Interesting comparison of 32 valve v-8's
Thread Starter
TECH Addict
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,153
Likes: 3
Interesting comparison of 32 valve v-8's I bought a new Tundra and it occurred to me there are lots of similarities between its engine and the old ZR1 engine:
1989 zr1
350 cid
3.9" bore x 3.7" stroke
11.0/1
32 valve, quad cam
375 hp at 6000 rpm
370 ft lb @ 4800 rpm
2007 Tundra
351 cid
3.7" bore x 4.0" stroke
10.2/1
32 valve, quad cam
381 hp @ 5600 rpm
401 ft lb @ 3600 rpm
The difference is that one came in a $60k high end performance car, while the other came in a $23k base model truck. It's amazing how much of a paradigm shift there is in 18 years.
Mike
1989 zr1
350 cid
3.9" bore x 3.7" stroke
11.0/1
32 valve, quad cam
375 hp at 6000 rpm
370 ft lb @ 4800 rpm
2007 Tundra
351 cid
3.7" bore x 4.0" stroke
10.2/1
32 valve, quad cam
381 hp @ 5600 rpm
401 ft lb @ 3600 rpm
The difference is that one came in a $60k high end performance car, while the other came in a $23k base model truck. It's amazing how much of a paradigm shift there is in 18 years.
Mike
Thread Starter
TECH Addict
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,153
Likes: 3
My Tundra ran 13.9 at 98 mph stock with only 300 miles on the odo.
The biggest problem with forced induction is the computer and fueling. Nobody really knows much about how the ECU works, what are the limitations, and what the fuel system is capable of. I was considering installing a rear-mount turbo and only running 4 psi boost to be on the safe side.
Mike
