Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sLiDewAys
such a predictable SR owner remarck... there is a lot of arftermarket support seeing that all the turbo and plumbing from sr can be directly linked to the ca18 w/ minor changes. all yuour fuel injector needs can be found at the local junk yards for under 100.00. as for tuning, w hich becomes a problem becasue not many people int eh states care for ca nor want to reflash their ECM's but u can pikc up these ROM chips CUSTOM from this guy online, he tunes and sets them for your specific settings and u just SAFC the rest........ as for ca18 being OLD? what... by 1 year? LMAOs erriously they stopped production in 91 which is when sr debuted... which is probly the year half the sr's here on zilvia are. as for ca18 parts being a rarity to find for replacment, you can jsut go down to the junk yard and pull most of everything off of ca16de ( cams, water pump pulley and some other things i havent uet tried) the dealership can get just about oanyand everything for th e ca18de and ca18et turbo from the s12 200sx. and by the motor being old has nothing to do with how it will perform if it is in good running condition...unles your car houses one and youve tried to see its potential when moded then dont speak.. the sr20 is a good decent motor but just take a look at the ca's characteristics, closely similar to rb.
***quote) from midwest240sx.com
"The Technical @#%$:
The CA used an iron block unlike the SR which runs an aluminum block but despite that there is not much of an overall weight difference in the two motors. The CA LIKE THE SR has the piston oil squirters and crank stud girdle. The SR uses a 4 runner manifold into a 4 port head, the CA on the other hand runs a 4 runner manifold that splits into 8 entering the head as an 8 runner manifold. The big difference in the two motors is in the valvetrains. The SR20 only has 4 cam lobes per cam not 8 like the CA does. With 8 valves per side on the SR Nissan had to use a rocker arm arrangement to actuate paired valves simultaneously from a single lobe. It's cheaper to implement than the CA's setup but causes valvetrain loss and noise. The CA runs true 8 lobe cams which act directly on top of the valves. Much more effecient, less moving parts, better revs, etc.. That's one of the reasons that the CA is considered to be a more FREE REVVING engine than the SR. The biggest advantage the SR20 has is it is a bigger capacity motor. 2.0L in comparison to the CA's 1.8 ( no replacement for dispacement right?) . The SR20 has a relatively long stroke, it's stroke is longer than the width of it's bore. The stroke to rod length ratio is at a point where the engine still revs well, but it suffers from "excess stroke". This is another reason the the ca is considered to be better reving (smoother not higher), unlike the SR with it's "over-square" design the CA uses a square design (stroke=bore). The SR is capable of handling more power on the stock bottom end. I've heard of 400-450PS being possible with the correct tuning on a stock SR bottom end while 400PS isn't quite feasble with an CA18DET... A big reason again being the difference in displacement.
(quote) from midwest240sx.com*****
|
Ohh sorry. I really must not know anything about these motors considering i have done countless sr swaps, a few ca swaps, and rb swaps. Im just saying the ca is a piece of crap. Thats my opinion, and get over it.
BTW i have blown up many sr motors and I believe they suck as well. Thats why im going to a ls1.