Hey Ya'll,
I have a 94 Land Cruiser I've had for a while and I have been toying with the idea of a turbo. I have done a vast amount of research regarding turboing a 1FZ-FE engine that is OBD1 and has a flapper AFM. I know most people say OBDII are easier to turbo/supercharge.
As far as I can tell, the TRD superchargers designed for 95-97 Land Cruisers use a draw through design when it comes to the placement of the throttle body. This eliminates the need for a blowoff valve and, in theory, should keep the distance between the throttle body and the AFM short, whilst not extending the distance between the throttle body and intake manifold too much. This could also allow space for a water to air intercooler between the turbo and intake manifold.
My question is, would a Rising Rate Fuel Pressure regulator and perhaps an auxiliary fuel pump be adequate for a low boost setup (boost under 10PSI)?
Additionally, I have read quite a few threads on here about a problem with the AF ratio becoming lean right at the transition from vacuum to boost, particularly when NOT at WOT and the presence of boost. I read in a very informative Fuel Injection thread on here that the Bell Engineering Fuel regulator 2035 BEGI is a good choice because this regulator has the capability of raising the fuel pressure prior to the presence of boost (i.e; vacuum).
The main concern I have regarding this setup is the ECU cutting pulse width (fuel) at cruising speeds when the throttle is not fully open, yet sufficient load on the engine creating boost and the O2 sensors telling the ECU to continually cut fuel. Is that a problem people have had with the NON-OBDII Land Cruisers?
Thanks.
Jon
I have a 94 Land Cruiser I've had for a while and I have been toying with the idea of a turbo. I have done a vast amount of research regarding turboing a 1FZ-FE engine that is OBD1 and has a flapper AFM. I know most people say OBDII are easier to turbo/supercharge.
As far as I can tell, the TRD superchargers designed for 95-97 Land Cruisers use a draw through design when it comes to the placement of the throttle body. This eliminates the need for a blowoff valve and, in theory, should keep the distance between the throttle body and the AFM short, whilst not extending the distance between the throttle body and intake manifold too much. This could also allow space for a water to air intercooler between the turbo and intake manifold.
My question is, would a Rising Rate Fuel Pressure regulator and perhaps an auxiliary fuel pump be adequate for a low boost setup (boost under 10PSI)?
Additionally, I have read quite a few threads on here about a problem with the AF ratio becoming lean right at the transition from vacuum to boost, particularly when NOT at WOT and the presence of boost. I read in a very informative Fuel Injection thread on here that the Bell Engineering Fuel regulator 2035 BEGI is a good choice because this regulator has the capability of raising the fuel pressure prior to the presence of boost (i.e; vacuum).
The main concern I have regarding this setup is the ECU cutting pulse width (fuel) at cruising speeds when the throttle is not fully open, yet sufficient load on the engine creating boost and the O2 sensors telling the ECU to continually cut fuel. Is that a problem people have had with the NON-OBDII Land Cruisers?
Thanks.
Jon
