Toyota runs GM powered Tundra in Baja 500

[theeedude]

OHC is more useful in race applications with a displacement limit. Without such a limit, you fit a more powerful OHV engine into same space/weight as a higher revving OHC engine.

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: mwmorph
... Full of shit? I guess it really shows how much you know about engine technology. 😕

Pushrods are excellent but OHC is more useful in race applications where higher sustained RPMs are going to be needed for long terms.

Decreased valve train inertia is useful when going for higher rpms which is why motorcycle motors are exclusively OHC. It would be optimal to put pushrods in those applications for the weight and size advantages but it's not practical. Similarily, here, when you're going to be running in their upper rev range over hostile, jostling terrain, the pushrods themselves risk deformation and damage while running so they will probably be replaced at least once this season while OHC will last longer under higher G forces from off road racing and high RPM running.

I've never bashed the LSx engines, they're my favorite motors, they run well, make excellent power for their small size and weight and due to the aforementioned size, can fit in almost anything.

Try to allay your fanboyism next time when making dubious attacks and claims.

Your reply is hilarious. I went back to re-read your original post and you mention none of the above.

Lower maintenance with a chevy small block. What they need is the simplest engine so repairs are quick and easy. Noo need for long term reliability, just short term, fuel economy and easy repairs and LS2s fit that mold.

So if an OHC is more reliable in race applications WTF did they go from the Tundra's DOHC engine to a "less reliable and less capapble" OHV engine? It makes absolutely no sense to me for you to say that they chose the LS2 because it is short-term reliable but not long term and then also go further and say that it is less capable for racing. Well if the Tundra's 5.7L engine is 1. More capable in race application due to being OHC and 2. have better long term reliability than the LS2 wouldn't the 5.7L DOHC Tundra engine have been THE perfect choice?????


Please explain further cuz my fanboy dumbass just cannot comprehend.

 

[woodie1]

OP: Isn't your thread title just a little misleading.

 

[OFFascist]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Why would they put Toyota stickers and style it like a Toyota if they weren't sponsored by Toyota?

Because this team thinks the chassis kicks ass.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: mwmorph
... Full of shit? I guess it really shows how much you know about engine technology. 😕

Pushrods are excellent but OHC is more useful in race applications where higher sustained RPMs are going to be needed for long terms.

Decreased valve train inertia is useful when going for higher rpms which is why motorcycle motors are exclusively OHC. It would be optimal to put pushrods in those applications for the weight and size advantages but it's not practical. Similarily, here, when you're going to be running in their upper rev range over hostile, jostling terrain, the pushrods themselves risk deformation and damage while running so they will probably be replaced at least once this season while OHC will last longer under higher G forces from off road racing and high RPM running.

I've never bashed the LSx engines, they're my favorite motors, they run well, make excellent power for their small size and weight and due to the aforementioned size, can fit in almost anything.

Try to allay your fanboyism next time when making dubious attacks and claims.

Your reply is hilarious. I went back to re-read your original post and you mention none of the above.

Lower maintenance with a chevy small block. What they need is the simplest engine so repairs are quick and easy. Noo need for long term reliability, just short term, fuel economy and easy repairs and LS2s fit that mold.

So if an OHC is more reliable in race applications WTF did they go from the Tundra's DOHC engine to a "less reliable and less capapble" OHV engine? It makes absolutely no sense to me for you to say that they chose the LS2 because it is short-term reliable but not long term and then also go further and say that it is less capable for racing. Well if the Tundra's 5.7L engine is 1. More capable in race application due to being OHC and 2. have better long term reliability than the LS2 wouldn't the 5.7L DOHC Tundra engine have been THE perfect choice?????


Please explain further cuz my fanboy dumbass just cannot comprehend.

1. How old are you?
2. I never said that, don't put words in my mouth.

I never said anything about capability. In fact you quoted it and i just bolded it, but I support the LS2 in the truck as the right fit. The OHV engines are inherently simpler and quicker to fix so over the short term, the small things that go wrong throughout a long distance endurance race will be easier to repair. Head gaskets, valve gaskets, valvetrain issues, etc and they won't have to worry about race ending problems since you can easily field repair a Chevy SB with fewer SSTs.

But as metal fatigue sets in, the pushrods will risk deformation as time goes on and more races are covered which means that motor's top end will be overhauled at least once.

I've never said anything about the 3UR-FE being more capable. It will last longer under jostling terrain, but that doesn't mean it'll be faster in a single race, just that it won't be as likely to suffer from valvetrain problems as the season goes on.

But that doesn't offset the price and performance per race. It costs more to buy the 3UR-FE and even over multiple races, you won't recoup the cost of that and as a privateer team, cost is #1.

What I suggest is
1. grow up, you sound like some 14 year old suffering from the typical outcast high school rebel phase. Just by your language, it doesn't even sound like you can drive.
2. Learn not just how to read, but actually try some reading comprehension.
and
3. Either educate yourself and put up some real facts instead of trolling or leave the real discussions to the grown ups. You've done nothing except attacking others, next time try throwing in some facts to support your opinions.

You remind me of one of my favorite quotes,
"When a man uses profanity to support an argument, it indicates that either the man or the argument is weak--probably both."

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: mwmorph
... Full of shit? I guess it really shows how much you know about engine technology. 😕

Pushrods are excellent but OHC is MORE useful in race applications where higher sustained RPMs are going to be needed for long terms.

Decreased valve train inertia is useful when going for higher rpms which is why motorcycle motors are exclusively OHC. It would be optimal to put pushrods in those applications for the weight and size advantages but it's not practical. Similarily, here, when you're going to be running in their upper rev range over hostile, jostling terrain, the pushrods themselves risk deformation and damage while running so they will probably be replaced at least once this season while OHC will last longer under higher G forces from off road racing and high RPM running.

I've never bashed the LSx engines, they're my favorite motors, they run well, make excellent power for their small size and weight and due to the aforementioned size, can fit in almost anything.

Try to allay your fanboyism next time when making dubious attacks and claims.

Your reply is hilarious. I went back to re-read your original post and you mention none of the above.

Lower maintenance with a chevy small block. What they need is the simplest engine so repairs are quick and easy. Noo need for long term reliability, just short term, fuel economy and easy repairs and LS2s fit that mold.

So if an OHC is more reliable in race applications WTF did they go from the Tundra's DOHC engine to a "less reliable and less capapble" OHV engine? It makes absolutely no sense to me for you to say that they chose the LS2 because it is short-term reliable but not long term and then also go further and say that it is less capable for racing. Well if the Tundra's 5.7L engine is 1. More capable in race application due to being OHC and 2. have better long term reliability than the LS2 wouldn't the 5.7L DOHC Tundra engine have been THE perfect choice?????


Please explain further cuz my fanboy dumbass just cannot comprehend.

1. How old are you?
2. I never said that, don't put words in my mouth.

I never said anything about capability. In fact you quoted it and i just bolded it, but I support the LS2 in the truck as the right fit. The OHV engines are inherently simpler and quicker to fix so over the short term, the small things that go wrong throughout a long distance endurance race will be easier to repair. Head gaskets, valve gaskets, valvetrain issues, etc and they won't have to worry about race ending problems since you can easily field repair a Chevy SB with fewer SSTs.

But as metal fatigue sets in, the pushrods will risk deformation as time goes on and more races are covered which means that motor's top end will be overhauled at least once.

I've never said anything about the 3UR-FE being more capable. It will last longer under jostling terrain, but that doesn't mean it'll be faster in a single race, just that it won't be as likely to suffer from valvetrain problems as the season goes on.

But that doesn't offset the price and performance per race. It costs more to buy the 3UR-FE and even over multiple races, you won't recoup the cost of that and as a privateer team, cost is #1.

What I suggest is
1. grow up, you sound like some 14 year old suffering from the typical outcast high school rebel phase. Just by your language, it doesn't even sound like you can drive.
2. Learn not just how to read, but actually try some reading comprehension.
and
3. Either educate yourself and put up some real facts instead of trolling or leave the real discussions to the grown ups. You've done nothing except attacking others, next time try throwing in some facts to support your opinions.

You remind me of one of my favorite quotes,
"When a man uses profanity to support an argument, it indicates that either the man or the argument is weak--probably both."

Um, I'm not putting words in your mouth. I've bolded where you mention that the OHC engine would be better for racing.

The insult thing is rich coming from you. Your "suggestions" wreak strongly of a direct personal attack.

Now please answer the question. If the LS2, being a OHV engine, is less usefull, capable or WHATEVER, in racing applications as YOU stated above. Why did they go with it?

And please, lay off the personal attacks this time. BTW, I do apologize for say you're full of sh!t, but I still strongly disagree when you in terms of the LS2's long term reliability.

 

[Nyati13]

Originally posted by: Ktulu
[
Now please answer the question. If the LS2, being a OHV engine, is less usefull, capable or WHATEVER, in racing applications as YOU stated above. Why did they go with it?

Because it's an engine they are used to and might already have experience with? This is a private team, they probably are transitioning to the Toyota chassis away from a GM chassis that they used before, and are choosing to continue using the GM engine at least for the time being. They could choose to transistion to the Toyota engine later.

The real question isn't why they are using a GM engine for now, the question would be why did they stop using a GM chassis? 😀

 

[AdamK47]

Why are they putting a perfectly good engine like that in a silly Toyota? Seeeesh!

 

[mooseracing]

Originally posted by: heymrdj

Originally posted by: Ktulu
Besides, if you think it's annoying how much I defend domestics, it's equally annoying how much anti-domestic bias there is on this forum.

AMEN!!

Another vote here.....


this thread bring the funnay of no one involved in race motors spouting their "ideas" of why it is that way. Classic.



disclaimer: of that not being aimed at everyone, but I highly doubt that everyone that posted in this thread understands how that engine is used and abused and how setup a is better than setup b for baja. Now feel free to defend yourself and jump to conclusions.

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: Nyati13

Originally posted by: Ktulu
[
Now please answer the question. If the LS2, being a OHV engine, is less usefull, capable or WHATEVER, in racing applications as YOU stated above. Why did they go with it?

Because it's an engine they are used to and might already have experience with? This is a private team, they probably are transitioning to the Toyota chassis away from a GM chassis that they used before, and are choosing to continue using the GM engine at least for the time being. They could choose to transistion to the Toyota engine later.

The real question isn't why they are using a GM engine for now, the question would be why did they stop using a GM chassis? 😀

Yeah, why didn't they use a GM chassis?

And the Toyota powered by a Toyota pushrod engine just won yesterday's Nascar race.

I guess the OPs premise that Toyota engines suck is garbage.

 

[LordMorpheus]

Originally posted by: mwmorph
<snip snip>

... Full of shit? I guess it really shows how much you know about engine technology. 😕

Pushrods are excellent but OHC is more useful in race applications where higher sustained RPMs are going to be needed for long terms.

Decreased valve train inertia is useful when going for higher rpms which is why motorcycle motors are exclusively OHC. It would be optimal to put pushrods in those applications for the weight and size advantages but it's not practical. Similarily, here, when you're going to be running in their upper rev range over hostile, jostling terrain, the pushrods themselves risk deformation and damage while running so they will probably be replaced at least once this season while OHC will last longer under higher G forces from off road racing and high RPM running.

I've never bashed the LSx engines, they're my favorite motors, they run well, make excellent power for their small size and weight and due to the aforementioned size, can fit in almost anything.

Try to allay your fanboyism next time when making dubious attacks and claims.

Lets think of a race series that has high sustained RPMs over a long time period ...

NASCAR? 500 mile races are common, and for most of the duration of the race the cars are in the high powerband of their top gears, with the throttle all the way open. Series that run OHC cars generally do not require anything close to that level of endurance from their engines, and rarely run on tracks that are close to wide open throttle all the way around.

The exceptions would be races like the 24 hours of Le Mans at Sarthe (won most recently by a diesel, and the pushrod corvette won its class).

With the exception of prototype racing, all the racing series that demand huge endurance, all at wide open throttle are NASCAR and it's derivatives, and all of those use pushrod V8s.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: LordMorpheus

Originally posted by: mwmorph
<snip snip>

... Full of shit? I guess it really shows how much you know about engine technology. 😕

Pushrods are excellent but OHC is more useful in race applications where higher sustained RPMs are going to be needed for long terms.

Decreased valve train inertia is useful when going for higher rpms which is why motorcycle motors are exclusively OHC. It would be optimal to put pushrods in those applications for the weight and size advantages but it's not practical. Similarily, here, when you're going to be running in their upper rev range over hostile, jostling terrain, the pushrods themselves risk deformation and damage while running so they will probably be replaced at least once this season while OHC will last longer under higher G forces from off road racing and high RPM running.

I've never bashed the LSx engines, they're my favorite motors, they run well, make excellent power for their small size and weight and due to the aforementioned size, can fit in almost anything.

Try to allay your fanboyism next time when making dubious attacks and claims.

Lets think of a race series that has high sustained RPMs over a long time period ...

NASCAR? 500 mile races are common, and for most of the duration of the race the cars are in the high powerband of their top gears, with the throttle all the way open. Series that run OHC cars generally do not require anything close to that level of endurance from their engines, and rarely run on tracks that are close to wide open throttle all the way around.

The exceptions would be races like the 24 hours of Le Mans at Sarthe (won most recently by a diesel, and the pushrod corvette won its class).

With the exception of prototype racing, all the racing series that demand huge endurance, all at wide open throttle are NASCAR and it's derivatives, and all of those use pushrod V8s.

I don't understand why people keep ignoring my context. Nascar and Lemans doesn't a) require stress an engine like off road racing. Look at Rally and Baja. High lateral+vertical g forces + sudden g loads as opposed to the more gradual onset from cornering means that it is more stressful for the high inertia parts.

As for Nascar, yes, it's not that bad, but also remember, Nascar and Lemans GT are the most forgiving on the engine. High rpms are not needed, Nascar gets 750-850hp from 358in V8s. LeMans GT2 is limited to about 500hp(from a large motor no less) a single race, not a season (i don't see how Audi's diesel OHC engine factors into the mix) so what I said is valid. In a combination of high rpms and g forces pushrods will not be optimal, but when you need quick repairs, as in 24 hours, pushrods work well.

Like I said before, a single race is not long term and less stressful endeavors work quite well for pushrods.

Look at F1 really any higher class open wheeled racing where g loads are 4.0+ and revs go beyond 16k. Look at raly racing with quick directional changes and high g loading.

Let me rephrase it.
Simplicity, durability, power for the displacement. Pick two and in the Baja case, the LS2 is the right motor, but expect a top end overhaul later in the season as the valvetrain is abused though the jumps and shaking inherent in offroad racing.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Originally posted by: BlackTigers91

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: mwmorph
Lower maintenance with a chevy small block. What they need is the simplest engine so repairs are quick and easy. Noo need for long term reliability, just short term, fuel economy and easy repairs and LS2s fit that mold.

TForce crew member Matt Riggle told Levine that the team chose the 375-hp, 400 lb-ft powerplant because of its reliability, as well as its ability to run on regular Pemex gas that's much cheaper than facing fuel.

Sounds this crew member disagrees.

...?

I probably should rephrase it, no need for long term reliability, just short term reliability with simple maintenance. I didn't disagree, I meant that for racing, the LS2 will probably be more reliable.

You're full of sh!t if you think SBC's don't have long-term reliability.

Fanboyish, anyone?

Um no, it's generally excepted by most people, fanboy or not. Anti-domestic are we?

So the engine being reliable is an exception?

K.

Ha, nice one BlackTigers91.

And Ktulu, I don't think it's so much me being anti domestic as you being decidedly anti-foreign, since you've posted in just about every thread about foreign cars for nothing other than to talk about how bad they are or how much better a domestic counterpart is.

Case in point: you practically worshipped the Cadillac CTS in the Hyundai Genesis thread, even though the 2 cars aren't even really competitors and the CTS is far from being best even in its own class. So how's the pay from GM lately, eh?

1) So I spelled accepted wrong, big deal, it's Friday afternoon, I was playing football during lunch so I pretty worn out.
2) I'm not anti-foreign, I own a civic and have no problems buying anything foreign if it's suits my needs. If a domestic sucks, I'll point it out as well. BTW ,would '>' instead of '>>>>>>>>' not be considered worshiping?
3)Although the CTS does technically compete against the likes of the IS, G35, 3 series, etc. it's proportions have it more suited to competed with larger luxury cars like the 5 series. In fact GM has been planning in bringing in a smaller car to move up the CTS in class. In which case the CTS competes against the Genesis just fine.

Besides, if you think it's annoying how much I defend domestics, it's equally annoying how much anti-domestic bias there is on this forum.

... Full of shit? I guess it really shows how much you know about engine technology. 😕

Pushrods are excellent but OHC is more useful in race applications where higher sustained RPMs are going to be needed for long terms.

Decreased valve train inertia is useful when going for higher rpms which is why motorcycle motors are exclusively OHC. It would be optimal to put pushrods in those applications for the weight and size advantages but it's not practical. Similarily, here, when you're going to be running in their upper rev range over hostile, jostling terrain, the pushrods themselves risk deformation and damage while running so they will probably be replaced at least once this season while OHC will last longer under higher G forces from off road racing and high RPM running.

I've never bashed the LSx engines, they're my favorite motors, they run well, make excellent power for their small size and weight and due to the aforementioned size, can fit in almost anything.

Try to allay your fanboyism next time when making dubious attacks and claims.

He's not using fanboyism, he's simply standing by the fact that the SBC is the longest regular production engine in one fashion or another for a reason. It wouldn't still be used if it wasn't reliable. Let's not get away from the point of the topic of this thread which is the Toyota bodied truck using a GM power train.
The engine is not the only reason here. Since it is using a GM motor, it is going to be using a coresponding transmission. Toyota, once again in the new Tundra line has had problems with transmissions.
Lastly there is a cost factor. The GM platform is going to be the cheapest way to go and cheapest to modify for more power.

BTW your point in bending a pushrod because of terrain issues is dumb. A pushrod motor has about as much chance of bending a pushrod due to jarring of the truck, as a OHC has of slipping a tooth on gear/sprocket. The pushrods don't just wobble around in the engine hoping they land right and push the valves. If properly installed there is no play, thus no chance for it to slip out of the socket and unless the truck hits something so hard it breaks through the frame and manages to BEND the engine block, you aren't going to cause the components in the engine to twist or deform to causing bending.

 

[lurk3r]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Originally posted by: BlackTigers91

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: mwmorph
Lower maintenance with a chevy small block. What they need is the simplest engine so repairs are quick and easy. Noo need for long term reliability, just short term, fuel economy and easy repairs and LS2s fit that mold.

TForce crew member Matt Riggle told Levine that the team chose the 375-hp, 400 lb-ft powerplant because of its reliability, as well as its ability to run on regular Pemex gas that's much cheaper than facing fuel.

Sounds this crew member disagrees.

...?

I probably should rephrase it, no need for long term reliability, just short term reliability with simple maintenance. I didn't disagree, I meant that for racing, the LS2 will probably be more reliable.

You're full of sh!t if you think SBC's don't have long-term reliability.

Fanboyish, anyone?

Um no, it's generally excepted by most people, fanboy or not. Anti-domestic are we?

So the engine being reliable is an exception?

K.

Ha, nice one BlackTigers91.

And Ktulu, I don't think it's so much me being anti domestic as you being decidedly anti-foreign, since you've posted in just about every thread about foreign cars for nothing other than to talk about how bad they are or how much better a domestic counterpart is.

Case in point: you practically worshipped the Cadillac CTS in the Hyundai Genesis thread, even though the 2 cars aren't even really competitors and the CTS is far from being best even in its own class. So how's the pay from GM lately, eh?

1) So I spelled accepted wrong, big deal, it's Friday afternoon, I was playing football during lunch so I pretty worn out.
2) I'm not anti-foreign, I own a civic and have no problems buying anything foreign if it's suits my needs. If a domestic sucks, I'll point it out as well. BTW ,would '>' instead of '>>>>>>>>' not be considered worshiping?
3)Although the CTS does technically compete against the likes of the IS, G35, 3 series, etc. it's proportions have it more suited to competed with larger luxury cars like the 5 series. In fact GM has been planning in bringing in a smaller car to move up the CTS in class. In which case the CTS competes against the Genesis just fine.

Besides, if you think it's annoying how much I defend domestics, it's equally annoying how much anti-domestic bias there is on this forum.

... Full of shit? I guess it really shows how much you know about engine technology. 😕

Pushrods are excellent but OHC is more useful in race applications where higher sustained RPMs are going to be needed for long terms.

Decreased valve train inertia is useful when going for higher rpms which is why motorcycle motors are exclusively OHC. It would be optimal to put pushrods in those applications for the weight and size advantages but it's not practical. Similarily, here, when you're going to be running in their upper rev range over hostile, jostling terrain, the pushrods themselves risk deformation and damage while running so they will probably be replaced at least once this season while OHC will last longer under higher G forces from off road racing and high RPM running.

I've never bashed the LSx engines, they're my favorite motors, they run well, make excellent power for their small size and weight and due to the aforementioned size, can fit in almost anything.

Try to allay your fanboyism next time when making dubious attacks and claims.

He's not using fanboyism, he's simply standing by the fact that the SBC is the longest regular production engine in one fashion or another for a reason. It wouldn't still be used if it wasn't reliable. Let's not get away from the point of the topic of this thread which is the Toyota bodied truck using a GM power train.
The engine is not the only reason here. Since it is using a GM motor, it is going to be using a coresponding transmission. Toyota, once again in the new Tundra line has had problems with transmissions.
Lastly there is a cost factor. The GM platform is going to be the cheapest way to go and cheapest to modify for more power.

BTW your point in bending a pushrod because of terrain issues is dumb. A pushrod motor has about as much chance of bending a pushrod due to jarring of the truck, as a OHC has of slipping a tooth on gear/sprocket. The pushrods don't just wobble around in the engine hoping they land right and push the valves. If properly installed there is no play, thus no chance for it to slip out of the socket and unless the truck hits something so hard it breaks through the frame and manages to BEND the engine block, you aren't going to cause the components in the engine to twist or deform to causing bending.

Pushrod engines would actually be safer to use in the application He's claiming they would be less reliable, if you break a timing belt, best case is you're dead in the water, worst is your whole engine is shot, bending a pushrod will just cause that single valve to not function, yes the bent rod might cause more damage, but a broken belt guarentees you're screwed. And I've broken far more timing belts than bent pushrods.

 

[mooseracing]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

He's not using fanboyism, he's simply standing by the fact that the SBC is the longest regular production engine in one fashion or another for a reason. It wouldn't still be used if it wasn't reliable.

Haha thats overstating the engine design, the SBC has constantly evolved every couple years. The LS2 is not even close to an 80's or 70's SBC. Just because it kept the same dimensions but internals are really different, it's just a marketing ploy. hell the block boring, water jackets, spacing is different. Your basically saying the 283 is the LS2, because the 350 SBC came from a 283 so they are the same as well?

Ford could have kept the 302/351 around longer if they didn't go to OHC and kept calling it a SBF.