so if you guys were picking up a shell to prep... and it was avail with irs/disc vs solid axle drum, would you go solid or irs? The solid would have to be replaced with something bigger... also not sure if its 4 link like ae86 in there leafs, but guessing 4 link. Noticed the toy Gr B were solid axle.

Thoughts appreciated.

Please, be more cryptic.

So, you have the choice between a RWD celica, and a FWD celica?

Actually, It's the other way around. All AE86's had the same coil spring 4-link with panhard rod suspension that all RWD Celica's came with. Some Celica GTS' came with semi-trailing arm IRS that was originally found only in the Supra.

My preference for stronger, lighter would be the solid axle. It's 4 link plus panhard bar, like stated. Get the solid axle out of a 70's Supra, 7.5" with disk brakes and a ton of gearing options thanks to the trucks that had 7.5" diffs also. If you go this route, you might look up my car on the web, for inspiration, it's an '84 GT.

-Jon

Quote
mhooper
so if you guys were picking up a shell to prep... and it was avail with irs/disc vs solid axle drum, would you go solid or irs? The solid would have to be replaced with something bigger... also not sure if its 4 link like ae86 in there leafs, but guessing 4 link. Noticed the toy Gr B were solid axle.

Thoughts appreciated.

A well located 5 link solid axle is hard to beat all round.
IRS is "cooler" but the limitations of passenger vehicles are such that it seems easy to get it wrong.

Either way I don't think there's any reason to swap to the other.
I've looked a lot at the early 80s Celica IRS and seems to be a lot of weight and maybe not so strong.

You know I push Xratty and 240 Volvo, OK?
I say the Xratty really is a much better car, its a 10-15 years later in time, dynamically "feels nicer" but I don't think any of us are so good that the differences in rear suspension design will make ANY difference in SS times.

And 35 years of watching MkII Escorts kick all sorts of ass, and 15 of watching 240s back up the idea that the solid axle---when located with the longest links possible---ain't holding anybody back.

Besides that, by now, most of those Celica's rear arms have a lot of rust inside them, making them prone to bending and breaking even on the street. If I build another Celica, I'll likely build up a custom IRS, but only for the cool factor, not the strength.

-Jon

Hey Mike,

Hope all is well down your way. I'm kinda with John on this one: most stock IRS's have limitations that keep them from being as good as they could be, particularly in the travel area. I would empahsize:
- Coil sprung
- Good travel; a long armed 4-link does this
- Solid mounting and bushings (make the panhard chassis mount strong)
- Simple links (panhard over Watts linkage)
- Large brakes (no standard 70's/80's Jap car drums!)
- Easy to get and cheap gear sets and limited-slips
- Strong parts;there's no need to accept a rear axle that ever have issues, when it is so easy to get one setup that will last and never give any problems.

Regards,
Mark B.

I think give the choice I'd go solid axle too.. problem is at some types of events a switch from independant to solid puts you into open (Targa)... Ok for G5 or G2 I believe.

-Martin.

I think he's talking about which model to buy, not converting. The '84 GT and ST had solid axles, the GT-S had IRS. I wouldn't think buying a particular model would force the class.

-Jon

Hi a Mark! Thank you all for the input. Kinda what I was thinking. You are exactly right about it being one car with two options. GTs has cool flares though.. THis sounds weird, but I am dying to stick a set of 1mz/3mz vvti /w58 trans and rally it. They are super cheap and I have a very good supply of engine accessories/parts/toy knowledge in the family.. The celicas are cheap and the aluminum block v6 would be just a shade over the 22r weight, but with 220/240 +hp/tq in super super reliable trim, all with sub 70k long blocks for under a grand, not that you could blow one up. The tq is 200 + from under 3k, and peak hp is around 5k, so it would still be fun to drive.

Bench building, but just can't get it out of my head. Think it would be a bombproof drivetrain.

I've done some research on just this kind of V6 swap. Not easy considering Toyota only sold the engines as FWD configurations in the US. My thought was to not worry about the tip angle, leave the block twisted 15 degrees to the right, that's how the oil pan want to sit anyways. There is a guy road racing a first gen Celica with a 1mz engine in Australia, good build thread on the engine swap online.

-Jon

tip would look a little funky, but 4a-ge corrolla, f20c, etc etc or all tipped so we'll call it by design... The vvti head is huge and protrudes back. That was the biggest fitment issue I see. considered non vvti, but sure would be nice.

Don't worry about the funky look, Mike. It can't be any funkier than my favorite funky engine: the early 60's GM SB V8 with one bank of the cylinders cut out of the casting for the Skylarks. It looks like a Sabb 99 4 cylinder having a bad day.....

If you put in this tilted engine, I just want to know if it wants to roll over/hits stuff more on one side than the other!

Mark B.

The guy in Australia, I believe, had a custom bell housing made along with a custom oil pan, to make it look right. I'm told the 3.4L 5vz-fe would be too tall, but it would make a great powerplant for a Celica, in my opinion. (or the 4.0L)
-Jon

The 5vz is iron block and way heavier, plus down on power. THe 4.0 is really tall and would be tough to fit, great power though. THe 3.5 2gr-fe? is 270 ish hp, but only comes drive by wire and is very lethargic, otherwise I would be trying to go that route. All great engines, but the 3.5 has had some problems.