothing on speed, responce, or performance of the petrol. Load both up with a tonne though and they would be side by side.

Torque is the only thing with diesels, its just the way its being measured and then how people are putting the measurements out of context.



Andy

The video is the best display of 4.2 diesel power I have seen yet!

What is incredible to me, especially after watching the vid, is the 1HZ @ 25psi makes such huge power and it really revs (not just talk). This engine is 2 valve indirect. Only thing in common with the 1HD-(T/FT/FTE) is the crank and for the most part the block, minus oil squirters (which are not so much a problem for IDI engine anyway, since the combustion chamber is in the head, not the piston).

It is so good to see, because everyone talks about the TD42 being good and the 1HZ prone to cracking heads around the precom. Perhaps that is because most installations are crap with poor flowing turbos, overfuelling and for the most part without intercoolers.

Having seen the bottom end of both engines (TD42, 1HZ and 1HD-T/FT) I can say that the 1HZ, apart from rods, was built for revs and the 1HD series was built for both revs and torque. The TD42 appears to be built torque but not so much revs. 1H series has an awesome design - fully counterweighted crank, full main bearing girdle and short conrods (~135mm for 1H series compared to 157mm for TD42 and 160mm for 12H-T).

165rwkw for 3 years on 1HZ shows that the rods, no matter what they "look" like, are good for the business. I had alwys heard they were weak (or perhaps it was weaker....). Unless the guy used 1HD rods and this might be a possibility. The Little end is bigger on the 1HD rods, but a thicker bush can fix that easily enough.

When viewing the heads of the TD42 and 1HZ compared to the 1HD-T is that the IDI engines "appear" to have much better flowing heads, since they do not require (or use) a swirl style inlet - the swirl takes place as the air enters the precom (othwerwise known as the swirl chamber). As a result, providing the engines have the appropriate turbo, fueling, precom cooling and are built to handle the revs, the IDI engines will likely be a better candidate for "cheap" racing. The only caveat here (price aside) are the 4 valve direct engines (1HD-FT/FTE) because the swirl takes place based on the valve arrangement and there is increased port/valve area, so they should flow well.

Anyone ever flowed the heads of a 1HZ directly compared to a 1HD-T or 1HD-FT? I would like to know if what it "looks" like is actually what is reality.

I am in the process of building a "hopefully" powerful 12H-T, watching the 165rwkw !HZ video almost made me abandon my project, but then I shook myself and realised that I want to tow economically at 1700rpm and those who have tried it will tell you that you cant do that in a TD42 or 1HZ - turbo or not.

I would like to be wrong in the last point, so anyone have an economical 1HZ or TD42 turbo setup? This means 10L/100km not towing and better than 15L/100km towing 2 tonnes in the shape of a caravan and a ladden roof rack at average 90km/h….. If so, I might change my project direction

I am still blown away by that video. I thought my cousins 151rwkw TD42 hauled (and it does), but that 1HZ is surely better and it is great to see!

Cant help there. My V8 with stock tyres and driving normally (which is hard to do) is 16L per 100. Thats the best. But with diesel costing an av of 20 - 25 cents more. Thats an extra 20 litres at $1.10. Thats an extra 125k's.
Makes an eqaul 12.8L per 100. At best. Towing or flat, Thats out the window .

My 1HD-T, intercooled, auto fully laden and towing a caravan and a filled up 2.4m roof rack (all up weight, 4.8 Tonne) averaged 15.6L/100km over two long range tanks of fuel with cruise control on at 90km/h.

Unladen, no roof rack, ~ 11l/100km

[quote="gbentink"]...only thing in common with the 1HD-(T/FT/FTE) is the crank and for the most part the block, minus oil squirters (which are not so much a problem for IDI engine anyway, since the combustion chamber is in the head, not the piston).

...

1HZ block has the same piston skirt oil nozzles as the 1HD-(F)T.

the only real difference in the blocks is the turbo oil return, which can be drilled in the 1HZ block.

sorry cant help with economy, general driving it gets 30lper 100k's did the pirahna pursuit last year 180ks of grouse bush driving but used 120l of fuel werth every cent

Your truck kicks arse for sure! You must be putting serious airflow and fuel through that engine to get those rpms and power - mind boggling!

Keep up the good work.

Louis

1HZ block has the same piston skirt oil nozzles as the 1HD-(F)T.

the only real difference in the blocks is the turbo oil return, which can be drilled in the 1HZ block.[/quote]


I wasnt aware of that - good to know. I wonder if that is the case without exception from 1990-2007?

@ Ads80 - are you interested to reveal if you improved cooling around the precom chambers? I have watched the video heaps of times - totally nuts power. But as you say; not exactly a fuel economy master :-) Do you run 4.8 diffs and how would you define your normal driving - it seems entirely possible that your normal is our "totally sick" driving.....

no special cooling, the hpc coating took about 100degc out from egt temps which must help. diffs are 4.11, normal driving is sort of normal road driving, its hard to drive it slow when v8 dunnidores want to have a go im sure highway cruising it could be a little better but just general driving on road i get about 30l per 100k, not that it sees the bitumen much anymore though

My 1HD-T, intercooled, auto fully laden and towing a caravan and a filled up 2.4m roof rack (all up weight, 4.8 Tonne) averaged 15.6L/100km over two long range tanks of fuel with cruise control on at 90km/h.

Unladen, no roof rack, ~ 11l/100km

Mine would be about the same. It doesnt drink much at all at 100kph. So there really isnt much difference. Just in the HP.

ADS80 - It wont let me see your vid mate. What hp are we talking here?

ads80 wrote:no special cooling, the hpc coating took about 100degc out from egt temps which must help. diffs are 4.11, normal driving is sort of normal road driving, its hard to drive it slow when v8 dunnidores want to have a go im sure highway cruising it could be a little better but just general driving on road i get about 30l per 100k, not that it sees the bitumen much anymore though

'Scuse the probably silly Question, but what is HPC coating?

High Performance Coatings

http://www.hpcoatings.com.au/pages/index.htm

ceramic coating, reduces heat soak or acts as heat deflector, im sure someone has a more technical answer

ads80 wrote:ceramic coating, reduces heat soak or acts as heat deflector, im sure someone has a more technical answer

so what do you coat with it, just your manifold? internals too?
i have all forged internals in mine, so do you only use it to make stock internals better or have you used it on forged gear?

it will have benefits on any part, check out their web site it has all the info

i had the piston tops coated and the skirts teflon coated

valves, exhaust ports , exhaust manifold and combustion surface all coated

ads80 wrote:I run a 1hz, balanced internals, hpc coated everything, garret turbo, air to air int, 25psi boost, modded fuel pump, makes 165rwkw and well over 1200nm from 1500rpm to 6000, and has been reliable now for over 3 years
http://s294.photobucket.com/albums/mm10 ... I_9377.flv

thats is so fking awesome ahha