Alternative 200 six connecting rod

pmuller9

2K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2018
We had a joint effort (I don't mean anyone was smoking anything) looking for an aftermarket rod for the 200 and drag-200stang found that the Toyota 1JZ rod would be a good candidate.

4.931" center to center
2.166" BE bore for the 2.047" crank pin
1.020" BE Width
1.00 PE width.
22mm pin
Comes in sets of six.
 

chad

5K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2020
Supporter 2019
"good" according to what?
exact length
to get closer - as an alternative to machining a zero deck
beefier
lighter
less expensive
etc
?
Oh, wait, I C U have some specs...I thought that wuz yer sig...
 

pmuller9

2K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2018
You're right.
I should have added that we were looking for a stronger rod that would hold up to turbocharging or any other extreme high performance application in the form of aftermarket 4340 steel "H" beams
The other consideration is having a performance rod that doesn't cost much more than than resizing the stock rod with ARP bolts, polished beams and shot peening.
 

rocklord

1K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2018
pmuller9":3lpejyzz said:
You're right.
I should have added that we were looking for a stronger rod that would hold up to turbocharging or any other extreme high performance application in the form of aftermarket 4340 steel "H" beams
The other consideration is having a performance rod that doesn't cost much more than than resizing the stock rod with ARP bolts, polished beams and shot peening.

Like these:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Connecting-Rod ... 1Q&vxp=mtr
 

pmuller9

2K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2018
Yep, like those and several others that are available.
Obviously the rods would require custom forged pistons but a person would most likely be going that route anyway for performance build.

Does anyone know what the big end width is for the 200 connecting rod?
 

chad

5K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2020
Supporter 2019
Thanks!
is there a place here to assemble these 'alternatives" & their benefits? may B even prt #s, prices and companies?
A catalogue of sorts (for Matt to supply us or just as an access point)... :hmmm:
 

pmuller9

2K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2018
Benefits;
The stock rod is 4.715" with a rod length to stroke ratio of 1.5
The aftermarket "H" beam rod is 4.931" which increases the rod length to stroke ratio to 1.58.
The piston side loading is decreased which is very important to those doing forced induction or high rpm engines.
The longer rod postions the piston pin at a 1.31" CH which is plenty room for rings.

The stock rod or "I" beams in general have a tendancy to bend sideways just below the small end especially if detenation is encounted.
Case in point: During a tuning session on our blown alky engine the engine went lean and bent 6 out of 8 Callies Ultra XD "I" beam rods that have angle arches from the small end to the beam to prevent bending. We changed to a different design and never had the problem again even under detonation.
The "H" beams handle high torque loads better.
I'm not really sure why I'm doing this paragragh when there is no real comparision between the stock rod and a 4340 steel "H" beam rod.

If you google "Toyota 1JZGTE connecting rods" you will find most of the brands with prices ranging from $300 to $1800.
The rod sets that are under $300 do not come with rod bolts so the buyer can select between the different grades of ARP bolts.
The cost of polishing the beam, shot peening and resizing the stock rod with ARP bolts is close to the cost of the low price aftermarket "H" beam rod.

If you have a 250 six then the 6.135" BBC 2.100" journal rod has similar benefits.
 

bubba22349

Moderator
Staff member
REDLINE 10K
VIP Member
Supporter 2019
(y) great info maybe we should start a few sticky’s for different engine build parts combos. (y) :nod:
 

pmuller9

2K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2018
67Straightsix":wwggq11r said:
The big end width measures .992".
Thanks 67Straightsix
Just needed to be sure.

The aftermarket rods will fit the crankshaft by either taking .014" off each side of the rod's big end or off of each cheek of the crank throw.
The crank rod journal gets turned down to 2.047" with a finished diameter for the correct bearing clearance.
 

bubba22349

Moderator
Staff member
REDLINE 10K
VIP Member
Supporter 2019
And maybe also offset grinding the crank throws for a small gain in stroke while your at it! (y) :nod:
 

cr_bobcat

Famous Member
Supporter 2018
Dagnabbit....eBay just ran a 20% off deal a few days ago. If I were on top of things I would have snagged a set... :banghead:
 

cr_bobcat

Famous Member
Supporter 2018
So has there been any movement here on someone trying one of these alternatives yet? Just curious.
 
cr_bobcat":2mu58gyz said:
Dagnabbit....eBay just ran a 20% off deal a few days ago. If I were on top of things I would have snagged a set... :banghead:

I actually did pick up a set during one of those sales. Got the discount plus had a gift card! Figured it was worth a shot for the amount of actual cash I spent...

I read a ton about that company maxpeedingrods (well, all that I could find...pretty scarce on information). An MG site had some dude that did some testing on them and said they are what they claim to be as far as he could tell (including verification that the bolts are genuine ARP...can find the link if anyone wants). Some claim they are the factory for eagle. Was pretty wary going in because of some stuff my dad's friends went through with Chinese made Chevy heads.

They came in last night and stunk the house up. Haven't weighed them...but the rods look nice enough. I'll take them with the engine to the machine shop when I get my head milled and see what they think. Probably going to use Clay Smith being they ain't that far away and were awesome over the phone.

Just gotta coordinate a trip in my wife's current car since I tore apart this mustang :lol:
 
First off, appologies to fast64ranchero. I don't have enough posts yet to reply to PMs.

I did some math though (kind of thinking about cam/rod combination):

Just going off some stock values from the tech archive:

Stock:
- stroke: 3.126
- bore: 3.68
- rod length: 4.715
- static compression ratio (SCR): 8.5:1 (guesstimate)
- dynamic compression ratio (DCR): 7.53:1
- roughly stock cam 252 @ 110, 4 degrees adv

With 1JZ Supra Rods:
- stroke: 3.126
- bore: 3.68
- rod length: 4.929
- SCR: 9.5:1
  • DCR 264D 112 at 4 adv: 7.88:1
    DCR 274S 112 at 4 adv: 7.61:1
    DCR STOCK at 4 adv: 7.94:1
- SCR: 9.1:1
  • DCR 264D 112 at 4 adv: 7.56:1
    DCR 274S 112 at 4 adv 7.30:1
    DCR STOCK at 4 adv 8.29
Those cam profiles are Clay Smith.

Don't know if that's helpful and it's all estimates and playing around with some online calcs. This article was kind of informative as to why people would choose one or the other.: http://blog.diamondracing.net/understan ... aft-stroke

Living in California with our super extreme 91 octane, I've gotta plan ahead or be forced into a water/meth setup or something. I'm also kind of "directed" by the wife's choice of keeping the C4 (which is why 112 LSA). Seems like I'll get more options for tuning with the longer rods because of the kind of "dwell" at the bottom and top...but I think that I'll start running into valve clearance of I keep bumping up the static compression (of course, there are pistons that could help too).

For turbo or supercharged where static compression stays a bit lower, seems like a perfect fit (part of my thoughts about going this direction was a "just in case, plan ahead thing").

If I'm completely wrong or something, let me know. I'm learning too! Haha.

I haven't been able to get to the rebuild yet because I've got a 19 month old. The time I've had has been devoted to the brakes and rear end. My wife only wanted to be able to stop and turn with power. I've also been kinda scouring the Google maps and local errand drives for closer machine shops with better hours (surprisingly hard to get any kind of information down in LA sometimes). Should be in October though!

I'm a rambler sometimes.

Edit: fixed some typos.
 

pmuller9

2K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2018
The two primary reasons for the longer Supra rods is:
The longer rod reduces the rod angle which reduces the side loading on the 200 six.
The stronger than stock rod allows those with the aluminun heads and/or power adders to push the limits of the 200.

Those rods also require a custom piston so you get to choose the SCR.
The most economical forged pistons will be 4032 alloy pistons from Autotec.

The valves are recessed in the head far enough that most cams will not create a valve to piston clearance issue.
It is always a good thing to check anyway.
 

bubba22349

Moderator
Staff member
REDLINE 10K
VIP Member
Supporter 2019
66contriviad-coupe":3252izj3 said:
First off, appologies to fast64ranchero. I don't have enough posts yet to reply to PMs.

I did some math though (kind of thinking about cam/rod combination):

Just going off some stock values from the tech archive:

Stock:
- stroke: 3.126
- bore: 3.68
- rod length: 4.715
- static compression ratio (SCR): 8.5:1 (guesstimate)
- dynamic compression ratio (DCR): 7.53:1
- roughly stock cam 252 @ 110, 4 degrees adv

With 1JZ Supra Rods:
- stroke: 3.126
- bore: 3.68
- rod length: 4.929
- SCR: 9.5:1
  • DCR 264D 112 at 4 adv: 7.88:1
    DCR 274S 112 at 4 adv: 7.61:1
    DCR STOCK at 4 adv: 7.94:1
- SCR: 9.1:1
  • DCR 264D 112 at 4 adv: 7.56:1
    DCR 274S 112 at 4 adv 7.30:1
    DCR STOCK at 4 adv 8.29
Those cam profiles are Clay Smith.

Don't know if that's helpful and it's all estimates and playing around with some online calcs. This article was kind of informative as to why people would choose one or the other.: http://blog.diamondracing.net/understan ... aft-stroke

Living in California with our super extreme 91 octane, I've gotta plan ahead or be forced into a water/meth setup or something. I'm also kind of "directed" by the wife's choice of keeping the C4 (which is why 112 LSA). Seems like I'll get more options for tuning with the longer rods because of the kind of "dwell" at the bottom and top...but I think that I'll start running into valve clearance of I keep bumping up the static compression (of course, there are pistons that could help too).

For turbo or supercharged where static compression stays a bit lower, seems like a perfect fit (part of my thoughts about going this direction was a "just in case, plan ahead thing").

If I'm completely wrong or something, let me know. I'm learning too! Haha.

I haven't been able to get to the rebuild yet because I've got a 19 month old. The time I've had has been devoted to the brakes and rear end. My wife only wanted to be able to stop and turn with power. I've also been kinda scouring the Google maps and local errand drives for closer machine shops with better hours (surprisingly hard to get any kind of information down in LA sometimes). Should be in October though!

I'm a rambler sometimes.

Edit: fixed some typos.

To your above specs you can add that

Stock 1966 200 head has a 52 CC Combustion Chamber
Stock 200 steel shim head gasket is .022
Pistion is down the hole .019
200 Piston Dish is 6.5 CC I think
The stock 200 Compression Ratio is 8.7 to 1

Good luck on your project (y) :nod:
 
bubba22349":1rjfwufs said:
To your above specs you can add that

Stock 1966 200 head has a 52 CC Combustion Chamber
Stock 200 steel shim head gasket is .022
Pistion is down the hole .019
200 Piston Dish is 6.5 CC I think
The stock 200 Compression Ratio is 8.7 to 1

Good luck on your project (y) :nod:

I think I have the thermacor/smog head with whatever is in there. Somewhere I had read it was 8.5. good to know that it is probably 8.7. It ain't staying that though. Thanks for the heads up. I can actually verify what it is at some point. Deck isnt blocked and it had a felpro. (I guess my use of stock may be wrong). :beer:
Thanks bubba22349!

pmuller9":1rjfwufs said:
Your DCR calculations are good except you need to swap figures between the 9.1 and 9.5 SCR.

The two primary reasons for the longer Supra rods is:
The longer rod reduces the rod angle which reduces the side loading on the 200 six.
The stronger than stock rod allows those with the aluminun heads and/or power adders to push the limits of the 200.

Those rods also require a custom piston so you get to choose the SCR.
The most economical forged pistons will be 4032 alloy pistons from Autotec.

The valves are recessed in the head far enough that most cams will not create a valve to piston clearance issue.
It is always a good thing to check anyway.

Thanks for catching the typo on my transcription with the 9.1/9.5 swap. Copy/paste/formatting skills have failed!

Totally was planning for Autotec pistons...kind of just thinking out loud about pistons clearance issues and to keep that in mind when I go to the machine shop and have them measure out for pistons. I have Yella Terra 1.65 and that 274 Clay Smith cam advertises 0.495 @ 1.65:1 ratio and I had read on either the tech archive or the handbook 0.500 was a safe distance (can't remember and haven't verified).

I'm on the list for the aluminum head, but I'm probably going to have to go forward with the cast iron one (1969) until I get a notification. I guess I'm somewhat trying to maximize my performance now with some plan down the road.

Thanks pmuller9 and drag-200stang for sending me down this path though (and doing the intial research). It's given me a lot to think about and learn. Pretty cool stuff.

I'll take some pictures at some point soon. I did weigh the new rods on my little digital scale. They seemed pretty darn spot on but I don't know of the scale is super precise (good enough to mail guitar pedals via USPS) or if they all balanced the same top/bottom-wise because I don't know how to do that.
 

pmuller9

2K+
VIP Member
Supporter 2018
From fast64ranchero

[image]https://www.dropbox.com/s/08j7cjqpzj7gcb8/inline%206%20rods%20resized.jpg?raw=1[/image]
[image]https://www.dropbox.com/s/bss7uc6xo6ooycn/rod%20resized.jpg?raw=1[/image]
[image]https://www.dropbox.com/s/mz03eha6z2erxht/6%20rods%20resized.jpg?raw=1[/image]
 
Top