karay240

Comparing the torque out put of a 2 liter I-4 and 3 liter I-6 is like comparing apples & oranges, though. . . That's 50% more displacement than the SR. If you want to be fair, how about comparing the SR to the 3S. Another tid-bit to think of when comparing figures b/w US and JP. . . actually any two cars is the fuel used. The Japanese pump gas, along w/ the higher price, has a higher octane than US pump gas. It's not like race gas or anything like that, but higher by a couple digits--translates to more safe power. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

The harsh ride will depend greatly on the shocks and springs you have on your car now. For example, I have a 240SX w/ Tein HEs and urethane tention rod bushings--the ride is bearable but harsh. On the other hand, we have a shop car that we're toying around w/ at snail speed. . . we have all of the control arms (except for the f&r lower arms) replaced w/ pillow-ball arms. The ride is comfortable, and complies to the road. The shop car thing was kind of an experimant to see if the car could ride good and handle like a champ. . . well. . . actually, it rides waaay too soft. A little more responsive than factory, but soft. I'm also used to the hard coilovers. . . but this isn't just my opinion. My suggestion is to get the urethane master bushing kit and an adjustable upper mount if you NEED the added adjustability. True, for the $ you could just get that one set and get on w/ your life, but then you still have to worry about the rest of the bushings that are 20-30yrs old. The initial investment may be more w/ the route I'm talking about, but you'll get much more from your ride w/ a complete set of urethane bushings. On a a side note, urethane bushings allows for compliance to bumps that will affect the integrity of the chassis; whereas the spherical bearing won't. For a street car, just go w/ the urethane. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

I haven't heard of any 240Zs w/ a KA-t, though. . . It sure would be something different. I'm not sure why you're worried about low-end torque. Granted, on a heavier car, that may be an issue, but we're talking about a car that's probably goint to weigh around 2300 (maybe 2400 w/ assorted niceties in the car). It's going to weigh around the same as a miata!!! I really don't think that the SRs "lack of torque" is really going to be an issue here. . . I actually am warming up to the idea of the KA motor, though. . . it could be real nice Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

Does he have a site?

Hey, drftn280zx2+2, About your comment about the CF. . . Most of these "carbon fiber" body panels are nothing but a fiberglass piece w/ either carbon fiber overlay. Most of the time, it's not even CF overlay, though. . . it's just dyed fiberglass weaves overlaid on fiberglass. . . What does this mean to you? It means that the "CF" parts you see that are affordable are either weigh just as much as the fiberglass counterparts, if not more. Real CF, or dry CF, is far more expensive than any of the aformentioned. And the weight saving is, in fact, more than the fiberglass, but is not worth the cost unless you're going to race it proceffionally. Here's an example of the price difference b/w dry and wet CF: your average wet CF hood in the states--$600ish (VIS, C-Wings etc). Your average dry CF hood in the states--$3000ish (electra, TopSecret etc.) My suggestion is to just go ahead w/ the fiberglass idea. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

it SHOULDN'T be a problem since all of your tubing/piping etc will have to be custom, and you're pretty much going to have to make due w/ what fits. Tha main thing w/ cooling parts (IC, radiator, oil cooler) is whether or not the capacity is enough. . . It doesn't matter if it fits, if it's not going to perform correctly. I'm not that knowledgeable on ArizonaZ products, and I don't know the cooling capacity. Find out up to what horsepower levels it's good for. This should be a good reference in your quest of the right radiator. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

ok, here's the best source for me. . . my eyes, and a magnet. There's a freshly disassembled SR motor sitting in our shop. The reason I THOUGHT that there were not sleeves, it that they are cast-in sleeves. I was wrong. . . I'm sorry. I used a magnet on it, and it stuck. . . I didn't mean to misinform anyone on the forum. I'll definately check stuff 2 or 3 times before I post next time.

Everyone seems to be so stuck on the "original" skyline motor. . . Why? I can't really say a whole lot, but here's all the info that I can say. . . The VQ35 has a lot. . . did I mention a LOT more power potential than the RB series could EVERY hope for. I have no doubt that there will be ppl pumping out 1000+ hp like its a big block w/in the year. . . Yea, it might have to be sleeved, but it's still going to be cheaper than getting that kind of hp from the RB Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

350 NA HP!? Are you serious!? from the KA? About the Rods on the KA, I'm not talking about weakness of the stockers, I'm talking about how the rod ratio is no good for high RPM. That's why I'm saying a shorter stroke w/ longer rods. And to my knowledge, there are no carry-over crank that'll fit. . . and unfortunately, custom cranks don't come cheap.

Just like anything to do w/ modifying a car EVERYTHING is a trade-off. The more power you want, the the less driveability you get. The more "racing" parts you put on, the less of a "street" car it becomes. . . sux, but true. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com Edit: The only way to get a better torque curve AND raise horsepower on a skyline is to increse displacement, or spend an insane amount and get the VVT kit from HKS (over $3k)

Oh, don't get me wrong, 1bad180sx. I'm not saying the KA is crap. That's not the impression I'm trying to give. I'm just trying to explain that the AL block of the SR is a far less limiting factor than the KA rods. I'm actually planning on keeping the KA on my 240SX. The thought of the KA has crossed my mind, but I've already have a KA in the SX. . . besides the SR is just easier (for me, at least), and the low end torque shouldn't be a problem in that light of a car. And like I mentioned, I'd LOVE to see a destroked KA motor (2.3 or 2.2) that revved to 8k. I think it could have far more potential than the SR. The main thing limiting the KA to go over the 600 limit is simply the RPMs. The rod ratio just isn't there. . . I do have some plans w/ the KA powered SX, but 1st things 1st. . . I gotta do one project @ a time. lol. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

I'd also like to see +500hp daily driven KA motors (pump gas is my definition of a daily driver). The highest hp I've seen a KA produce (@ the wheels) is 490ish. And that was pushing it, too. I wanna know what they do to keep it from blowing? The only thing that I could think of is to change the crank to a shorter stroke, that'll allow a better rod ratio. . . but we're in the US, and noone wants to spend that much to "downgrade" even if it does make a bullet proof motor. -The weakness of the SR is the head (can be bandaged w/ a cheap rocker arm stopper, and eliminated w/ a more expensive lash killers) -The weakness of the KA is the bottom end (can be bandaged w/ a set of expensive pistons and rods, and COULD be eliminated w/ a shorter stroke crank w/ longer rods). . . I really do hope that someone w/ $$$ will be motivated enough to attempt this mod. . . As I mentioned in another post in a different thread, I don't have the $$$ Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com Edit: As for the ppl complaining about the AL block of the SR. . . the KA rods are a much weaker link than the SRs AL block could EVER be. And for the $$$ you'd spend building the KAs bottom end, you could just sleeve the SR, and call it a day. The only reason to go KA is torque, nothing else. It's not a "better" motor than the SR, it's power production is different.

But. . . but. . . why would you go from a 3.1 to a 2.6!? Have you gone absolutely mad!? How are you going to make up for the lost .5L of displacement? (hope you're sensing the sarcasm. . . I've noticed ppl freaking out about losing .4L of displacement by going 4 cylinder, so I figured loosing .5 would be an even bigger of a deal for some.) Congratulations. Seems like you got a pretty good deal on your motor. I noticed you mentioning that you were thinking about using a 350 tranny. . . by this, I'm assuming a chevy 5sp? Tell me you're not serious . . . A US tranny will require a custom bell housing for it to fit on the 26. Why not just get a 25 tranny? The RB25 tranny bolts up to this motor and is RWD. The internals (synchros & such) are the same as the Z32, and is fairly beefy. A major advantage of this tranny is the shift feel. I've driven many cars, and I have not found one US tranny that was a smooth as sportier Japansese models'. You can actually pick a RB25 tranny (RWD) for that motor for less than 1k. If you were talking about AT, then I'm sorry, I jumped the gun. I just realized the possibility while I was typing the last paragraph If the AT is what you're going for, then give the guys @ Mckinney Motorsports a call. They specialize in the 240SX, but their main thing is sticking RBs into 240SXs. Last time I talked to them, they were talking about making a powerglide bolt-on kit for the RB. . . If drag racing is your main goal, I'd say go for it. As for your wiring, if I were you, I'd just go w/ electromotive or if you've got the $$$, motec. Once you factor in buying the wiring harness, sensors that are broken, and misc parts, why stick w/ JDM EMSs? Initial investment is higher w/ these EMSs, but after a couple of sensors go bad, you'll see why you mad the right decision. (GM parts seem to be cheaper than JDM parts. . . quicker delivery, too). The choice is up to you, but the RB26 is a great motor that usually shuts up a lot of the displacement whores. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

The alloy used in the SR20, 1ZZ-FE(I think that's what it was called--MRS engine. . . celica is lined), VQseries (350Z, Altima, G35, and even the turbo model VQs), and VH45 (Q45, and the race motor if I remember correctly). . . I'm sure I could go w/ a list enough to make you quit reading half way through. . . Fact is, MANY aluminium blocks w/o sleeves are in production around us everywhere. The only ones that do have sleeves from the factory are honda I-4s (not sure about their V6s) and the latest model of celica. I know that there are more out there, but there are more that are not lined. Not trying to be a know-it-all, but I just want ppl to realize that AL blocks are not something to shun just b/c of the material. The reason many ppl seem to shy away from AL blocks are that back in the day, when AL blocks began rolling off the production lines, manufacturers had not perfected methods of production or design. This led to many cracked blocks. It didn't help that ppl kept having to replace blocks after they overheated their motors. Probably made ppl swear never to get an AL block again. . . Thus the legend of weak AL blocks was born. Other than that, as I mentioned earlier, AL blocks are VERY susceptible to severe damage when overheated. Blocks seem to crack warp when water temp goes a little too high. This is where the iron block shines above the AL blocks. I'm not trying to say that the AL blocks are better than the iron blocks, b/c, as I mentioned in my last post, I favor the iron block; however, the AL block isn't something to sneeze @ either. A sleeved AL blocks are probably the best of both worlds, and I'd love to do this in the future, but it's definately not what you'd call cheap. Conclusion--Iron block>AL block. . . but the difference w/ a well made AL block, the difference isn't that big of a deal as long as you don't overheat them. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

Actually, the SR motor is not sleeved. I've seen numerous SRs, and whether NA or turbo, they are aluminum through and through. The block on the SR is, in fact, very strong for being AL; however, one overheating, and it's history. When tuning a car, you need to think about the worst case scenario. It would've been nice if Nissan made the SR w/ an Iron block, but I'm not going to loose sleep over it just b/c it isn't. You just need to be careful w/ the cooling, but this is true for any motor, so. . . In the end, it's all just personal preference. . . I wish that it was Iron, but so what? It's got it's faults like EVERY engine out there. To me the differences b/w the CA & SR aren't really all that big. They are both great motors, and if I thought the SR didn't hold a candle to the CA, I wouldn't have made the decision to go w/ the SR. On a side note. . . I am planning on doing the solid lash, and keeping the revs at a reasonable level. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

Waaay too many ppl talk about how the 4 cylinders turbos lack lowend torque. . . aren't we talking about a 2300lbs (ish w/ a I-4) car? I think for the size and weight of the car, a 300hp 4 cylinder z would be the perfect balance of weight, torque, and horsepower. This is for a autocrosser or a street car, and does not apply to drag cars. For drag cars, go w/ the biggest baddest engine, but don't forget to fortify the chassis. The thing that ppl in the states seem to overlook is the necessity for chassis tuning. W/ stickier tires and double, or even triple, the torque, you're going to, at least, need a roll cage. Most of us have seen drag cars twist off the line. . . that's usually w/ a full roll cage. Imagine what 500, or even 300ft/lbs of torque is doing to your chassis. Dispite the initial investment, I think, unless you're building the car primarily for drag racing, the I-4 or a V6 is goint to be better for handling and for the life of your chassis. I really don't see why ppl think that going from a old carburated 2.4 (2.6, or 2.8. . . whatever fits) I-6 w/ LESS than 150hp (w/o accessories) to a modern 2 liter I-4 producing over 205hp is a downgrade. I can't help but think that some ppl believe that just because there's more cylinders on a car the car's going to be faster. There are many ppl who "downgrade.". . . For example, I've seen MANY R32 Skylines w/ a SR20 swap done b/c the owners of the cars wanted more torque, and lighten up the front end. For a more professional example in the racing arena, look at the Toyota JGTC car. Do you think they use the 2JZ in that thing? Think again. It used to, until it kept loosing to the skyline. Now they have a 3S (I-4 form MR2), and they began beating the skyline. Now, I understand that there are other factors that determine an outcome of a race, and that for JGTC (or any racing series w/ regulations) the 3S was better suited. The skyline has been using the VQ35 for a while now, b/c of weight and added displacement, but it's still a good race b/w the two. What I'm trying to say in this overly lenghened post is one thing. . . WHO CARES. Everyone is going to have a different opinion about different things. If you take 2 Zs, one w/ a SR, and one w/ a SBC (both tuned to about the same hp w/o regards to price) on the drag strip the SBCZ will probably beat it (marginally). You take it on a road course, the SRZ will likely be the winner (again, marginally). Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

RB20 vs SR20 Longer stroke = more torque = believe it or not, the SR has more low-end torque than the RB20. What I can say in RB20's behalf is that, IF you can find parts for it, you can bore it and stroke it to 2.4 (using aftermarket pistons, rods, and a factory RB26 crank) for a fairly inexpensive price *cough cough* If you're just wanting bolt-on performance, the SR20 would be the way to go, unless you're just absolutely in love w/ the idea of a I-6. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

Yea, just b/c it was in a mag doesn't make it the best turbo for everyone. There are soooo many options when it comes to turbo selection. Everything, when it comes to turbo selection, or any kind of modification for that matter, is a trade-off. Get an inexpensive larger turbo, you're gonna have lag; get a smaller turbo, and you're gonna have great spool up, but no top end; if you want the best of both worlds, you're going to pay a pretty penny. Noone w/o knowing your final goals, purpose, and size of your pocket book. Your best bet, unless you've got some extensive knowledge, is to talk to tech support at Garret (or any manufacturer who might know something about turbos), or a knowledgeable shop near you that really deals a lot w/ turbos (get several opinions before you form your own). My favorites are Garret (or HKS) b/c I have the most experience w/ them, and I couldn't tell you the 1th thing about the IHI or the KKK turbos when it goes farther in depth than a bolt-on kit. The best advice I could give you (since I really don't have extensinve knowledge when it comes to the L series), is to talk to ppl who've done their motors up right, and learn from them. I don't mean just post something on a forum, but also ask apecific people about their setups. Sorry I'm not much help Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

Everyone seems to focus on the weight of the AL block of the SR. The thing people seem to forget is that, since an AL is weaker, the cylinders need to be made beefier than a iron block of the same durability. What this means it that any weight saving from the AL block is counteracted by the amount of metal needed (unless it's sleeved like other manufacturers do). As far as I know, the weight of the SR and CA are about the same. As for the statement made by S30Z Bushido, there IS a reason that Nissan replaced the CA w/ the SR. It can be summed it up in one word--COST. There are other factors such as the lack of low end torque w/ the CA, but ultimately, it was cheaper (in the long run) to create the SR than trying build a torquier CA20DET. Look at all of the different cars w/ the SR motors in them. . . it makes sense, business-wise. There are numerous cost saving methods Nissan used on the SR. Although they seem to be a better motor w/ the publicity of many shops building high HP SRs, w/ the right parts, the CA is just as capable, if not more. The only problem I see w/ the CA is the outdated ECU, but that's easily remedied w/ a EMS. What it boils down to, is how much $$$ you are willing to spend, and your power goals. After installing pistons, rods, cams, and a EMS, the differences are practically none. The CA will be able to rev higher w/ less problems, while the SR will have a marginally better torque curve. It all boils down to what you want out of your car. For an all out race motor, I'd DEFINATELY go CA. If built right, the CA practically has no inferent weaknesses the SR is seemed to be plagued w/ like the block warping or racker armes failing. The CA is capable of using a more radical cams, even w/ lash adjuster killer on the SR. That being said, I'm going w/ the SR, though. . . I'm chosing the SR b/c I'm not planning on high enough hp. . . I'm not going for over 250hp, until I work all of the bugs out (probably at least 6 months), and even after that, I'm only wanting around 350ish, so I don't see myself going CA. I'd only go CA if I was planning on going above that. Besides, there TONS of parts in the states that are available for cheap, now that it seems EVERYONE'S going SR (in other cars, I mean) . . . sorry for the long post Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

If you're going to spend that much on a responsive turbo (for a 2L), why not just get the HKS RS turbo? It's very responsive, and can handle 420ish hp. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

how exactly is the RB easier to install than the SR? W/ the RB, you're going to use the RB20 oil pan & pickup from the Z31, and still have to make custom mounts for the thing. W/ the SR, you'll have to custom fab a engine cradle, but why is that any different than creating engine mounts? The work, as long as it's an inline motor (unless you're trying to put a AWD tranny or a old school I-8 or something outrageous), the work is GENERALLY going to be about the same. The VG30DETT is a PITA to fit in due to the side clearance, and the placement of the turbos, but as long as the engine is the inline configuration, it's not going to be any more or less dificult. As long as we're not talking about dropping another L series motor in, ALL hybrids require custom fabrication, and is NOT for the weakhearted. If you can't do it youself, or can't afford for someone else to do it, don't take on a hybrid project. It's as simple as that. I'm not trying to sound harsh, but seriously, NONE of these projects are easy. All of these are skill level "10." There are, however, less difficult hybrids, but even these are at difficulty level 9.5ish. They all require good welding skills, and lots and lots of patience. Kenny

I'm all about having a 4 cylinder & rotary section, too. I'm fairly new on this forum, and frantically searching for 4 cylinder info, but I think it'd be easier for all of us if there were a specific place to go to for info. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

If all you were going for was about 300hp, this turbo is probably the best out there. . . HOWEVER, like several ppl have said, it's made for a 2.0 to 2.3 (if I'm not mistaken. . . this was about a year ago when I looked into it), and in order to fit it on a 2.8 you'd be better off converting to a external wastegate system as the exahust flow may get too excessive w/ the larger motor. You'll have a torqe band like the Audi motors--flat as a table. If you've ever driven any of their newer turbo cars, you know what I'm talking about (1.8 or 2.7 turbos). With this turbo, boost should be kicking in as low as 1500 rpm. I'm actually an advocate of smaller turbos for better response, but I don't see using this small of a turbo for a 2.8 liter I-6. The exhaust pulses of the I-6 is really goor for turbocharging. they have better spooling characteristic than a I-4, so just go with a larger, cheaper turbo. For the $$$ you'll be spending on the turbo, you could do so many other things that could improve low end torque like increasing displacement. . . most of the older Zs on the road need a complete overhaul, anyway. Why not go the extra mile. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

I think the KA idea is actually pretty good. There are TONS of really cheap factory replacement parts for the KA, and like you said, the engines are a dime a dozen. The only problem w/ the KA is that it CANNOT be over reved!!! The majority of ppl who turbo their KA and crank up the boost get carried away, and rev it past redline. Rods tend to break on the KA motors when you either crank up the boost too high, or when you rev it past the factory set limits. With the extra $$$ that you'll be saving, get a good set of pistons, rods, and a metal headgasket. . . maybe a set of cams if you want to spend a little extra. The Intake cams on the 1st gen Altima is 248 deg. like the exhaust cam on the 240, so there's a cheap upgrade. But about over reving it, though. . . This is only possible w/ aftermarket or reprogramed ECUs, but that'd be advisable, anyway. The JimWolf ECU, for example, raises the redline to 73 or 7500. . . BAD IDEA!!! When tuning the KA motor, or any street driven motor for that matter, don't rev it over the factory limit. EVER. Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com

Thanks johnc!!! That was exactly the info that I was looking for. I'm actually supprised w/ the distribution, though. I thought that it'd be less weight in the front (hence my reference to the porsche). I forgot that the L series motor is lighter than the RB series motors. Probably a lot, too w/ it's smaller head and lack of turbos etc etc, but I'm very supprised that the difference is that minor. I know the weight difference of the bare block b/w the RB and the SR is about 80lbs., and I firured once you factor in everything, the weight difference would be pretty staggering (especially the tranny, but that really doesn't affect the weight distribution). I'm also planning on doing the R200 and multilink swap also, so for me, at least, I think the rear will weigh more that yours. But the numbers you gave me will be a good reference in directing what I'll be doing w/ my future project. BTW, as reference, does anyone know the weight dist. of a factory 240Z? Thanks, Kenny http://www.rbmotoring.com