Author Topic: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s  (Read 1392 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mountain,man1

  • Offline Rock Crawl'n
  • **
  • Turtle Points: 245
  • Male Posts: 68
  • Member since Jan '19
  • Crawling with Marlin
    • View Profile
Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« on: Aug 28, 2019, 08:59:37 PM »
A while back my 22RE started having some terrible rocker arm noises work got busy havent had time to tear into her yet. So this winter when work slows down a bit I'm going to pull the engine and get it preped for a vist to a machine shop. Questions I have. When I have the machine shop bore the cylinders I don't want too go to big and have the cylinder walls so thin they could blow out. I'm thinking 40 over. Would like advice on bore size. I'm also going to order a new head, camshaft, and rocker arm assembly from lceperformance. What is everyone's thoughts on their Pro torker head kit? I've also been told if I install a heavier flywheel I can produce more torque. Has anybody installed a heavier flywheel from lceperformance for torque gains, and does that actually work? Lastly does anybody know the performance gains I may get installing a header? I've been told I can get slightly more power and slightly better fuel economy is this true? Any advice and constructive criticism on this rebuild would be greatly appreciated thank you very much.
88 TurdRunner 22RE W56B 31x10.5R15 no lift rust assisted weight reduction 100% trail damage

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #1 on: Aug 29, 2019, 04:16:18 AM »
There are 1000's of posts over decades on rebuilding a 22.  :driving:

Lots of opinions, anecdotal experiences, and advice from self-identified experts.  :psss:

Do lots of research.  :yesnod:  :phone:

If I did my own rebuild again.....  :gap:

.060” over bore – with OK by Jim at 22RE Performance  :thumbs:

Machine shop – Magnaflux, Sonic test, RA spec’d and VERIFIED exact for rings.  :yesnod: :thumbs:

Head, cam, rockers – new from 22RE Performance  :thumbs:

Heavier flywheel – NO… waste of money and don’t need it.  :thumbdown:

Header – Doug Thorley, 2” exhaust – YES! it will be the best bolt-on upgrade.  :thumbs:

If I could go back in time, I’d just buy a long block from 22RE Performance!!  :yesnod:

That’s just my opinion…. it may be worthless.  :smack:

Gnarls.  :blah:

1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

Hickory Nut

  • Offline Rock Crawl'n
  • **
  • Turtle Points: 206
  • Posts: 69
  • Member since Feb '16
  • Crawling with Marlin
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #2 on: Aug 29, 2019, 06:25:16 AM »
For what it's worth... I ordered a stage 2.5 long block from 22RE Performance and bolted a LC Engineering header on my 85 Sr5 and it runs great.  If you are looking for HUGE gains in torque and HP then it may be less expensive doing some sort of engine swap for a larger more powerful motor. Looking back I wish I would have done a swap in mine. The gains were minimal and the cost were excessive. Don't get me wrong they build one mean 22RE and it does feel like it has more power over the one I replaced but I wouldn't do it again.     

arlindsay1992

  • Offline Rock Crawl'n
  • **
  • Turtle Points: 423
  • Posts: 43
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Crawling with Marlin
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #3 on: Aug 29, 2019, 06:52:23 AM »
Generally you should only ever bore to the next size up which cleans up any scratches or pitting in the walls. The extra displacement you gain from boring bigger is not going to give you any extra power. You want to only bore as much as necessary so if you need to rebuild it again in 300,000 miles (unlikely) you'll still have room to go.

I have the 35 lb flywheel from LCE. It's a bit pricey for what it is. It is not at all noticeable on the street, maybe a bit harder to stall off the line. Where it shines is off road. The truck is very hard to stall. It doesn't add torque as LCE claims, just adds rotational inertia and smooths out power down low. Without touching the throttle, the engine will go down to 250 - 300 RPM and keep driving. Stalls when it gets down to around 200 RPM. If I had it all to do again would I buy it? I'm not sure. It's pretty expensive. But I do have it and it does help and I'm happy with it.

Don't have much to add for your other questions.

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #4 on: Aug 29, 2019, 07:59:23 PM »
For what it's worth... I ordered a stage 2.5 long block from 22RE Performance and bolted a LC Engineering header on my 85 Sr5 and it runs great.  If you are looking for HUGE gains in torque and HP then it may be less expensive doing some sort of engine swap for a larger more powerful motor. Looking back I wish I would have done a swap in mine. The gains were minimal and the cost were excessive. Don't get me wrong they build one mean 22RE and it does feel like it has more power over the one I replaced but I wouldn't do it again.     
For what it's worth...   

As I said… everyone has an opinion.

Installing an LCE head (4-in-1) is a good header, but known to be better for high RPMs… not useable unless you are racing your vehicle and want to sacrifice some lower RPM torque.  The DT header would have been the better choice for that engine…. Just my opinion.

Gains and cost is all subjective.  Based on my recent experience gains and cost going with 22RE Performance long block IS way less expensive and WAY more reliable than practically anyone else’s DYI rebuild.

Engine swaps for “a large more powerful motor” are more often touted as easy and less inexpensive… they are not always.  The hours invested from start to finish and the actual dollars spent are almost always under estimated.

Gnarls.



« Last Edit: Aug 29, 2019, 08:57:24 PM by Gnarly4X »
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #5 on: Aug 29, 2019, 08:25:01 PM »
the 22RE is a little tractor motor.

While I see your point, I disagree with your characterization.

There are a good number of successful modifications to the 22s beyond it’s stock form.

Tractor motor?.. rather sophisticated for a “tractor”. 

Here's a quote for your "tractor motor" thinking...

"The Toyota Celica GTS entered the 1985 Macao Grand Prix with a modified 22RE engine, although the racing team intended to use a Japanese domestic 140-horsepower, high-compression 18RG engine. However, the Celica entered in the race had a U.S. vehicle identification number, or VIN, so race regulations only allowed a U.S. engine. The team dropped the 22RE in the Celica, qualified for the race, and then finished third place behind two six-cylinder BMWs. It was the highest finish for any 22RE-powered Toyota."

They are basically designed for peak torque between 2500 and 3500, and a peak HP at 4800, right about where most people buying that vehicle actually uses its power.  Anything will run good in 4WD… and it requires a Marlin Crawler t-case if you want to do anything considered typical and common 4-wheeing.

What electronics cannot be modified?

It (the ECU) senses electronic signals continuously and “learns” and adjusts air, fuel, and ignition timing continuously.

“Most of us have wasted a lot of money”….  Again that’s subjective.  And, the cost per increase can seem like a waste.

I agree an excellent option is a long block from 22RE Performance.

If you want more reliable power than about 150 HP in a 22, then an engine swap may be a good consideration.

Gnarls.


« Last Edit: Aug 30, 2019, 03:49:40 AM by Gnarly4X »
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #6 on: Aug 29, 2019, 08:35:45 PM »
Generally you should only ever bore to the next size up which cleans up any scratches or pitting in the walls. The extra displacement you gain from boring bigger is not going to give you any extra power. You want to only bore as much as necessary so if you need to rebuild it again in 300,000 miles (unlikely) you'll still have room to go.

I have the 35 lb flywheel from LCE. It's a bit pricey for what it is. It is not at all noticeable on the street, maybe a bit harder to stall off the line. Where it shines is off road. The truck is very hard to stall. It doesn't add torque as LCE claims, just adds rotational inertia and smooths out power down low. Without touching the throttle, the engine will go down to 250 - 300 RPM and keep driving. Stalls when it gets down to around 200 RPM. If I had it all to do again would I buy it? I'm not sure. It's pretty expensive. But I do have it and it does help and I'm happy with it.

Don't have much to add for your other questions.

Boring a 22 block to 60 over can be reliably done and will produce a very noticeable increase in power.  If my 60 over bore goes 200,000 miles, that’s about 10 years for me.  I’d rather have the extra power for 10 years than be concerned about rebuilding a 43 year old engine block.  A stock 22RE with a .060" over bore will produce about 5 lbs more peak torque, and average of about 4 more lbs of torque between 1800 and 5,000 RPMs, and will increase the peak HP by about 1 HP.  It is my opinion that 5 lbs. of increased torque at 3000 RPMs will be very noticeable in a stock 100 HP engine.

By the way... high performance 22 race engines are punched 80 over.  However, they are typically rebuilt after one season of racing.

The heavier flywheel DOES increase torque.  Lugging an engine down to 200 or 300 RPMs is foolish, especially when 4-wheeling.  Oil pressure drops too low for safe lubrication protection and there is virtually no usable torque at 250 RPMs.

Gnarls.
« Last Edit: Aug 30, 2019, 03:34:37 AM by Gnarly4X »
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

arlindsay1992

  • Offline Rock Crawl'n
  • **
  • Turtle Points: 423
  • Posts: 43
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Crawling with Marlin
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #7 on: Aug 30, 2019, 03:47:43 AM »
The hypothetical gains from boring 0.060" over are pretty small. It's also anyone's guess whether you could truly feel 5 ft-lbs increase. So I'm not going to argue that.

The flywheel does not add torque. Torque is force x distance. The force comes from the fuel air mixture exploding and pushing down on the piston. The distance is the offset from the rod big end centerline to the crankshaft centerline. None of that changes when you change the flywheel. The flywheel adds rotational inertia. The flywheel absorbs energy by increasing rotational speed, and released energy by decreaseding its rotational speed. When compared to a ligher flywheel, a heavier flywheel can absorb more energy at the same rotational speed, and correspondingly, it can realease more energy for the same reduction in rotational speed.

I agree 100% that lugging the engine down to 200 RPM isn't a good idea for exactly the reasons you stated. It was just a demonstration of how the engine is harder to stall with a heavier flywheel.

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #8 on: Aug 30, 2019, 04:35:42 AM »
The hypothetical gains from boring 0.060" over are pretty small. It's also anyone's guess whether you could truly feel 5 ft-lbs increase. So I'm not going to argue that.

The flywheel does not add torque. Torque is force x distance. The force comes from the fuel air mixture exploding and pushing down on the piston. The distance is the offset from the rod big end centerline to the crankshaft centerline. None of that changes when you change the flywheel. The flywheel adds rotational inertia. The flywheel absorbs energy by increasing rotational speed, and released energy by decreaseding its rotational speed. When compared to a ligher flywheel, a heavier flywheel can absorb more energy at the same rotational speed, and correspondingly, it can realease more energy for the same reduction in rotational speed.

I agree 100% that lugging the engine down to 200 RPM isn't a good idea for exactly the reasons you stated. It was just a demonstration of how the engine is harder to stall with a heavier flywheel.

Rotational torque… a flywheel releases stored energy by applying torque to a mechanical load,  You can call it what you want.  I’ll stick with “torque”, you can call it inertia.

In my 22R I could “feel” and see the RPM drop by 100 to 200 RPMs when I turned on the AC compressor.  How many pounds of torque were required to spin the AC compressor.  I could also feel and see the RPMs drop when I turned on the lights.  How many pounds of torque does it take to spin the alternator under load?

Can an engine dyno measure a change in 1 HP?  How much torque equals 1 HP?  Is that a “hypothetical” measurement?


Gnarls.  :inthedark:
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

arlindsay1992

  • Offline Rock Crawl'n
  • **
  • Turtle Points: 423
  • Posts: 43
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Crawling with Marlin
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #9 on: Aug 30, 2019, 06:02:10 AM »
Inertia is stored energy. A heavier flywheel takes more energy to spin up, and releases more energy when slowed down. The engine makes the torque it makes. The flywheel stores some energy and can release it when a load is applied. Think of it like a battery and alternator. The alternator charges the battery. If you have a bigger battery, it takes longer to charge, but also takes longer to discharge. So when winching, even with a stock alternator, you can winch longer because the battery has stored more energy.

Don't want to argue about whether you can feel X amount of horsepower. Neither one of us can prove our point. Yes, you can feel the RPM drop when the A/C or lights turn on. That's a drop in RPM. The real question is can you feel the difference in 0-60 times with the A/C turned on or off (possibly), or the headlights on or off (probably not)? This would be a test of a change in usable power.

Horsepower does not convert to torque in any way. They measure two different things. Horsepower is a function of torque and RPM. Imagine an engine with a perfectly flat torque curve. It makes 150 ft-lbs at 2000 RPM and 150 ft-lbs at 4000 RPM. At 4000 RPM it will make twice as much power as it does at 2000 RPM.

Horsepower = (torque (in ft-lbs) X RPM) / 5252.

Lewis Hein

  • Shoutbox Ban
  • Offline Crawler Guru
  • ****
  • Turtle Points: 245
  • Posts: 466
  • Member since Feb '17
  • Trying to equal the wonderful one-hoss shay
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #10 on: Aug 30, 2019, 06:15:15 AM »
Physics police here! Others have explained some of this but I will shove my oar in as well  :gap:

Rotational torque… a flywheel releases stored energy by applying torque to a mechanical load,  You can call it what you want.  I’ll stick with “torque”, you can call it inertia.

Torque and inertia are completely different things. It's a free country and you can call them what you want, but these discussions will be much clearer if we all stick to standard definitions and remember the difference :greengrin:.

In my 22R I could “feel” and see the RPM drop by 100 to 200 RPMs when I turned on the AC compressor.  How many pounds of torque were required to spin the AC compressor.  I could also feel and see the RPMs drop when I turned on the lights.  How many pounds of torque does it take to spin the alternator under load?
Torque is not measured in pounds, rather in foot-pounds. :thumbs:

Can an engine dyno measure a change in 1 HP?  How much torque equals 1 HP?  Is that a “hypothetical” measurement?
You need to know the engine RPM to make that question meaningful. The equation is:

Horsepower = (Torque*Rotational Speed)/5252. Torque needs to be in foot-pounds and speed in RPM for this to work.

We shall now prove that a heavier flywheel does not increase the torque output of an engine.

Take a stock 22R with stock fuel system running at a fixed RPM. it can only suck in air and fuel at a limited rate. Therefore there is a theoretical upper limit on the power output of this engine, because there is limited energy stored in the fuel and it comes in at a limted rate.

Suppose that adding a heavier flywheel increased torque. By the equation above, horsepower would also have to increase. But there is no upper limit to this; by adding heavier and heavier flywheels to the engine, we could get horsepower beyond the theoretical upper limit to it's power output. We would have violated the conservation of energy.

Spoiler: Conservation of energy holds. Heavier flywheels may well help the engine not stall, but they do not increase torque output.

Thanks everyone for reading. Have a nice physics packed day!  :gap:

arlindsay1992

  • Offline Rock Crawl'n
  • **
  • Turtle Points: 423
  • Posts: 43
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Crawling with Marlin
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #11 on: Aug 30, 2019, 06:19:22 AM »
 :biggthumpup:

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #12 on: Aug 30, 2019, 07:13:01 AM »
Lewis,

What do you call the FORCE that inertia applies to a rotating mass?

Gnarls.
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #13 on: Aug 30, 2019, 07:17:22 AM »
When a torque is applied to an object it begins to rotate with an acceleration inversely proportional to its moment of inertia. This relation can be thought of as Newton's Second Law of rotation. The moment of inertia is the rotational mass and the TORQUE is the rotational FORCE.

The heavier flywheel is applying more TORQUE.

Lewis,

I attended a different school and different physics classes.

Perhaps, commonly, we are discussing conceptual semantics.

Gnarls.
« Last Edit: Aug 30, 2019, 08:02:12 AM by Gnarly4X »
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #14 on: Aug 30, 2019, 07:20:53 AM »
...  a heavier flywheel does not increase the torque output of an engine.


True.

Gnarls.

1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

Lewis Hein

  • Shoutbox Ban
  • Offline Crawler Guru
  • ****
  • Turtle Points: 245
  • Posts: 466
  • Member since Feb '17
  • Trying to equal the wonderful one-hoss shay
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #15 on: Aug 30, 2019, 07:59:39 AM »
What do you call the FORCE that inertia applies to a rotating mass?
It doesn't.

When a torque is applied to an object it begins to rotate with an acceleration inversely proportional to it moment of inertia. This relation can be thought of as Newton's Second Law of rotation.
True.

The moment of inertia is the rotational mass...
The moment of inertia is more complicated than that because it depends on the shape of the spinning object as well as its mass.

I attended a different school and different physics classes.
Perhaps, commonly, we are discussing conceptual semantics.
As I said before these discussions are much clearer when everyone involved uses the correct terminology  for the correct concepts. :biggthumpup:

The last thing I have to say in this debate, which others have already said:
A heavier flywheel (Actually a flywheel with greater moment of inertia) stores more energy at a given RPM than a lighter one. This extra energy can be used to help your engine keep spinning between cylinders firing at 200 RPM, or it can help your rock crawler tire climb over a bigger bump. These are good and worthwhile things but do not mean that the flywheel added any torque, just more stored energy in reserve. Like having more money in your savings account without changing your monthly income.

I hope some of this is informative. Have a nice day everyone!

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #16 on: Aug 30, 2019, 09:32:36 AM »
Lewis....

Are we talking about a rotating flywheel?

In physics the mechanical work applied during rotation is the torque times the rotation angle:  W=r*theta.

The word torque is the correct word.

Gnarls.
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #17 on: Aug 30, 2019, 10:26:34 AM »
I see a few posts about boring the block here. Boring the block IS a minimal gain across the board. BUT there are advantages to a larger bore, primarily in the flow gains with the proper combustion chamber work. You'd be surprised what an extra mm of clearance will do on the intake, especially one designed to flow sideways into the cylinder. IF you want easy gains stroke it. Stroking the 22R does require a bit of tuning beyond what can be done stock fuel systems. Done right it'll last as long as a stocker, especially at the RPM ranges used in crawlers. Do your homework on that one. Either way you look at it, the only way to get more out of any engine is efficiency. More efficient intake and exhaust. More efficient combustion. Less friction. Proper tuning. You can go with an engine builder with experience, probably best, or do it yourself, research research research. Know what you want before you start, find out what you need to get it, and then look at your bank account cherishingly as it's going bye bye. It is definitely true that a swap will have the best bang for the buck though, unless you're like me and don't care about best bang and insist on doing what you can with what was provided, y'know, I'm keeping the 22RE and no, I'm not super or turbocharging the thing.
Toyota has already proven the 22RE can be tuned for 140lbtq and 115hp. With a little tweaking and bolt-ons you can get another 10-20 lbft/hp. With another $3k you can get another 10-30 lbft/hp easy enough. The 22R really isn't a 'tuners' engine by any stretch of the imagination and all the stories your hear about big numbers, 200+ anything takes a lot of experience and even more money to get it.

Take any and all advise with a grain of salt. 1mm oversize valves don't do anything spectacular without the corresponding port work and grind. A 'new head' can be worse than a rebuilt stocker if the designer sucks. Aftermarket pistons are a turkey shoot. Machine shops are probably your biggest worry, a bad shop can destroy all your research and expensive parts for a lot of money. And of course, if all is done perfectly and the tuning isn't right your engine can put out less than stock.

Best to your build! Have fun doing it!
Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #18 on: Aug 30, 2019, 11:38:19 AM »
I see a few posts about boring the block here. Boring the block IS a minimal gain across the board. BUT there are advantages to a larger bore, primarily in the flow gains with the proper combustion chamber work. You'd be surprised what an extra mm of clearance will do on the intake, especially one designed to flow sideways into the cylinder. IF you want easy gains stroke it. Stroking the 22R does require a bit of tuning beyond what can be done stock fuel systems. Done right it'll last as long as a stocker, especially at the RPM ranges used in crawlers. Do your homework on that one. Either way you look at it, the only way to get more out of any engine is efficiency. More efficient intake and exhaust. More efficient combustion. Less friction. Proper tuning. You can go with an engine builder with experience, probably best, or do it yourself, research research research. Know what you want before you start, find out what you need to get it, and then look at your bank account cherishingly as it's going bye bye. It is definitely true that a swap will have the best bang for the buck though, unless you're like me and don't care about best bang and insist on doing what you can with what was provided, y'know, I'm keeping the 22RE and no, I'm not super or turbocharging the thing.
Toyota has already proven the 22RE can be tuned for 140lbtq and 115hp. With a little tweaking and bolt-ons you can get another 10-20 lbft/hp. With another $3k you can get another 10-30 lbft/hp easy enough. The 22R really isn't a 'tuners' engine by any stretch of the imagination and all the stories your hear about big numbers, 200+ anything takes a lot of experience and even more money to get it.

Take any and all advise with a grain of salt. 1mm oversize valves don't do anything spectacular without the corresponding port work and grind. A 'new head' can be worse than a rebuilt stocker if the designer sucks. Aftermarket pistons are a turkey shoot. Machine shops are probably your biggest worry, a bad shop can destroy all your research and expensive parts for a lot of money. And of course, if all is done perfectly and the tuning isn't right your engine can put out less than stock.

Best to your build! Have fun doing it!

2 times that!!   :beerchug:

1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #19 on: Aug 30, 2019, 12:13:56 PM »
On the subject of headers.
I've had best results for low to mid-range increases with tri-y headers. If you want to look into low range try a set of short headers. Those long tubes work best with upper RPMs. Either way equal length tubes make for the best pulse balance hence improved scavenging. If the engineer has the ability to keep the tubes the same length AND keep the number of degrees in the bends even, or even close, the pulse tuning will be best.
If you do work on the exhaust the system beyond the manifold/header makes a big difference. If you have the later 22RE manifold an upgrade to the exhaust system will get really good results. The cast manifold is actually pretty good, a little small in the runners, but a decent design. The downpipe needs attention. Basically, the gains from headers come from the larger cross section of the runners. I live in CA, I've learned to get as much as I can from the stock parts, and keeping a stock appearance on the rest. I like Extrude Hone processes. Do the exhaust manifold and a heavy ceramic coat inside, have the downpipe made at 1 1/2" and then the exhaust to 2 1/4" after that. Even the best smog techs won't catch it. Looks totally stock.
Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #20 on: Aug 30, 2019, 12:55:34 PM »
Pistons.
Cast pistons are inexpensive, can handle the pressures and heat cycles that are typical to our stock to medium tuned 22Rs, but these are where the iffy section is. The alloying process and the foundry processes make huge differences in the quality.
Hypereutectic pistons are great pieces. Just keep in mind the addition of silica to the aluminum create an insulating effect in the metal so the heat stays in the piston. The HE alloy tends to reduce the expansion characteristics of aluminum allowing really tight clearances to the cylinder wall, The heat retention does raise the heat in the piston rings necessitating an increase in the ring end gaps. Pretty much all of the failures I've seen with KB hyper pistons was from ring seizure. All it takes is a hard run up a hill or a little overheating in the engine to close up the gap enough to need a tow truck. Look into the recommendations on increasing the end gap by intended use.
Forged pistons.
Really can't be beat, if your budget allows. There are several alloys available, choose the one that best suits your application. I'm not recalling the alloys right now, but if your app. is for daily or frequent use avoid the alloys that have the greatest cold clearances, they're noisy, even when heated up. The loose clearances also tend to accelerate cylinder wall and ring wear.
Rings.
My suggestion for a long life is to go for the thicker rings. The thin rings will require a rering in half the time. Thinner rings have less friction that will result in better output and economy. If you think 5lbs of torque and 2 miles per gallon are worth the shorter time to opening up your engine are worth it in your application then that's the way to go. For longevity go with rings that have more meat on them. I like to use Deeves rings, sweedish steel rings that are more flexible than the typical rings you'll find everywhere. I've found them to be thinner than regular rings with lower tension while still having a longer life than other thin rings. Zero gap rings offered up by Total Seal and Childs and Alberts are a good investment as they keep the gasses in the cylinder and out of the crankcase which increases cylinder pressure improving output and economy while reducing emissions and oil contamination as well. Reduced oil contamination can increase engine life too.

Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #21 on: Aug 30, 2019, 01:05:34 PM »
Connecting rods.
I'll add this little bit as a 'why not' issue. Decent set of rods can be in the $300 range, I can find Eagle rods for that here and there. Yeah, it's about twice what rebuilding a set of stockers will cost, but well worth it in my opinion. The reduced weight and increased strength can have their advantages. The stock 22R/RE rods are forged but have enough irregularities that balancing still won't remove all the harmonics. look at 100 rods, pay attention to the removed metal to get the stock balance. Billet rods are very close after machining without having a glob of weight in varying places throughout the part. CNC control is fantastic.
Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #22 on: Aug 30, 2019, 01:12:54 PM »
Bearings.
Look at the bearing builds. A manufacturer that makes bearings for a V8 engine (Clevite) knows how to build a bearing for a brute engine. Pretty sure you won't see the same bearings in an Indy car. Definitely be sure to get bearings with a soft break in layer. Also consider the oil you would like to use, bearing make-up will vary from one oil type to the other.
Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #23 on: Aug 30, 2019, 01:23:40 PM »
Lubrication.
Now is the time to think about the type of oil you want to use. Synthetic 5w20 has a different clearance need than 10w30 fossil. When I build for fossil oils I have the shop machine for looser clearances to increase the oil volume through the bearings and use the lowest visc I feel safe with. Synthetic oils have stronger and longer molecule chains that will work better with tighter clearances and reduced flow. Synthetics also have a better adhesion to surfaces affording better protection during low film scenarios, like when the oil pick-up is out of the oil pool. Synthetics also work better than fossil oils at higher temps.
« Last Edit: Aug 30, 2019, 01:31:56 PM by sirdeuce »
Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #24 on: Aug 30, 2019, 01:45:24 PM »
Head.
Rebuilding the old head may be better than getting a new head, especially if it's not been done before. Either way, old or new, I always install bronze guides and get a good lotta angle valve grind. If you plan to go with bigger valves, don't do it without corresponding port work. Just installing bigger valves can hurt flow. If you want better flow numbers and better charge characteristics in the cylinder have the combustion chamber worked. There is quite a bit to be gained unshrouding the intake valve.
The piston head clearance should be at least .025", no closer than that, unless you want to do it all over again. Best would be .030" no more than .040".
Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #25 on: Aug 30, 2019, 01:46:21 PM »
Just a few bugs for your ears.
Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #26 on: Aug 31, 2019, 05:44:07 AM »
It doesn't.
True.
The moment of inertia is more complicated than that because it depends on the shape of the spinning object as well as its mass.
As I said before these discussions are much clearer when everyone involved uses the correct terminology  for the correct concepts. :biggthumpup:

The last thing I have to say in this debate, which others have already said:
A heavier flywheel (Actually a flywheel with greater moment of inertia) stores more energy at a given RPM than a lighter one. This extra energy can be used to help your engine keep spinning between cylinders firing at 200 RPM, or it can help your rock crawler tire climb over a bigger bump. These are good and worthwhile things but do not mean that the flywheel added any torque, just more stored energy in reserve. Like having more money in your savings account without changing your monthly income.

I hope some of this is informative. Have a nice day everyone!


Sorry Lewis...  you are wrong and your "physics police" badge is bogus.

The measured force is TORQUE which is a real, indisputable measurement of the actual force - inertia- created by a rotating mass with a given radius from its perpendicular location - axis of rotation - the end of the crankshaft.  A 30 pound flywheel will produce more measurable torque than a 10 pound flywheel with the same radius and spinning at the same RPMs... it's simple physics.

The moment of inertia is the rotational mass and the torque is rotational force.

Here... I'll make it real simple for you....  here's handy calculator.  You plug in your numbers and see if FORCE changes and if FORCE can be calculated as TORQUE:

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/centrifugal-force

Gnarls.


« Last Edit: Aug 31, 2019, 06:01:26 AM by Gnarly4X »
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #27 on: Aug 31, 2019, 08:52:40 AM »
Alright guys, you're mixing apples and oranges here. A flywheel is basically a place to store energy, it does not create energy on it's own, it's just mass. Let's look at it through the eyes of a 5 year old.
A machine (engine in this case) creates 100lbft of torque. Coupled with a 10lb flywheel that carries 100lb of inertia. As a load, lets say 100lbs of resistance, is imposed on the flywheel/machine combo the inertial energy of the flywheel is dispersed almost immediately and the machine has to do pretty much all of the work to bring that resistant load into play. Now, increase the flywheel mass to 30lb, that gives us 300lbs of inertial energy. Introducing the 100lb load only takes 1/3 the energy stored in this flywheel increasing the time to the machines taking over the job completely. Either way, the flywheel's stored energy is transferred to the load totally. Usually before the load is brought to operational speed where the machine is required to complete that job. Once the stored energy is dissipated the flywheels mass becomes an extra load on the machine. Either way, the machine only produces 100lbft of torque.
Why do we need a flywheel? That machine makes 100lbft of torque at 1000rpm and only 30lbft at 200 rpm, introducing a 100lb load will stop a machine only putting 30lbft into it. It's used to get things started, that's all. As an added benefit the extra mass helps smooth operation, bigger the mass the smoother the operation. Where that whole misconception that a flywheel increases an engines torque comes from is that the stored energy can be greater than the engine's output. A flywheel neither increases nor decreases an engines output.
Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

Gnarly4X

  • Offline Silver Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 3814
  • Male Posts: 3,209
  • Member since Jun '16
  • Marlin and I slid "The Sluice" Martinez Canyon
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #28 on: Sep 01, 2019, 08:09:30 AM »
Alright guys, you're mixing apples and oranges here. .... A flywheel neither increases nor decreases an engines output.

S…..  I see your point.

We’re not talking about apples and oranges, we’re talking about the laws of physics, and specifically a rotating mass, inertia, and centrifigal force.

Would you agree that the engine creates inertia in the flywheel?

Is inertia a force?

If the engine stalls at 550 RPM while climbing a steep rock with a 10 pound flywheel, why does the engine stall at 250 RPMs with a 30 pound flywheel?

What is the stored energy, or force, or whatever you want to call it that is being applied to the input shaft of the transmission while climbing the rock as the engine stalls at 250 RPMs?

In the science of physics, what is that force called?

Gnarls.
« Last Edit: Sep 01, 2019, 10:39:43 AM by Gnarly4X »
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~26,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

sirdeuce

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 238
  • Male Posts: 302
  • Member since Sep '06
  • One shot, one kill.
    • View Profile
Re: Up coming 22RE rebuild ?'s
« Reply #29 on: Sep 01, 2019, 12:30:08 PM »
Force defined; Strength or energy as an attribute of physical action or movement.

Physical laws are different on the production of power, rotating mass, inertia, and ugh centrifugal (centripital) force.

Yes, the engine changes the inertia in the flywheel from staic to motivational.

A 10lb mass requires greater velocity than a 30lb mass to overcome the same resistance.

Energy required to change a masses inertial moment from static to motivational can be considered as a stored energy in that mass as that energy can be transferred to something else as energy. Just like a battery.

Look at a hammer, same thing. A Hammer is an energy conduit, the more energy fed to the hammer the more energy it can transfer to another object. A hammer is not a generator, it does not produce it's own energy.
If you want to delve deeper into the subject of a hammer or even flywheel, the energy/power required to get either up to the desired point requires more power than will be used to get the desired job done. But that's another story.
Sure it'll fit........ Just needs a little brute finesse.

 
 
 
 
 

Related Topics

9 Replies
3343 Views
Last post Jun 01, 2005, 10:21:46 PM
by alfio
1 Replies
1074 Views
Last post Jul 05, 2006, 07:55:19 PM
by 79coyotefrg
6 Replies
1149 Views
Last post May 22, 2007, 08:44:53 AM
by Zoomschwortz
3 Replies
2055 Views
Last post Dec 13, 2007, 04:08:02 PM
by 84pickup
4 Replies
2199 Views
Last post Feb 23, 2010, 05:57:24 PM
by topkicktech