250wkw not to difficult while keeping a smooth torquey drive and reliability. MAx 1.5bar boost needed.
300wkw costs more and will have lag due to turbo size required and around 2bar boost
350wkw will have plenty lag due to turbo size required and 2 bar plus boost
You decide what you want there are NO freee lunches.
Does noone want to try a supercharger + turbo combo? Like VW did with the little 1.4 golf recently? Loads of power and no lag? Doesn't that sound nice? 😀
Toby wrote:
Does noone want to try a supercharger + turbo combo? Like VW did with the little 1.4 golf recently? Loads of power and no lag? Doesn't that sound nice? 😀
Lotsa money and complex plumbing and complex belt arrangements. Use the right BB turbo and you will have boost from as low as 1500rpm.
Like Qwerties car
1500rpm= 0.2bar
3000rpm= 0.5bar
4000rpm 1.5bar if you want it.
Ok one more option has now entered my mind.
CA20DET. Anyone know which cars in SA came with the CA20 motors? I presume it must have been the old skylines?
Anyways, CA20 crank apparently bolts up to the CA18 block, or CA18 head bolts up to the CA20 block. Can't recall the details anymore.
Granted some custom forged (honda) pistons and mitshubishi rods are needed to make this work but can be another option to consider. Seeing that the CA18DET is in fact just a 4 cylinder version of the mightly RB series motors...
Also, anyone on this forum have a low port (8 runner) CA18DET in their cars?
AFAIK the CA20's crank is weaker, you dont wanna use it for a stroker
Doctor G wrote:
Also, anyone on this forum have a low port (8 runner) CA18DET in their cars?
Draco has an 8 port but from what I've read you want the 4 port for more flow at high RPM's
Doctor G wrote:
CA18 head bolts up to the CA20 block. Can't recall the details anymore.
I read an article where someone tried this, there biggest problem was there was no mounting holes in the block for the timing belt pulley's and also they couldn't find timing belt that fitted once they had it on, since the CA20 was only ever 8V.
To get an SR to run 350kw you gonna have to spend real money, which buy the sounds of things isnt an option... The sr is awesome, but if you plan on getting that kind of power and for a relatively good price, go with the RB.. I have an RB and at 0.6 bar its 245kw on the fly with 330nm... its a real fun motor with loads of potential, and thats in standard form... the sr makes half that power basically... I have an SR and am looking for that kind of power, but to run realiable the money is getting out of hand.... I recon an RB at a bar with a GT3037 or even a GT3540 will be mad... Thats the way im going.. so far ive spent 16k on motor and box with the RB, and its more fun than most of the cars ive driven... i recon that motor in a light body will be crazy fun.... and if you run it .4 bar, 207 on the fly....more than a CA or SR will have at probably .7...
The article stated that a CA20 crank is forged, unlike the CA18 unit? Is it 4cw or 8cw?
Bruno how much work was it to make the RB fit? Engine mountings etc? How much power can it handle before internals etc are needed?
How much power can it handle before internals etc are
More power then the drive shaft and Diff can take.
RB are rock solid, But damn expensive to run and maintain.
Also with regards to the CA20DET, Don't expect to much gain from the extra CC...
Look if you want serious power and reliability every day, The only real swap is RB25 / RB26. They can push the required number with a smile when just set-up correctly
maybe go 2JZ 😂
Phinx wrote:
maybe go 2JZ 😂
Blasphemy!! 😈
After speaking to a few sources it seems the best option at this stage given my budget would be the normal HP SR20DET.
Once the '20V' VE heads become available I will give it some head work and swap it on.
Ah come on be the under dog and go with a CA18DET, so many people go with the SR20DET and make big power but the CA18DET has alot of potential aswell, ask the calibrator about the bakkie he is busy with.
Gary I hear you. And after looking on the net I see that there are some parts like cams, cam gears, pulleys, manfiolds etc available for the CA18. So it's not a TOTAL lack of parts.
ONLY concern I have is that the 4CW crank won't hold the bearings under high boost. Maybe CRYO treating the crank will do the trick? I washoping the CA20 crank is 8CW cause then the CA18 block can jsut be bored to keep it all square.
Does anyone have head flow data for the CA18DET head vs the SR20 head?
Dude, it sounds to me like you're grabbing at straws for a reason to ditch your CA for an SR...
The ONLY 2 factors a CA has against it is age and availability of parts.
In many ways the CA is superior to the SR, the SR was an evolution, but not one brought by a need for power, but from a need for emissions and low manufacturing costs. It cost nissan more ot make a CA than it did to make an SR, its easy to se why, a CA is essentially a Baby RB, look at the FACTS:
CA has direct valve on lifter action, SR has rocker arms limiting max revs
CA has a cast iron block for strength, SR is aluminium to save weight.
CA uses a timing belt, SR has a timing chain for less maintainence.
.
But hey, it looks like you've made up your own mind, sell me your CA.
I would speak to Duane as he has a CA making big power and big boost, think it is at like 300RwKw. Personally I would keep the CA and be the underdog. Just think you will have the cost of the SR to put into the CA, that is some nice parts.
Dude, it sounds to me like you're grabbing at straws for a reason to ditch your CA for an SR...
The ONLY 2 factors a CA has against it is age and availability of parts.
In many ways the CA is superior to the SR, the SR was an evolution, but not one brought by a need for power, but from a need for emissions and low manufacturing costs. It cost nissan more ot make a CA than it did to make an SR, its easy to se why, a CA is essentially a Baby RB, look at the FACTS:
CA has direct valve on lifter action, SR has rocker arms limiting max revs
CA has a cast iron block for strength, SR is aluminium to save weight.
CA uses a timing belt, SR has a timing chain for less maintainence.
.
But hey, it looks like you've made up your own mind, sell me your CA.
Sounds like you are trying to convince him to sell the CA 😂 .
Yeah, Sell me your CA, I'll find an unsuspecting nissan 1400 bakkie to drop it into!
to build a CA is gonna cost 15k if you lucky....to buy an SR is like 8k... realiabilty comes obviously with the parts you put in, but also the boost you are using....stock for stock the SR makes crazy power compared... I would go SR if you talking the figures you are... You should be going RB.. also remember, no ones talking NM here... the CA wont make it up here.... dispalcement means lower boost levels for the same power and higher torque by far....SR is a superior motor, the RB is just over kill which makes it awesome
Well my CA has just under 300k kms on it and is still healthy as a horse. Made 160kw on the dyno last time caver ran it. This was at snail and at the flywheel, corrected. Not bad considering stock is 126. Only (Performance) mods are 76mm zorst, cone filter and electric fans.
Ran 15.1 in a hectic head wind at dragwars.
At the moment my hydraulic lifters are quiet but if they ever start making noises I WILL swap to SR immediatly. I hate that in the CA.
If the CA can make 250wkw reliably without costing me more than doing a SR swap and achieving the same power then I will keep it. Right now the SR seems to be the easy way out though.
(Ps: anyone of you guys running the upgraded cam belt on your CA? Perhaps a group buy is in order??)
(Ps: anyone of you guys running the upgraded cam belt on your CA? Perhaps a group buy is in order??)
😕 Didnt even know you got such a thing.
Gary57 wrote:
(Ps: anyone of you guys running the upgraded cam belt on your CA? Perhaps a group buy is in order??)
😕 Didnt even know you got such a thing.
Same
If the CA can make 250wkw reliably without costing me more than doing a SR swap and achieving the same power then I will keep it.
What will the SR swap cost??
Sign in to reply.