Guest Z2nr Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 This is something I have been recently thinking. I don't know too much about the Ca engine, does anyone know anything about it, it seems like a beast. I heard lot of comparisons between the 2 on other forums, what is the general concensus in here. I know the Sr it .2l more but what else. I heard that the Ca is engineered tougher than the Sr, is any of this true. I want to know and since this is the only real forum I trust, can anyone help? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 The CA has an iron block. The SR block is aluminum with steel sleeves. The CA has a more direct valvetrain making it capable of revving pretty high, as long as the bearings don't fail on the rods. This high revving capability is useless, unless you have an inordinately huge turbo, making the car unstreetable, because the motor doesn't have any torque. It would be a drag racing only car at that point. The SR valvetrain is the weak point of the motor. A Rocker Arm Stopper kit, which costs about $60-70 now, solves 99% of these problems... and is easily installed in about an hour or two. However, the SR can make well over 500hp before redline on a stock bottom end. A little headwork goes a long way. This motor is much more torque biased, and can spool big turbos reasonably quick. Stock VS Stock, the SR is a full second faster in the 1/4 mile than the CA. The SR20DET can make 400hp dependably on all stock internals (I did it). Doing this with a CA18DET requires a full build... most people drop the money to make it a 1.9 liter and then go into the bolt ons to make a it comparable to an SR20 with the same bolt ons and still stock internals. Now put that money into the SR internals, and it can far surpass the CA. I spent about 5 years in Japan, left there in February of this year. I've raced and worked on many of these engines. I had a theory over there, that "friends don't let friends drive CA's." I found the motor to be very problematic, requires a lot of finesse... and then hard labor to repair it a lot. Comparitively speaking, the CA doesn't stand a chance against the SR. In the HKS Drag Meetings in Okinawa, Japan, I was in the SR & CA class. That was typically 15-20 Silvias and 180sx's. The CA's were always at the bottom of the field. There was one who was faster than me, he had it fully built and was running a Greddy T78 at like 30psi or something. His car was a shop-built track whore, that never showed up at the street races or anything else... just drag meets a couple of times a year. Anyway, he was in the top five of the field, the rest all being SR's. (including me) On the streets, the SR was king over the CA. All the street SR's from the Drag Meets could be seen regularly tearing it up at the street races. They were regular guys like you and me, with insanely fast cars. On the other hand, you see CA's getting beat by Hondas, which is just sacrilige over there. (Hondas are not regarded as good drag racing cars in Japan) All I'm trying to say is, the only people that say they love CA's are CA owners. Many of them already moved on, most of them already moved on. You spend way too much money and time to get the same return an SR would've given you for much less. The initial investment pays off exponentially later on. Anyone I offend with my remarks, sorry. Thats how I feel after several years of hands-on experience with both motors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Z2nr Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Thanx for the post man, I just wanted to explore all my options. The Ca sounded like a decent motor, but I don't know anyone with one. Since you lived in Japan and are a living testiment to the Sr, I think I would be a fool to go against someone who has worked on and raced both engines. Thanx for you reply and I will heed your advice, I am 99% sure I want an Sr but the 1% always keeps me researching to see if there is something better the suit my taste. Thanx again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 A lot of people will disagree with my on this post, though.. so take it for what its worth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Kind of a related question from a customer of mine: What kind of horsepower can be made from a NA SR20DE? Its for a specific racing class and you get a 300lb. weight break for a NA engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Most I've seen in a street NA SR20DE is still under 200rwhp. Supposedly when built for racing like the TODA setup, it can make a lot more.. but I think that would be very expensive to accomplish. There is the Autech SR20VE, which is supposed to make over 200hp, but I haven't seen anyone actually do it... they're still under 200hp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Thanks. From my years on SR20.net I thought 200hp was about the limit. I was hoping that folks had figured out a little bit more since 1998. Looks like my customer will have to take the 300lb. hit and run a SR20DET. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifegrddude Posted December 4, 2004 Share Posted December 4, 2004 If you have a friend who can read/translate Japanese, I believe it was a speed shop called Arita Speed who campaigned an n/a sr20 powered S13. Option magazine did a feature on their car and it dynoed out 294hp. The most significant thing I can remember it having were individual throttle bodies. They were originally making ~270hp before the throttle bodies being added and then gained 20 more after fine tuning them. John 82ZXT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Z2nr Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 I am not trying to clown or anything but the sr20ve the highest anyone has seen is like 200whp, I have personally seen a 200whp B16 that has not been sleeved or stroked to higher displacement. Steve Omniman built one and documented the shit on video. That is sad that an n/a 2.0l with variable valve timing can barly make 200whp. I have seen 200 whp b20 vtecs on pretty much stock internals hitting low 200 to high one hundreds on the stock unrebuilt blocks, just the vtec head. I use to own a 99 honda civic si, it was probably one of the funnest cars I owned, not the fastest but definatly high on the fun factor. It was easy to maintain and you could bang on it every day and it would be there for you. Honda really knows their engines, I don't know how they flopped with the s2k like that bringing in that weak rear end and tranny. Any how if you want to go n/a get a Honda or BMW they make great n/a engine, if you want turbo get a Nissan or Toyota. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ca18dettrueblue Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 To old mate with the qustion sr vs the ca18det i am a ca18det ex owner and i now have a sr:icon8: to put it strait at u ca all the way:D i had my ca for 10yrs since i was 9 doing 10.7 on the quter mile smoked every sr in sight no bullshit and it dosent take a lot of cash to do this just some sence. start with the turbo i was running with a kkr 330 with a 280 frount compresser plate power on nice and ealery what u wont from the moter.get race actuwaiter 15psi min and a fuel pump will be needed 2 full 3in dump no cat and 3 in from race pipe back a good set of shocks ar handy to the coil packs have proply hade it so get some splitfires packs big frount mount is a need some 32 gtr injters u will need for the remap/tune now the beauty get a set of forged pistons and the last thing is a gismo lunch controller. time for tune on 20pis 214kws at the rear weels. 2nd time 23pis 247kws atws 3rd time 27 psi 301 kws all up the will cost u no more then 5 to 6k for a sr killer. time to go to the track with my mate with the done up sr drift was the race fist lap i countent c him to far behind and on the 2nd lap the sr gave up after spitting a shim to the sump and snaping the tapet. ca all the way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbg19 Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 This is a really old post lol i think that guy already made his choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ca18dettrueblue Posted May 31, 2009 Share Posted May 31, 2009 then he made the wrong one:frown: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young Z Posted May 31, 2009 Share Posted May 31, 2009 I heard another disadvantage of the CA is the fact that the aftermarket support for them is slim pickings compared to the enormous aftermarket support for the SR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbg19 Posted May 31, 2009 Share Posted May 31, 2009 I think i would prefer a KA over a SR,too bad nobody at that time had deal with KAs in the s30s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Whoa! Holy old post! When I wrote my reply almost 5 years ago, the aftermarket support for CA's was getting bad. Now 5 years later, its worse. You had a CA from age 9? The work you mentioned is a complete rebuild and replacement of all the major components of the engine to make it into an SR killer. That's just what I said above. Are these motors still available? They're all 20 years old now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.