SBC vs 2F

[psreno]

"When many people think of a small block Chevy, they think of a carbureted, mid-seventies engine."

Many v8 swaps were done in the '70s because it was very difficult to get parts for the F/2Fs at that time (+ no speed limits). If you broke down in the middle of Nevada, for instance, you left your truck for weeks while the Toyota dealer in the next major town ordered parts.

SBC parts could be sourced at the nearest farm junkyard (and still can be). And, once you do the Chevy swap, it is cheap(er) and easy(er) to swap future SBC engines in.

Nowdays, the reasons to swap are very different, what with fuel injection and google.

 

[toyotalandfj40]

Cool, I guess it is for the build. The V8 has many advantages, so the debate is over. The 2F is great for nostalgia and stock themed builds and the V8 is good for everything else.

Also, with the 4-speed, I was clocking 95mph on my 2F (GPS and odometer were saying the same thing).

Great! Thank you everyone for your cooperation.

Though now I have a question. Has anyone seen the new Mercedes Bluetec engines? turbo-charged V6 , 400 ft/lb, but 208 hp.....that kicks Cummins upside the face easily, I wonder if it'll fit.

 

[Mace]

anything can fit with enough money..

 

[twoyotas]

I met a guy once who was running a relatively new chevy straight 6 in his fj40. I forget what year the motor was. He said his friends liked to tease him, but it did everything he wanted it to do.

 

[fj40charles]

Though now I have a question. Has anyone seen the new Mercedes Bluetec engines? turbo-charged V6 , 400 ft/lb, but 208 hp.....that kicks Cummins upside the face easily, I wonder if it'll fit.

Which Cummins are you referring to?

Rather neat, and finally glad the US car industry is improving on that.... Okay, that helps, thank you, just trying to get some of the things in my head to settle really, but always love the sound of a really good straight six.

Thank you.

I like the sound and torque of my 6BT Cummins too.

 

[toyotalandfj40]

Which Cummins are you referring to?

Well, can you fit the 5.9L or 6.7L V8s that they make for the Dodge Rams into the FJ40 bay? And won't the steering column cause problems if it's too wide? Just saying, this seems like a rather good option to have here.....even BMW made a rather decent Turbo Diesel engine, and Porsche came (or coming) out with a diesel engine, be interesting to see those.

 

[pb4ugo]

anything can fit with enough money..

& creativity.....

There's someone running a V12 jag motor on this site.

I did a 7.4L(BBC) years ago.

 

[Brian in Oregon]

Well, as for economy, I can begin to see that, but the cost of maintaining a new v8 is expensive. And then if you ran an old V8 gets expensive as well, and they have their problems. It's just a debate I have in my head, seeing which is better. My TBI 2F engine gave me great gas mileage, I was significantly impressed by it. Went from Los Angeles to Big Bear lake in half a tank, that was nearly doing 18 mpg.

Cost of maintaining a new V8 is expensive? Old V8s are expensive? Please explain. The SBC is one of the less expensive motors to run, especially when you consider many will have twice the mileage lifespan of an F or 2F.

And Chevy is doing great currently with their V8s, but then you are still stuck with an automatic, hard to find a manual gearbox to attach to a new V8, and then putting it to the H42 tranny, yeah, it can take the torque, but the tranny sure as hell won't, needing to pay for a new one of those to replace, and the same with the whole drivetrain really. The thing is, that working with a 2F, makes it simpler to not........make it an easy car to break.

Utter nonsense. I'm running a Toyota 4-speed and transfer case.

A friend of mine, he has dana 60s front and back, and an LS2 if I recall correctly. He has to keep spare parts for the drivetrain in case his son breaks it. Fortunately, he engineered it to where it's a propshaft he'll break and nothing else, but still, spare parts. And I'm dismissing the spare parts for any Landcruiser, I take points, electrical cable, etc. but still haven't had to change much from the drivetrain since I got the split transfercase (that is a lifesaver).

I see you've conveniently sidestepped the issue of using a bone stock ordinary SBC. I'm sure if I put in a huge cam, high compression pistons, big valve big port heads, and a dual quad intake I can break things too. But my bone stock 350 has a power level quite suitable for bone stock Toyota running gear and I do not drive it like a hot rod.

So, why make it better, when the car was engineered to handle so much? The list of things to change to a V8 seems longer than the 2F, it's doesn't quite seem rational. However, the availability for parts is a God send, would love to have the support like they do everywhere else for 2F parts, but just have to look for it before it goes wrong.

For the previous owner who installed a V8, it was very rational. He had two rebuilt Fs installed and both needed to be rebuilt again with very low mileage on them.

From my perspective, the V8 runs better in the mountain grades pulling a small trailer. And I have not given up off road driveability, because I installed a QuadraJet with small primiaries which allows it to lug down almost as good as the six.

If I was to install a six in a Land Cruiser and had a clean slate to work from, it would probably be a 292 Chevy or a 300 Ford. I'm not impressed with the old technology Toyota engine that was obsolete when it was copied from Chevy.

And yes, I know how to work on a V8.

If true, then you really cherry picked your facts.

So far
2F advantages: rugidness, simplicity (6 moving parts practically), works with the car greatly, and easy to repair and diagnose.

2F down falls: rare parts, not economical, low power.

All of that is true, but add long engine lifespan is not enjoyed by many. Also add that it is the ORIGINAL engine, and that is very important to some people, including potential future buyers. Especially if a lame brain hacks up an FJ40 to put a V8 in it.

V8 advantages: Significantly lighter, easy to find parts, simple (if old), power, almost equal rugidness, good economy, can pass smog test, and more power than needed.

Again, you are glossing over the power issue by assuming every V8 is hot rodded. Mine is bone stock and it definitely does not have more power than is needed. I'd say the power level is just right. It is better suited to run at highway speeds pulling a trailer in the mountain passes, but isn't breaking the drivetrain. As for smog testing, not an issue since my '71 is exempt. Better economy, yes, if you consider 2 mpg with a carb V8 to be really that much better. An injected V8 is the way to go for economy. And frankly I think the 350 is more rugged than the Toyota six.

V8 disadvantages: Requires a lot more than just the engine, original drivetrain won't cut it really, can be complicated to repair if new V8, (applies to nearly new V8 only) automatic is almost only option, and (old) break downs more common.

Again, utter nonsense. I'm running bone stock FJ40 running gear, though the 3-speed was upgraded to a 4-speed. And by "old" V8s breaking down more often, if you are installing an old junk yard motor, maybe, but a rebuilt 350 is not an "old" engine. Frankly, because of the mileage longevity issues of the six, my opinion is that a used V8 and a freshly rebuilt Toyota six have about the same lifespans on average.

Regardless, everyone breaks down regardless of everything, but still just tossing this out there.

Yes, there will always be issues with any mechanical device. Alternators go out, water pumps may leak, hoses get old, but that can happen to any motor.

(Did I miss any of the advantages or disadvantages?)

Yes. There are two camps to the V8 bunch. Hot rodders and those simply wanting a more modern engine to the Toyota six.

Much of what you wrote does indeed apply to the hot rodders, but they should know better than to install an engine with that much power into a stock vehicle and not expect issues.

You've overlook those simply wanting a more modern engine that does not have the issue of running on the freeway at higher sustained RPMs. Those of us running a bone stock V8 are not looking for a significant power increase. There is more power, yes, but well within the design limits of the drivetrain.

 

[Roboosfj40s]

Wow! Lol....Bottom line is; Anything Man Made Is Subject To Fail.

 

[Mace]

The SBC is one of the less expensive motors to run, especially when you consider many will have twice the mileage lifespan of an F or 2F.

For the previous owner who installed a V8, it was very rational. He had two rebuilt Fs installed and both needed to be rebuilt again with very low mileage on them.

All of that is true, but add long engine lifespan is not enjoyed by many.

And frankly I think the 350 is more rugged than the Toyota six.

His engine builder sucks..

 

[fj40charles]

Well, can you fit the 5.9L or 6.7L V8s that they make for the Dodge Rams into the FJ40 bay? And won't the steering column cause problems if it's too wide? Just saying, this seems like a rather good option to have here.....even BMW made a rather decent Turbo Diesel engine, and Porsche came (or coming) out with a diesel engine, be interesting to see those.

I'm sure you could fit a 5.9 Cummins into a 40 engine bay, but I don't think you'll like it much. Too much torque and you'll end up breaking lots of stock drivetrain parts. Also, very heavy for the stock axles and springs.

I don't see the steering being an issue.

Why is the Mercedes Blu Tec diesel so much better than a Cummins? I would still like to know which Cummins you're comparing the Mercedes Blu Tec to.

 

[toyotalandfj40]

His engine builder sucks..

Exactly my point, might have only seen V8s if the F engine had to be rebuilt often.

And I run with people who have V8s, one having a stock V8, and yes, it works well, has grunt, but we had to stop for him to refuel rather a lot, and he brought a whole car of parts in it.

Which brings in that other point! "Anything man made will break at some point, no matter what you do."

 

[toyotalandfj40]

I'm sure you could fit a 5.9 Cummins into a 40 engine bay, but I don't think you'll like it much. Too much torque and you'll end up breaking lots of stock drivetrain parts. Also, very heavy for the stock axles and springs.

I don't see the steering being an issue.

Why is the Mercedes Blu Tec diesel so much better than a Cummins? I would still like to know which Cummins you're comparing the Mercedes Blu Tec to.

The inline four cylinder they had, I remember seeing ICON having one, forgot what it was, but I was an inline four diesel engine.

 

[jagota]

& creativity.....

There's someone running a V12 jag motor on this site.

I did a 7.4L(BBC) years ago.

Ah yes, the V12. Once it was finished it has been no more expensive then any of the other engines.

I put a v8 in a 40, liked it a lot, would probably still have it if not for a drunk driver at 70 mph on the highway. I survived nearly unscatched, the 40 did not.

 

[Off Duty]

Wow! Lol....Bottom line is; Anything Man Made Is Subject To Fail.

Actually, if it has T**ts or wheels, it will eventually give you problems!
I think this is the weirdest discussion I've ever seen here on MUD

It's what you want, what works for you, and how you plan on using it.

The 2f is in fact very rugged and dependable if properly maintained. Same goes for the 3fe engines in 62's, but it's still an old school engine, with old school technology and old school fuel economy.
Nothing really wrong with any of that, and it's certainly got it's place!
It's still difficult to find parts for, and that's not going to get any better.

No matter what, you can't beat the physics.
Regardless of whether you're pushing a large (55/45/60/62) or small (40) brick, aerodynamically, it's still a brick!
If you can force that brick through the air at a given speed, at a lower RPM, and less strain on the engine, then you're going to be better off no matter what you're looking at.

My personal opinion is, if you want a 60's or 70's era "hot rod" go by one.
Get a Camaro, Nova, SuperBee or any number of other purpose built cars of the era, and go racing.

The Landcruiser to me has always been a steady, lumbering, get you anywhere and back vehicle. When I was driving my 40, and later my 62, I had no choice but to slow down.
This in turn seemed to slow my pulse and heart rate to a similar degree, and left me with the "feeling" that my BP was decreasing as well.
Sort of the same feeling I got switching from my Kawasaki police bike, and my Goldwing, to the HD PD ride.

Now physiologically, whether or not this really occurred was and is, totally immaterial to me. I "felt it" and that's all that ever mattered!

On the other hand, I'd feel much better if I could maintain that same lumbering, get you anywhere and back mentality, combined with the knowledge that I can buy, borrow, or steal SBC parts from damned near anywhere on the continent, and actually have the ability to get where I'm headed just a little faster, or get out of the way a little quicker, if the need arises, and not be shackled to the inevitable slowness of the 2F/3FE.

On the opposite side of the coin however, I HATE computers. the newer engines require a different approach to the diagnostics, and replacing computers can be an expensive proposition.

But in the end, there is no right or wrong answer. Just "answers" and "opinions."
They both have advantages and disadvantages.
It's about what you want, need and makes you happy.

Best of luck with your decision. Either way you go, you can't go wrong!

 

[toyotalandfj40]

Actually, if it has T**ts or wheels, it will eventually give you problems!
I think this is the weirdest discussion I've ever seen here on MUD

It's what you want, what works for you, and how you plan on using it.

The 2f is in fact very rugged and dependable if properly maintained. Same goes for the 3fe engines in 62's, but it's still an old school engine, with old school technology and old school fuel economy.
Nothing really wrong with any of that, and it's certainly got it's place!
It's still difficult to find parts for, and that's not going to get any better.

No matter what, you can't beat the physics.
Regardless of whether you're pushing a large (55/45/60/62) or small (40) brick, aerodynamically, it's still a brick!
If you can force that brick through the air at a given speed, at a lower RPM, and less strain on the engine, then you're going to be better off no matter what you're looking at.

My personal opinion is, if you want a 60's or 70's era "hot rod" go by one.
Get a Camaro, Nova, SuperBee or any number of other purpose built cars of the era, and go racing.

The Landcruiser to me has always been a steady, lumbering, get you anywhere and back vehicle. When I was driving my 40, and later my 62, I had no choice but to slow down.
This in turn seemed to slow my pulse and heart rate to a similar degree, and left me with the "feeling" that my BP was decreasing as well.
Sort of the same feeling I got switching from my Kawasaki police bike, and my Goldwing, to the HD PD ride.

Now physiologically, whether or not this really occurred was and is, totally immaterial to me. I "felt it" and that's all that ever mattered!

On the other hand, I'd feel much better if I could maintain that same lumbering, get you anywhere and back mentality, combined with the knowledge that I can buy, borrow, or steal SBC parts from damned near anywhere on the continent, and actually have the ability to get where I'm headed just a little faster, or get out of the way a little quicker, if the need arises, and not be shackled to the inevitable slowness of the 2F/3FE.

On the opposite side of the coin however, I HATE computers. the newer engines require a different approach to the diagnostics, and replacing computers can be an expensive proposition.

But in the end, there is no right or wrong answer. Just "answers" and "opinions."
They both have advantages and disadvantages.
It's about what you want, need and makes you happy.

Best of luck with your decision. Either way you go, you can't go wrong!

Thank you very much, I'll experiment with the next 40 I get, and keep my first 40 nice and near stock (TBI 2F isn't really stock). So, is there anymore says upon this matter?

 

[msapers]

You have to take intended use into account. If you're going to want to spin 44 inch tires in deep thick mud at 5000 RPM, a V8 is the only sane way to go. For daily driving, normal wheeling, normal tire sizes, etc.. a 2f is great.

I've owned an F, A 2F, and a 350. All were good, reliable, serviceable rigs that got me wherever I needed to go and did whatever I needed them to do.

My current "cruiser is a stock '76 with the 2F and I love it.

The 2F is an extremely durable engine if you drive it sanely and perform proper preventative maintenence.

The SBC is an extremely durable engine no matter how you drive it.

 

[toyotalandfj40]

You have to take intended use into account. If you're going to want to spin 44 inch tires in deep thick mud at 5000 RPM, a V8 is the only sane way to go. For daily driving, normal wheeling, normal tire sizes, etc.. a 2f is great.

I've owned an F, A 2F, and a 350. All were good, reliable, serviceable rigs that got me wherever I needed to go and did whatever I needed them to do.

My current "cruiser is a stock '76 with the 2F and I love it.

The 2F is an extremely durable engine if you drive it sanely and perform proper preventative maintenence.

The SBC is an extremely durable engine no matter how you drive it.

Cool, though, I think the FJ by itself limits how far you can push it. Don't expect sharp turning, don't expect to drag race between lights, or go vertical (though that sure as hell can be fun).

So it truly is to try and get everything out of the FJ. Thank you for supporting this thread.

 

[DaveWest5150]

this thread is all over the place... IF... a 2 f is properly cared for it will outlast any small block 3 to 1. Yes... the small block has more Horsepower.. the 2 f has more torque. the 2 f runs cooler, and CAN be built to have nearly the same horsepower as a mild small block. I like both, and the only reason my 40 has a small block, is because it was cheaper than building a nice 2 f.

 

[fj40charles]

this thread is all over the place... IF... a 2 f is properly cared for it will outlast any small block 3 to 1. Yes... the small block has more Horsepower.. the 2 f has more torque. the 2 f runs cooler, and CAN be built to have nearly the same horsepower as a mild small block. I like both, and the only reason my 40 has a small block, is because it was cheaper than building a nice 2 f.

I disagree with your assertion that a properly cared for 2F will outlast any small block 3 to 1. I've seen plenty of broken connecting rods on F/2F engines. Having only 4 main bearings is not real desirable IMHO.