Talk:Toyota MZ engine

in the article, it is said "It happens to be the world's first partial OBD-II compliant engine, and the world's first fully compliant OBD-II engine."

Contridicting itself. "world's first partial OBD-II compliant", "and the world's first fully compliant OBD-II engine."

Is it partially compliant or fully?

I went ahead and removed that sentence, it's self-contradicting, and nobody seems to know what the writer actually meant. Ahanix1989 15:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Americocentrism

More information about engines not necessarily sold in the USA would be nice. Especially about the engines in the Australian-market Camry, Avalon and Aurion.

Changing the whole article to SI units would be good too Grassynoel 01:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Especially considering that 172kW doesn't equal 210hp 220.101.145.182 10:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interference design

I enjoyed reading the very good section on the Toyota MZ-FE engines. My only disappointment was that it did not mention which engines were of an interference design and which were non-interference. I'm not surprised by this omission since it seems nearly impossible to find these facts on the web by doing normal Google searches. The general opinions (that often appear to be uninformed opinions) are about 50/50 for interference or non-interference for the 1MZ-FE engine. If there is anyone who has access to the engineering specs or other definitive, primary data regarding this issue I'd very much like to see the interference information added for these engines and for as many others as possible. This becomes a crucial question when one is considering how compulive (or paranoid) one should be about changing timing belts exactly when recommended by the manufacturer, or ever earlier. I've found lots of generalizations on the web to the effect that most Toyota engines are non-interference but nothing reliable that lists this information by engine type. Several people have mentioned the Gates belt company web site had this information, but their link to "interference" does not seem to lead to any useful information about the issue, so perhaps they have removed that data. I've also seen comments on the web that some of the Gates data was not correct anyway, but exactly which parts were incorrect is not usually stated. This is an area that really needs some definitive clarification by a knowledgable person, like an automotive engineer for example. 206.188.56.24 23:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, Dave L.

^^^ The information that I have been able to glean is that the 1MZ-FE with VVTi is Interference whilst the non-VVTi version is not. That would make sense as the specification charts I have seen show the VVTi version as having greater valve lift, at least on the intake valves. (8.something mm instead of 7.something) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.157.237.106 (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MZ engines for Mark II?

Really?.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.105.60.37 (talk) 06:51, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was on 'Mark II Wagon's... 95.105.60.37 (talk) 06:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]