2f Engine Head/Block/Carb/Intake Choices (1 Viewer)

[eithegreat]

After much research and my own observations, I'm still stumped on the best 2f engine block/head/carb/intake combinations. I'll be scouring all sources I can find for some answers, but am basically at the mercy of this forum, please help, and sorry about the length!!!

Here's what I'm trying to do: build the best performing 2F engine (well-rounded performance) out of parts I have or can get for reasonable prices. The truck is an '75 fj40, so should be smog exempt in CA (I want to completely desmog this truck properly). I'm adding 2-pc headers, K&N filter, and am trying to improve compression/performance in combustion. I don't have the money for ceramic MAF headers right now, so that is out unless other's believe it is essential.

Engines I have: '75, 60k '77 (original engine - I just am titling the truck as a '75), 60k '83 engine, 110k and 150k '83 engine, and 150k '86 and '87 engines.

I have heads, pistons, and carbs for all the above 2F engines and a 200k '67 F head; and am willing to shed the cash for a late '73 or '74 F head (to improve compression while keeping the oiling passages the same with a 2F block. Unless anyone knows if I rebuilt the '67 head I have that it'll fit on the 2F block with easy modifications.

Which Air Intake and intake manifold to use? F engine (the big bowl type one) or 2f? I can't find any information on the facts about either.

Which carb to use? I'm pretty decent at rebuilding the aisans and prefer them. But which year? I have a '75 body, a good '77, and all years of the later 60 carbs.

And last but not least, which block? Go with the '77 with the domed pistons, or put in the an '83 block with a '74 head - keep the flat pistons or put in the domed ones? I've read that the later fj60 blocks tend to have more efficient combustion chambers, but the domed pistons in the mid seventies trucks yield better compression boosts with a F head. Any ideas?

Does anyone know when I'm done, will this truck require premium fuel to keep pinging down? I'd rather keep it at super or under if possible. I'll put in colder plugs and set the advance to the standard 15 degrees (it's the only mark on my flywheels I can actually see). I am trying to avoid a complete rebuild, but will if required, I want this to run like a new truck (esp. since it originally has only 60k on it).

Just any help or advise is appreciated. Many will think that my efforts at building the "perfect" engine are wasteful, but I've dedicated a good two years of my life (solid) towards this project and want to have a shiny example of what one of these marvels can do...

Also, will my boosted performance cut down on engine life with the boosted compression? If so maybe I should have just gone the 350 route...

I'll be swapping in 60k 3.73 thirds and eventually an h55f soon as I get the spare cash. I'll also be adding power steering (either fj60 or mini truck box) and 33 inch tires.

I'll also be rebuilding my FJ60 with the complete 60k drive train I have and the next lowest mileage '83 2f smogged engine. Any engines and parts I have and don't need are to be sold, if interested in anything just let me know - I list of lot of items on ebay as well.

Thanks for any replies!!!

 

[65swb45]

Hi ei and welcome to MUD. You've certainly asked a lot. But you did right by me on the FJ60 stuff I bought from you last year, so I'll take a stab at this.

I like the 77 2Fs because of the domed pistons, but if any of your 60 motors has good compression I would choose it because it is better balanced from the factory than the 77s were. I would choose the 77 carb over a 75 or an FJ60 carb for simplicity. 75 and 77 intakes are the same and are both ok. No need for the 68ish large runner unless you know how to open up the Aisan to get all the cfm out of it.

Personal preference against the two piece headers because of leaks and clearance issues. I prefer the Tri-Y, which I also happen to sell.

You could spend a lot more time swapping pistons around, as well as heads, but you would be trading longevity for performance. IMO, this is the first step on the path to the dark side.

 

[Pin_Head]

2Fs are pretty near perfect for their intended purpose in FJ40s right as the came out of the box. Hot rodding them is on the losing end of diminishing returns and can be counterproductive. It is a 1950s design tractor engine with 4 main bearings and over square stroke. It just isn't going to last long at high RPM. You can end up dropping a lot of money on the project for a small power gain at the expense of reliability and then slap yourself upside the head and go: "Doh, I could have had a V8!"

YMMV, literally

 

[eithegreat]

Thanks for the above replies, keep any insight coming, please! I look forward to getting my two trucks finished up and contributing a bit to this forum! I may look into tri-y's eventually Mark, hope the 60 stuff you got from me worked out well.

So... The reason for hot rodding the engine was my attempt to strive for that 200% gain in performance... A landcruiser digest I had once bought claimed that addition of any performance part led to gains in the "modest" 10-15% range, but addition of all (boosted compression, headers, dizzy, and intake) made the phenominal 200% boost. Of course, if it takes the longevity from my engines (which I worked my behind off to find in such low mileages); I'll forget it and just add the headers and K&N to the orignal 60k '77 2F. I'd love to use one of the '83 engines; but am wary of their original head as I personally have had some trouble with the later 2F heads in trucks I bought that had been overheated in the past (I also read that they were weaker).

So one vote for an '83 and one for the '77, reminds me of choosing cereal at the grocery store...

Pin_Head, I wasn't wanting to run at higher RPMs (I'm religious about staying below 3k), but thought that compression boost would just mean a more "powerful" engine? So the additional pressure from a compression boost would lead to problems and a shorter lifespan?

Anyone know which air cleaner to use with K&N, F or 2F? Seems to be NO write ups about any...

Thanks again guys, I hope everyone can now find out the truths with all of these modifications...

 

[norm]

2f engines

I'd use the 87 engine. I don't have my 72 head anymore to compare side by side, but I think the combustion chambers were the same. It's weird that Toyota went back to flat top pistons and a closed chamber head in the 80's. You can't use the 87 head with 77 domed pistons without maching the head or pistons. Another reason you might consider is the 87 block has the holes to mount the factory power steering pump.

I think the 2f responds well to some hotrodding. A little more compression, a mild cam, headers, and re-curved distributor can wakes them up a bit and still have lots of low end torque and great reliabiity.

 

[Mark W]

Use the later 2F short block. Slightly lighter rods and pistons. Slightly lighter valvetrain. Better oil pump. Use a '69-'72 F engine head (to work with the flat top pistons) and run an oiling line to take care of the rocker arms. A '67 head with the deep bathtub combustion chamber and the siamesed exhaust ports is nothing more than a conversation piece. Run the late model 2F electronic ignition. If you can find one of the large/separate runner intakes, use it. The "FJ60" carb is the way to go. Balance the rotating assmbly. Put a cam with a duration (advertised) in the 260 degree range into the engine. The ones in the 270 degree range loose a little bottom end and don't really gain enough in midrange or top end to justify it. Put a header on it and a free flowing exhaust.

Anyone who says that this is a waste of time... well I've built several hot rodded 2Fs that give the lie to this. The 2F has a LOT of untapped power potential. And you don't have to loose any of the low end tractability or longevity that makes this motor what it is and you can improve fuel economy at the same time. That's not based on other peoples reports or assumptions or anything but first hand experience .

 

[Mark W]

Pin_Head, I wasn't wanting to run at higher RPMs (I'm religious about staying below 3k), but thought that compression boost would just mean a more "powerful" engine? So the additional pressure from a compression boost would lead to problems and a shorter lifespan?

If this is true, then forget about performance. Why would you set a 3000 RPOM limit? Heck, even the factory rates the HP at 3600.

You can cruise across the country at 3000 without a break and then do it a few more times... It ain't gonna hurt it.

A built 2F will take 4000-4500 shifts all day long. It will pull to and beyond 5000. That's where I normally set my personal limit (and seldom go quite that high), but I have a couple of guys turning my engines 5500 pretty regularly and even pushing to 6000 (which I DON'T recommend).

Additional compression (within the ranges that we are talking about for a 2F) will in theory add a little heat, but in reality you will not be able to detect it. It will not adversely affect anything in the engine.


Mark...

 

[eithegreat]

Wow, thanks for all the insight, keep them coming!!! I can see already that perhaps there is no absolute correct answers to compression boosts - block/head modifications, but many good viewpoints. I'm going to pick up my final cruiser parts truck over the weekend and see if there is a consensus; then start decided what to do then. Since I have a fj60 also that I'm keeping stock, I might just go on with my hotrod plans with the fj40 and keep a good spare engine incase it should lead to a catastraphic end.

Mark W, I always kept my truck at just under 3k becuase it seemed like the general consensus to promote longevity, 3k just seemed like a sweet spot, though the engine does still run well above that (had to try it once or twice). Perhaps going a little higher occasionally would be alright - and a nice thrill... When you said later block, did you mean any fj60 block, or just the '87? Any ideas where I'd find any info on running an oilling line to the rockers in the '69-72 head? Exactly what would I be trying to do... I do have a metal mill/lathe, so I'm not afriad of refabricating/fine tuning parts.

 

[Pighead]

I built an engine last summer...
I had found a cache of 7 or 8 engines. I used a '76 block, bored it .50 over, put a late F head on it. Federal-Mogul domed pistons, Sealed-Power rings, balanced, some head work, RV cam. Used my old '74 carb, but sent it to Jim C. first. Downey header, '68 carb, Pertronix. Runs pretty good. Had some pre-detonation issues, fixed it with better gas. Routinely tachs to 3.5K around town, 4.5K going up an onramp. It never sounds over-taxed, feels like it has plenty more vroom.

 

[Tigerstripe40]

As a me too post...

I have a 1976 2F that was built by a machine shop that did all of Cruiser Outfitters motors.
We built the motor to make torque, but also have some reserve horsepower.

anyhow, they bored teh block .030 over. Used the necessary domed pistons.
DId a 3 angle valve job with oversize SS valve.
We put in an .270 duration cam.
Upgraded oil pump.
Balanced the whole assembly.
We didn't up the compression very much. Probably around 8:1 (in retrospect, maybe I should have had them deck the head a little more).

Out the door of the machine shop IU Think I spend $1700 for all of the machine work and parts.
I also put in a non-usa Vac Advance distributor (yes, with points!)
Jim C rebuilt and desmogged carb.
Man-A-Fre header (came with the truck)

I run my motor 3200 rpm on the freeway and can maintain that. I usually am pretty conservative with my RPMs in the motor, but when I am getting on the free way I will do 4000 rpm shifts. RARELY do I go over 3200 rpms.

The truck pulls pretty hard. I have plenty of power for passing (I run an SM420, 4.11 gears, and 35" tires). I know I could push this motor harder.

As far as timing goes, I run as much advance as I can so that the engine JUST starts to ping when going up a steep hill and I romp on the gas. Every 2F is slightly different so seat of the pants timing is a good thing to learn how to do.

While my truck IS NOT a sports car, it gets up and moves pretty well if I put my foot into it.

The biggest complement I got was that I was having a vibration problem, and I had DJ's Traction Systems owner David drive my truck to help me figure it out. (DJ's was THE guy to take your truck to for a V8 conversion). He jumped out of the truck with a BIG grin on his face and said 'James, if I didn't know any better, I'd have thought you had a V8 under the hood of this thing'

2F's can make power. IF you are expecting V8 kind of power, you will be mistaken. BUt a 2F can be built well enough for most of our needs.

I used to think differently, but I think that adding a well though out intercooled turbo setup to a 2F would simply be AWESOME.

as far as gas mileage goes.
I routinely get 15-17mpg.

Timing and carbureation are key.

 

[Mace]

Ahh, the glorious sounds of a turbo spooling up..


I'll be building a new motor for my FJ60 coming up.

It will be a low budget turbo 2F.

stay tuned..

 

[Mark W]

Mark W, I always kept my truck at just under 3k becuase it seemed like the general consensus to promote longevity, 3k just seemed like a sweet spot, though the engine does still run well above that (had to try it once or twice). Perhaps going a little higher occasionally would be alright - and a nice thrill... When you said later block, did you mean any fj60 block, or just the '87? Any ideas where I'd find any info on running an oilling line to the rockers in the '69-72 head? Exactly what would I be trying to do... I do have a metal mill/lathe, so I'm not afriad of refabricating/fine tuning parts.

3000 does work as a limit on your cruise speed. I have never been comfortable with much higher for extended highwy runs. Just don't be afriad to run it up when shifting through the gears, powering through mud or pulling a steep upgrade and stuff like that.

Any of the '81 and later short blocks will be comparable.

Other than talking to folks who have done it I would not expect to fine info on the oiling lines. I'ts prety simple. The two mpost popular aproaches are to tap into the main oil passage below the #2 main cam bearing at the oil filter and run the line behind the side cover, or to "T": off of the oil pressure sending unit and run an external line up to the head. Whichever route you take, you can either feed it back in via the rocker arm pedestal or the mounting boss for the same.

Some guys use the F engine rocker arm assembly which has the provision for the oil line to it.


Mark...

 

[Pin_Head]

Pin_Head, I wasn't wanting to run at higher RPMs (I'm religious about staying below 3k), but thought that compression boost would just mean a more "powerful" engine? So the additional pressure from a compression boost would lead to problems and a shorter lifespan?

...

I spent a lot of my money in my misguided youth street rod racing, so I learned the hard way what works and what doesn't. The dynamometer and quarter mile ETs don't lie.

The key to performance and power is burning more air/fuel mix. This is linearly related to engine RPM up to the point where the volumetric efficiency falls off. An engine that redlines at 7,500 RPM is going to produce more power than one that throws a rod at 5,500. Displacement is key: A 5.7 L engine is going to have a big advantage over a 4.6 L engine.

While you can hot rod a 2F and get some performance increase, the point is that it isn't worth the money and effort because of its design limitations. The analogy is like putting a racing saddle on a mule. It may look better, but it really doesn't accomplish much. For less money, you can get more power in a stock V8.

Power is always inversely related to fuel economy. More power requires more fuel.

 

[Mark W]

I spent a lot of my money in my misguided youth street rod racing, so I learned the hard way what works and what doesn't. The dynamometer and quarter mile ETs don't lie.

The key to performance and power is burning more air/fuel mix. This is linearly related to engine RPM up to the point where the volumetric efficiency falls off. An engine that redlines at 7,500 RPM is going to produce more power than one that throws a rod at 5,500. Displacement is key: A 5.7 L engine is going to have a big advantage over a 4.6 L engine.

While you can hot rod a 2F and get some performance increase, the point is that it isn't worth the money and effort because of its design limitations. The analogy is like putting a racing saddle on a mule. It may look better, but it really doesn't accomplish much. For less money, you can get more power in a stock V8.

Power is always inversely related to fuel economy. More power requires more fuel.

There's lots of us out there who spent their younger years pushing the qarter mile ETs.

Analogies like saddles on mules have their place. But when all is said and done, as I have said earlier, there is a lot of unused potential in the 2F. Can you build power easier and to higher levels with a 350 TBI? Sure you can. But you can also push a 2F into the 200 HP range with not a whole lot of money spent and without haveing to do any swaps of fab work. And it will still be a 300,000+ mile motor. I am perfectly happy to build and run V8s in Cruisers and Minis. I have owned and do own my share of both V8 rigs and 2F setups. I Like 'em all.
But the idea that you HAVE to swap a V8 in to get acceptable power is just wrong. I talk guys out of V8 swaps all the time, because once they look at how they want to use the rig, what they want it to do and what their resources are (tools, experience, money, time, spouse's patience or whatever) it just makes more sense to get a bit more out of their 2F instead. How many of us here are actually running 44 inch boggers at the local mud bog races, or running a '40 at the drag strip"

And the more power=more fuel statement is correct. But there's a catch... You CAN gain power without spending fuel if you increase the efeciency of the engine. Burning fuel at a compresssion of 7.8:1 yeilds a lot less energy out of it than burning the same amount of fuel at 9.5:1. A cam which lets the intake charge run nice and smooth at the prm range that the engine is used will burn the air fuel more effeciently than one which is being pushed a few hundred or a thousand rpm past it's optimum rpm.
Done it, seen it, measured it. The most documented case I know personally was an FJ60 getting 13mpg on the highway, over a 2-3 hundred mile run (with mountans as well as flat ground with probably 50 miles of city driving at the middle). After we built it the fuel consumption of that same stretch was 15-16.

That's about a 20% gain in fuel mileage. Not too shabby. Even if it didn't have significant power gains as well. Which it did.



If the 2F was a bit more power/efficiency orientated to start with then you would not be able to gain all that much. But it isn't. It's a 1930s design (an evolved design, but old nontheless) which is meant to run on Mexican ditch water if it has to and to keep running while maintained by an illiterate teenager in any dusty village in nowhereistan using baling wire and a hammer.

Mark...

 

[Pin_Head]

But you can also push a 2F into the 200 HP range with not a whole lot of money spent and without haveing to do any swaps of fab work. And it will still be a 300,000+ mile motor. ...

Wishful thinking. You might see 200 hp if the engine was turbo/supercharged, but you aren't going to see a 45% increase in hp just by fiddling around. Test it on a dyno; they don't lie. The oiling system is already marginal and the bearings aren't going to appreciate the extra load.

Burning fuel at a compresssion of 7.8:1 yeilds a lot less energy out of it than burning the same amount of fuel at 9.5:1. ...

It is a spit in the bucket. Even increasing the compression ratio by 25% only nets a less than 10% hp increase. It isn't worth the effort because you will need higher octane fuel. Google "compression ratio + power"

Your average 350 TBI is pushing 200 hp right out of the box and it weighs 200 lbs less.
A hp 350 can easily make 300 or more hp.

Hot rodding a 2F when you really need horseposer is like taking a knife to a gun fight.

2Fs are great for their intended purpose in FJ40s just they way they come out of the factory.

 

[Mace]

Wishful thinking. You might see 200 hp if the engine was turbo/supercharged, but you aren't going to see a 45% increase in hp just by fiddling around. Test it on a dyno; they don't lie. The oiling system is already marginal and the bearings aren't going to appreciate the extra load.


Your average 350 TBI is pushing 200 hp right out of the box and it weighs 200 lbs less.
A hp 350 can easily make 300 or more hp.

QUOTE]


Turbo = higher than 200hp.

Average TBI is 180 hp..

It takes very little to actually be able to outperform a stock TBI motor.

 

[Mark W]

Actually I HAVE seen 200+ on the dyno from a 2F. Fairly pedestrian and no turbo involved.

But it's not worth beating this horse any more.



Mark...

 

[Pin_Head]

But it's not worth beating this horse any more.



Mark...

It's a MULE.

Hiyo silver, 2F!

 

[eithegreat]

Well I'm gonna try to find an old F head, anyone have one they want to sell (69-72). Unless some other people think that putting a 73-74 head on the '77 block I have would be awesome (then I need a 73-74 head). I know that for raw performance, a 350 is the way to go, especially since I want to drop in a five speed. Putting a gm in however would take away from my cruiser's charm since I'm putting so much effort into keeping everything on it Aisan or TAG. It is a very solid restoration and I just want to add some oomph to the original drivetrain. Plus passing a Chevy 350 pickup up a steep hill in a "true" vintage Toyota would be sweet... Eventually maybe I'll even try to turbo it...

-Eddie

 

[norm]

Has anyone cc'd the combustion chambers of a 72, 74, 77 and 85? It would be a great resource to have. Maybe someone should write a "how to hot rod your 2f" book like the "how to hot rod your chevy, vw, datsun, ford, mopar...."

Horsepower is great on the road, but torque is what makes driving a stock landcruiser off road fun. I spend more time idling, and riding the brakes than on the gas when I'm Cruisin. Of course that was when I had 3 speed and non-power steering. I just installed power steering and a H41 with my 3 speed xfer case, so maybe now I won't need to use the pedals at all.