Ca18det Vs Sr20det

Started by craigcd, 01:25:05 AM / 16-Jun-04

Previous topic - Next topic

Nebuchernezzer

Yeah the CA was replaced because of costing as far as i know, the SR used only the tech that proved worthy on the CA (oil squirters etc) but used a low rent valvetrain (that can still spin to the factory 7500 revlimit anyways so who cares).  The FJ was probably replaced because of it\'s size weight and NVH.  It\'s hardly technical and has that old school massive wide angle twin cam head.  If you have ever heard one running they sound quite terrible actually haha so NVH was going to suffer.

QuoteIts just why bother spending all that money on the FJ to only replace it with something that costs alot as well when you could have used that money to develop the FJ instead. Mmmmm Fj20det in the S13 pumping 160kw!!
Plus isnt the turbo on the FJ an old T3 which means ghey spool and lower compression to deal with the fact of no cooler and more detonation!
Yeah its a 1980s turbo motor so the compression is low the turbo is slow and it weighs alot.  Its technical advancement, i\'m sure there is many reasons why it was replaced and economics plays as much a part as driveablility and outright power.  Thats why every car isn\'t powered by a pushrod bent 8, with quad pumpers on it hehe

If looks could kill you'd have eyes like cyanide...
http://www.cardomain.com/id/zeruel

2BDFRNT

QuoteIt\'s probably to do with response, NVH (noise vibration and harshness), fuel economy etc.  I have never driven an FJ20 but in stock form they probably don\'t feel anywhere near as good to drive as a CA18DET (low compression, slower turbo spool etc).

There is a reason for the difference in feel. Well, two reasons really.

1) The FJ20 DR30 \'Rines and S12 Silvias were homoglation specials. Plain and simple, the factory made them to fulfill homoglation rules, not to create a quick and comfortable sports coupe for Joe Bloggs (or the avergae joe for yanks, or whatever your local translation is). So they were fitted with huge turbos and such to homoglate said turbos.

SO

2) When the FJ20 no longer needed to be homoglated, Nissan did the smart thing and put in an engine which, while having a lower peak power figure, was  far more suited to road use, so they could actually sell some to the 30-40 year old non-enthusiast bracket, who would have been scared shitless by the on/off power delivery and extreme noise of the FJ20 S12\'s (The DR30 had been superceded by this point.)

Sure, the FJ is a superior engine for tuning purposes but, really, who takes a BRAND NEW car and tunes it, straight off the bat? Answer is, for 20 points, not enough people to put a major dent in overall sales. Therefore it makes perfect sense why Nissan chose the route they did.

It takes cubic money to tune a brand new car. For example who takes a new Audi A6 Bi-turbo and has enough cash to rip it apart and tune it straight away? Only a tiny percentage of the people who actually buy an A6 Bi-turbo.
Gus:
S12\'s....sigh. Had one, lost it, got another...lost it. Back to the drawing board.
_________________

Damn, I got Hyundai Exel all over my bodykit!!!

Nebuchernezzer

I agree except on the matter of
QuoteSo they were fitted with huge turbos
they weren\'t they were fitted with old T3s, they are physically smaller than a T28 from a S14 or S15.  The AR is a normal 0.6 on skylines and a 0.45 on S12s, the reason for their lack of response is 1980s turbo technology.  The wastegate flows directly into a flat wall, the housing and blade design isn\'t very advanced etc.  I\'m not even sure the FJ was on/off as a factory engine, i was always under the impression it was just plain doughy down low and a bit laggy, not so much scary as uninspiring.  Great drag engine though, there is many a FJ powered drag car down here, and everyone has seen Bens drag silvia in NZ by now.

If looks could kill you'd have eyes like cyanide...
http://www.cardomain.com/id/zeruel

craigcd

I will have some pics up tonight!!! :headbang:  :cheers:  :lol:

salps12

Opps i think i turned this into a FJ vs the rest debate  8-)

I actually thought the FJ would have been similar to my old MX5, slow responding turbo and on/off boost! But it was a 2.2L 12valve  :werd:
[span style=\'color:RoyalBlue\']Gazelle: CA18DET[/span]
S15 T28BB - ARC intercooler - oil cooler w/ remote mount filter - Rb20 AFM - Boxed pod - Hyrbid EBC - HSV 300kw Fuel pump - Xtreme HD Clutch - DBA Slotted Discs w/ f:RB74  r:Comp2 pads - JIC Front coilovers & Rear kyb shocks and kingsprings

[span style=\'color:DeepSkyBlue\']POWER:[/span] unknown (approx 140rwkw)

craigcd

So i made up my mind, wanted a CA18DET, but wasnt paying SR money to get a CA soooo....

Did a leak down test and there is less than 10% leakage on all four cylinders. That includes leakage from the dipstick and exhaust. :p

salps12

QuoteNEWS:

D1Datto - 1600, CA18, 450hp Garret, 223 rwkw, 12.0 @ 113 mph

By an Aussie aka Dr Drift on ns.com forums.
Yeh the times are fast due to the 1600 datto but the CA18DET is running on stock internals.. 223rwkw!!

Ok for a CA18DET to run with this much power you need the following:

Standard Internals
Removed Intake Butterflies
RB25DE Throttle Body
FMIC
2.5\" Exhaust
444 cc Inj
Z32 AFM
Remap
450 BB turbo

Hmmmmm 2.5\' zorst, gtr injectors and a simple remap! This seems a bit too easy!  :mrgreen:
[span style=\'color:RoyalBlue\']Gazelle: CA18DET[/span]
S15 T28BB - ARC intercooler - oil cooler w/ remote mount filter - Rb20 AFM - Boxed pod - Hyrbid EBC - HSV 300kw Fuel pump - Xtreme HD Clutch - DBA Slotted Discs w/ f:RB74  r:Comp2 pads - JIC Front coilovers & Rear kyb shocks and kingsprings

[span style=\'color:DeepSkyBlue\']POWER:[/span] unknown (approx 140rwkw)

Mr.200

I never do understand stock motor vs this motor that motor etc etc.

Sounds to me like a lot of people are dumping a ton of money on engine swaps to make negligible power gains.

Not to offend, but there\'s been a host of ca18et cars that with moderate build ups have lived at 250 rwhp ~ 190 kw.

Plenty to embarass a stock or even modded Sr20det.

Don\'t forget that\'s SOHC power, which means all in by 5,000 rpm.

Hell, there was that one guy in the UK who had his up to 320whp ~ 240 kw with ca18det internals.

He dumped that motor because he found the ca18et could not be opened up enough to make much more power than that, as oversize valves are a no go.

... and now is running a 450 whp ca18det

I have to agree with Alex, people are wrong in assuming 2 cams are always better than one.

I also don\'t understand why a selling feature of motor a) or motor b) is how high it can rev.

Anyone else driven an S2000?

To be fast you have to make the most power in the shortest amount of time. A turbocharger the size of a satelite dish on a motor that revs to 10,000 might make 400 hp at 8,500 RPM, but you\'re fodder for anyone that can make an even 200 hp across most of the RPM band.

The DET motors make more power due to technological improvements, not because they unlocked some secret formula for engine manufacturing.

The PRINCIPLE of making power has never changed in an internal combustion engine. Sure, new motors can make more power than their older cousins (like how the LS1 is finally making a dent in the domestic drags) ... but come on, it\'s taken the automotive industry what ... 30 years to come close to 426 Hemi territory.

Whatever motor you end up starting with, Nissan isn\'t going to be making you any faster. They did their part in supplying you with either a 135, a 175 or a 205 hp motor. From then on, it\'s what you do that will make it fast.

So lower your reciprocating weight (adding a second cam would be counterproductive ... you\'d really only want the DET head for flow potential, not the 2 cams ...)

Take a look at the Mercedes McLaren ... turbo SOHC.

HP is a number, and really ends up meaning nothing. If your motor is light, revs happily and boost easily, anyone up against you has to play catch up big time and hope they have enough nut to holeshot you.

I would swear by the FJs power potential by the simple fact that NA, those motors can make over 300hp. If you can find one, look for the FJ24E stroker kit ... show me a ca18de or sr20de or any other nissan 4 pot that will make that much NA power. Sure the kit is a couple thousand bucks, but that\'s a formula motor.

Anyway, my SOHC flag waving is over. *lol*

I would say the ca18det and sr20det make comparable power ... and if that\'s the route you\'re going to go, I\'d immediately discredit anything you\'ve heard about them. I\'ve been told, and by people that should know, so many conflicting things about either motor, in fact any motor. I\'ve heard the ca18det can take 500 hp before things go breaky. But I\'ve also heard that anything over 250-300 is the limit. By the same token, I\'ve seen SR20DEts sitting on the floor with cracked blocks from under 300 hp.

But when a motor goes bad, so many people instantly assume it was an inherant weakness of the design.

But also, I\'d say 95% of people I\'ve talked to with JDM motors just dropped them in, added some go fast goodies, all the necessary doo-dads, engine management, gauges etc. The wondered why their motor either grenaded, or didn\'t make anywhere near the power that \"so and so\'s buildup that used the same parts in said magazine\"

I\'ve also seen a magazine article claiming they built a \"stock bottom end\" SR20DET that took 400 hp happily. Going on to read the article, this \"stock bottom end\" was a stock SR20DET crank and rods that had been cryo treated, knife edged, lightened, balanced and fitted with a few hundred dollars worth of the best bearings you can buy. Oh yeah, they also ran lightweight aluminum low compression pistons.

By that definition, pretty much any \"stock bottom end\" will take 400 hp

And it\'s not like it\'s a new phenomenon. For years and years and years, people have been under the impression that 1967-71 440s were the only year 440s to bother with, because \"the higher nickel content in the block\" made the post 72s weak, and anything more than a .030 overbore was suicide.

It took until about 2 years ago for someone to actually bother checking. He took a \'77 440, punched it .090 ... proceeded to transplant all the internals from his 750 hp race 440 into it, then they ran it on the dyno, on the track, and everywhere they could. Didn\'t break. With that research, they had a piece of different blocks analyzed, and yes, the later blocks did have marginally more nickel, but not enough to make a difference.

There\'s 30 years of crow eating right there. I have hundreds of tech articles from supposed Gurus telling everyone not to build up a post 71 440. Even recomended you swap out your post 71 for a pre 71 before starting any build up.

68-71 440hp = thousands

72-78 440 = next to free
1987 200sx CA18ETi - The Toad
1972 Dodge Charger 413ci/6.6L - The Bully

Matt
http://www.angelfire.com/freak/brutesquad/index.html

RPSport-John

the fj is a good motor, but parts availability wise (currently) you want to go with the sr. There is alot more heat on all sr related sellers to lower prices recently so it is becoming more cost effective.  As well, IF YOU DONT LIKE THE NON HASSLE OF HYDROLIC LIFTERS] You can purchase HKS or TOmei Solid lifter kits for less than $300 for the SR20. Combo\'d with it\'s square bore to stroke ratio 86mm x 86mm you can rev to the moon.  Go with the sr, it really is bang for you\'re buck.  Take it from sombody who has worked with both the CA and SR.


John
RPSport.net
Costa Mesa, CA
I Install S12 Swap. Believe It.
Suspension Solutions, Race Prep, Fabrication, Engine Management Tunning.

jeffwins24

#49
EDIT: lol at me reviving a old thread >.<




i think CA wins...

If I was buying a new car i wouldn't want it using technology from the 1970's (hint hint head design) Yeah you get it, the SR uses rocker arms while the CA uses active motion cams or somethig like that where the cam acts directly on the valve instead of the cam then rocker then valve, which makes it flow better and and revv very freely. In terms of power the SR wins because it's a bigger engine in the fact that it's a 2.0 instead of a 1.8 liter.

300hp on a 1.8 liter is alot on stress on a small engine. But I hear theres stroker kits around somewhere to bump it to a 2.0

Another point is that the CA is timing belt and the SR is timing chain. you could only revv so high with a chain compared to a belt, I've heard of some people revving up to 11k rpms on a CA.

I see the CA as the whiny bitch. and the SR as the the low revving whiny bitch Lol. Another thing is the CA is mentioned as the 4 cylinder RB because if it was based off the RB series. Obviously the the SR was made with more power in mind because when the FJ left the scene people were complaining about the down grade in power on the CA, so they made the SR as a cheap powerful engine. also another reason the CA was dropped was because it costed alot to make, but remember when something cost alot to make it usually means that it was made with more precision then the other engine in this case the the CA beats the SR

The CA has a intake where the it splits from a 4 runner intake into a 8, two per cylinder compared to the SR'S 4 (also used for high air flow). this kind of intake manifold usually requires more time to make and it's better flowing compared to the SR'S :S

Externally the engines look really different and they should. The CA is a iron block and the SR is a shiny aluminum block but don't think that SR is ultra heavy if anything it's 50 pounds heavier then the CA.

The CA is more revv happy and hyperactive engine (like me LOL) compared to the SR. The SR20 is more peppy and on long straights feels like it's a lightweight engine, Then again i guess that 200hp isn't all for not. (Or so I've been told)

I personally haven't seen the combustion chamber of either so I can't comment on that.

just like the CA the SR has piston oil squirter's and a crank stud for a girdle  (or so I've Researched). Now comparing turbos the CA and SR both use the same turbo but the CA'S turbo is just a tab bit smaller then the SR'S at least the SR20DET has that running for it.

I'm not really sure how they respond to modifications. But being the CA born from the RB engines I would imagine it responds very very well to modifications. I can't really say anything for the SR.

Going back to the point I made about one Using timing belt and chain I think nissan used the timing chain because it was cheap and they would last long. where as a timing belt could snap after a long period of time and lots and lots of abuse. after that you'd have to spend at least 200 - 400 for valves and the works and if the pistons happen to take a poop well thats like another 900 buxs the cost etc etc, but lets not forget rust loves metal, and metal hates rust (timing chain).

In my opinion I would prefer a CA over the SR and a FJ over the CA and SR. If your aiming for low end torque and drag racing you should consider the KA24DE as the have plenty of low end torque.

With all this in mind I would imagine the SR as more of a truck engine like the KA.

I've done some research on the QR25DE....Nissan is on crack and thats the reason I would never buy a new car, because i would have to end up doing a engine swap. and plus OBD1 fitting in a OBD2 car... not gonna work unless you swap out all the electronics.
VG30ET > 2JZ > RB > 1JZ> L28ET> 4g63t > 7m > 3gste > KA24DET > SR20DET > *

Arro

Wow, so many things I need to correct in what you said...


Quote from: jeffwins24
If I was buying a new car i wouldn't want it using technology from the 1970's (hint hint head design) Yeah you get it, the SR uses rocker arms while the CA uses active motion cams or somethig like that where the cam acts directly on the valve instead of the cam then rocker then valve, which makes it flow better and and revv very freely.

No, it doesn't affect flow. That's determined by the port geometry, the induction method, and the lift and duration of the camshaft's cam lobe. The intermediate part (the rocker arm) is just a lever, nothing more, nothing less. It will move with the lift of the cam equally (or it should). I would think that the two methods are just, like many things with Nissan, attempts at different approaches to the same goal. One may or may not be more *reliable* in terms of durability and maintenance, but otherwise that's about it.

QuoteIn terms of power the SR wins because it's a bigger engine in the fact that it's a 2.0 instead of a 1.8 liter.

"power" is a vague term often thrown around too much too easily. And what's more, there's a big difference between factory power, maximum power, and *reliable* power. The CA18DET, stock, can make more *reliable* power than the stock SR20DET in most situations. Displacement isn't the issue, there's only .2 liter difference. That's less of an issue with boosted engines.

Quote300hp on a 1.8 liter is alot on stress on a small engine. But I hear theres stroker kits around somewhere to bump it to a 2.0

You're looking at surface facts... "well, it's a 1.8 so it has to work a little harder to make the same power". No offense, but this is wholly inaccurate, too. Power isn't just due to displacement, but due to head design, fuel map, manifolds, and in this case, turbos used.

What's more, in the case of THESE two engines, the CA18DET is built much stronger than the SR... the internals for one thing are stronger... the block is more stout... and the CA18DET even has a crank girdle on the bottom, whereas the SR does not. Again, we come back to the "reliable power" factor.


QuoteAnother point is that the CA is timing belt and the SR is timing chain. you could only rev so high with a chain compared to a belt, I've heard of some people revving up to 11k rpms on a CA.

That's an urban legend. Belts snap too. A faulty belt can snap unexpectedly. And FJ's and KA's use chains, and those engines have been pushed to extreme limits with no issues with chains (not usually). Just because someone here or there has a chain or belt break doesn't make one technology better or worse than the other.

QuoteI see the CA as the whiny bitch. and the SR as the the low revving whiny bitch Lol.

Both engines are capable of higher revs given the right engine prep. So I have no idea where you get that from.


QuoteAnother thing is the CA is mentioned as the 4 cylinder RB because if it was based off the RB series.

False. The RB engines were based on the CA18DET head design, and the L-6 bottom end. So you have that part of the way backwards, and part of the way missing the L series connection.


QuoteObviously the the SR was made with more power in mind because when the FJ left the scene people were complaining about the down grade in power on the CA, so they made the SR as a cheap powerful engine. also another reason the CA was dropped was because it costed alot to make, but remember when something cost alot to make it usually means that it was made with more precision then the other engine in this case the the CA beats the SR

Oh, obviously  I'm just giving you shit dude, but that's not the case. The SR was their "lego" engine, meant to plug into a variety of car platforms, and provide ample, CHEAP power. It was never their "power" series. That was the RB.

Don't let construction costs fool you. They just decided that all the engineering that went into the CA18DET would be better suited in a 2 liter inline six engine instead. CA18DET was one of Nissan's experiments-put-on-the-market.

The SR's advantage was this: it was shoved into so many different cars, in both naturally aspirated and turbocharged versions, that the aftermarket saw HUGE advantage in producing parts, because the customer base was HUGE, too. Whereas the customer base for the CA18DET was a nitche at best.


QuoteThe CA has a intake where the it splits from a 4 runner intake into a 8, two per cylinder compared to the SR'S 4 (also used for high air flow). this kind of intake manifold usually requires more time to make and it's better flowing compared to the SR'S :S

Again, "better flowing" is like a nine year old saying "bigger is better". It's a narrow concept, and actually not true. The reason behind the dual runner intake was to provide higher velocities at lower RPM's from a smaller aperature, and then when that volume was maxed out, to open up the secondaries for the increased volume. Closed, it promotes better throttle response, and open it promotes higher flow. The only reason tuners disable them to full open is because they often change the flow characteristics of the overall induction system (bigger turbocharger, different intercooler, ported head, bigger exhaust, etc.), and it's easier to work with a static intake flow than a dynamic one (one among other reasons).

QuoteExternally the engines look really different and they should. The CA is a iron block and the SR is a shiny aluminum block but don't think that SR is ultra heavy if anything it's 50 pounds heavier then the CA.

You've obviously only seen fanboy aftermarket advertisements. A dirty SR20DET looks like any other engine.

QuoteThe CA is more revv happy and hyperactive engine (like me LOL) compared to the SR. The SR20 is more peppy and on long straights feels like it's a lightweight engine, Then again i guess that 200hp isn't all for not. (Or so I've been told)

Where are you getting these power figures? Have you driven a car with one or the other engine? A lot of this sounds like you've read some facts, and a lot of rumors, and then filled in the blanks with more guesswork, and decided to say it for fact. A lot of these statements you're making should be in the form of *questions*, not stated as info or comparison, no offense.

QuoteI personally haven't seen the combustion chamber of either so I can't comment on that.

Ok, first good point there.

Quotejust like the CA the SR has piston oil squirter's and a crank stud for a girdle  (or so I've Researched). Now comparing turbos the CA and SR both use the same turbo but the CA'S turbo is just a tab bit smaller then the SR'S at least the SR20DET has that running for it.

CA18DET has a crank girdle. I do not believe the SR20DET has one.

QuoteI'm not really sure how they respond to modifications. But being the CA born from the RB engines I would imagine it responds very very well to modifications. I can't really say anything for the SR.

Both respond very well per testimonials from hundreds (and in the case of the SR, thousands) of people's experiences with them. Again, I mention that the CA wasn't born FROm the RB, it was what SPAWNED the RB.

QuoteGoing back to the point I made about one Using timing belt and chain I think nissan used the timing chain because it was cheap and they would last long. where as a timing belt could snap after a long period of time and lots and lots of abuse. after that you'd have to spend at least 200 - 400 for valves and the works and if the pistons happen to take a poop well thats like another 900 buxs the cost etc etc, but lets not forget rust loves metal, and metal hates rust (timing chain).

1. Belt is actually cheaper, and 2.internal parts are generally protected from rust and such by the motor oil.

QuoteIn my opinion I would prefer a CA over the SR and a FJ over the CA and SR. If your aiming for low end torque and drag racing you should consider the KA24DE as the have plenty of low end torque.

I don't understand why drag racing determines the choice of engines here... and the KA24DE isn't a good performance engine until you add the turbo. As far as which engine is best on a dragstrip, it depends on how you tune it. Otherwise it just depends on the factory setup and stock horsepower, in which case, the SR20DET is going to be the better engine.



QuoteWith all this in mind I would imagine the SR as more of a truck engine like the KA.

That's funny, because I would never want a truck with an SR20DE or SR20DET in it, whereas a CA18DE would be stout and reliable, able to take a beating.

Anyways the whole "KA is a truck engine" thing is bullshit. Yes, it was put in a truck. So was the 22RE, put in Toyota pickups. AND it was considered one of Toyota's better race engines, in their Celicas in the 80's.

An actual "truck engine" would be a V6, such as the VG



QuoteI've done some research on the QR25DE....Nissan is on crack and thats the reason I would never buy a new car, because i would have to end up doing a engine swap. and plus OBD1 fitting in a OBD2 car... not gonna work unless you swap out all the electronics.

There's nothing wrong with the QR25DE. It's actually a nice engine.

I'm not sure you understand the technical differences between OBD1 and OBD2... but lots of people manage to get around the OBD2 stuff. There's lots of cars with aftermarket tuning out there that are OBD2. Lancer Evo, WRX, even 350Z to name a few.


I know I took apart every point you've made here, and I'm not trying to be a dick, but really man, most of this sounds like guesswork on your part. A lot of inaccuracies, backwards facts, and missing info. If I didn't know the correct information, I might reason the same things you did. But I do know the correct info in this case, and I can tell you for certain that you have a lot more research to do.

CA18DET vs. SR20DET. Which is better? It depends on what you want to do, how you want to spend your money (because you ALWAYS end up spending money), and what your expectations are of your engine.

-Jason Arro


'85 Nissan 200SX (KA24DE)
formerly,
'85 Nissan Silvia RS-X - FJ20 w/ dual Weber carbs
'84 Nissan 200SX Turbo
'85 Nissan 200SX Turbo
Drive it like you stole it, and work on it like you married it - self quote
Quote from: ka-t.orgHella flush and all associates should be gunned down for brainwashing people into thinking a 225 and lots of camber is proper wheel fitment. THAT IS EASY, anyone can camber a skinny as tire till it dosnt rub. Now fitting an 11 with a 315 on stock fender with reasonable camber, that is fitment. And looks, and performs better than both.
Quote from: s-chassis_only on 07:43:21 PM / 25-Sep-10 i dont own a s12 at the moment but trying to acquire one to get rid of my s13 hatch
Quote from: SHOUTBOX[27:54] zastaba: I had a friend touch the contacts on his distributer once
[28:04] zastaba: He did the super jumping up and down pain dance

DjayS12

#51
I wanted to get a ca in my S12 for a long time, but I've searched dyno sheet on the net and compared these sheets within engine with about the same mods, and the same turbo pressure and similar max hp.

Result: Torque is 1000rpm earlier on a SR in 95% of the case!
And that is pratical, in theory the CA should be better than that, but the sheet show the invert, and peoples who have tried both all say that the ca rev like a honda... wich is not a compliment in my opinion.

EDIT: Oh and yes no replacement for displacement, 200cc is small, but it's like to have a stroked CA. and the CA intake, even if it sound better in theorical, have a pretty average air flow. And that is a major problem when people want to get 300whp or more on a ca.

see my build thread!

seishuku

All RWD SR's have a mains girdle, FWD SR's don't. Even the RWD non turbos have one!
Matt W.
Daily: 2015 Ecoboost Mustang
Previous Daily: 2011 Camaro V6 (tree fell on it)
Previous previous: 2013 VW Jetta TDI super polluter (got bought back)

seishuku

And you know... I really REALLY hate these kind of threads, every time someone bad mouths the SR, it really gets my blood boiling. It isn't a bad engine... There absolutely nothing wrong with it, yea some things could have been done better, but for the R&D they put in it... Whatever.

And the rocker arm design isn't all bad, yea it's possible that one could pop off... If it's not set up right. People have revved to 9k with these rocker arms and never popped one off, and they don't use "rocker arm stoppers", and I wouldn't either! Talk about hack. Ugh.
The rocker arms actually allow for much less valve train friction than lifter bucket direct cams, like the KA/CA/RB, since it's one lobe driving two valves. Seems to me that it would make cam grinds cheaper too. I donno.

They're all Nissan engines, can't we all get along!?

Hell, I'd be sporting a KA right now if I hadn't found the SR first.
Matt W.
Daily: 2015 Ecoboost Mustang
Previous Daily: 2011 Camaro V6 (tree fell on it)
Previous previous: 2013 VW Jetta TDI super polluter (got bought back)

Arro

I think CA, SR, and KA are all good engines. I just wanted to shed light on shady comments. Other than the girdle (which I said "I think"), I was IMO spot-on.
-Jason Arro


'85 Nissan 200SX (KA24DE)
formerly,
'85 Nissan Silvia RS-X - FJ20 w/ dual Weber carbs
'84 Nissan 200SX Turbo
'85 Nissan 200SX Turbo
Drive it like you stole it, and work on it like you married it - self quote
Quote from: ka-t.orgHella flush and all associates should be gunned down for brainwashing people into thinking a 225 and lots of camber is proper wheel fitment. THAT IS EASY, anyone can camber a skinny as tire till it dosnt rub. Now fitting an 11 with a 315 on stock fender with reasonable camber, that is fitment. And looks, and performs better than both.
Quote from: s-chassis_only on 07:43:21 PM / 25-Sep-10 i dont own a s12 at the moment but trying to acquire one to get rid of my s13 hatch
Quote from: SHOUTBOX[27:54] zastaba: I had a friend touch the contacts on his distributer once
[28:04] zastaba: He did the super jumping up and down pain dance

RB25sx - SLPR

I'd like to see some flowbench results from both engine's heads.

As for the idea of 'people complaining' about dropping the FJ, that is not what drives a manufacturer to produce a new type of engine. As Jason pointed out, the SR was a cross-platform replacement that appeared in many, many orientations, displacements, induction types, etc.. The "SR20det" was popularized due to availability and thus  aftermarket support.

The pools of available misinformation are overflowing (on the internet), and there are members who have posted in this thread who shine as if having heartily drank from it's shores. :O

-Dan

IggyEGuana

Quote from: RB25sx - SLPR
The pools of available misinformation are overflowing (on the internet), and there are members who have posted in this thread who shine as if having heartily drank from it's shores. :O

-Dan

BEST POST IN THIS THREAD!!  HAHAHAHA!!

Liked when Arro laid the smack down too.


My contribution here is to say that I chose the ca18det cause of 3 things..
Factory Turbo
Factory 8000rpm redline
Factory Good Looks

haha

Waylon Deno - Silhouette Autosports (check it out on facebook)
Drift Build Thread
Quote from: Arro
you sir are emblazoned with win.