Ca18det haters

[dash]

what difference it makes who/if they hate on the ca..... fvk 'em

There's a 10sec capable (11.1) s13 right in the 1/4 mile sticky, tuned via sr20 electronics.Also a full wt daily driver gone 11.1sec at a measley 16psi on a cheap t3/t4 boosting a 17yr old unopened ca18. How much better does it get ? Idiots

[float_6969]

now that i got my CA running, i love it, much much more than i did my KA-T

i have:

CA18DETsard 450cc injectorsssac FMICarc bovHKS GT-SS turbokoyoaltima fansmegan turbo elbow, and greddy 3in DP2.5in downpipe back exhaust

running 8psi it feels quicker than my KA-T did at 5psi which had:

t3/t04e 57trim .63 a/r and 370cc injectorsother stuff pretty comperable.

and it is a much smoother power delivery.

You're the first KAT to CA converter that I'm aware of and it pleases me to no end to hear you say that!

what's all this about revving a CA to 8.5k??? that's way past the volumetric efficiency of the head, what's the point?

The bottom end is capable of it, and with cams,lifters,springs,port match, and polish, the head is capable of it as well. It could probabaly be done with just cams, but valve float on an interference motor is a one time mistake...

[redtop91]

I just laid the smack down on my friend with an sr20 in his s14 lastnite.

im pushing 10 psi of boost out of s15 bb turbo, sidemount, and stock everything cept for 3" exhaust

his sr20 has huge front mount, lots of aftermarket goodies, same turbo as me, and i still raped him

ca18det rules, no contest. Sr is fine....but what came first the SR or the CA

Your friend sucks at driving. With equal mods the car capabilities should be the same. There is some inconsistency with your statement.

[float_6969]

S13 vs. S14?

Skinny vs. Fat?

[redtop91]

S13 vs. S14?

Skinny vs. Fat?

rofl

[float_6969]

It's the best I could come up with

[sideways danny]

The bottom end is capable of it, and with cams,lifters,springs,port match, and polish, the head is capable of it as well. It could probabaly be done with just cams, but valve float on an interference motor is a one time mistake...

yeah but why? that's so far past peak power you're just giving the engine hell for the sake of it.

for what it's worth it's my strong belief that the limit of standard rods and pistons is around 7.3k rpm and not at a given power. Revs kill rods, it's as simple as that

[bentvalves]

[QUOTE=ozzie!]Just show this to all the haters.....

link to show THE CA18DET OWNS!!CA18's are severely under-rated.

haha that 180 and skyline just tuned me right up. A fine example of what a little enginuity can accomplish.....thaat fuuckin' skyline is ridiculous lol....im laughing at the thought of giving a hater a ride in either one of those cars.

[drifting circles]

So my ca will be in tomorrow for sure. What belts will i need to use???

[ca18detpowered]

Your friend sucks at driving. With equal mods the car capabilities should be the same. There is some inconsistency with your statement.

yknow what, now that i think of it he does need a tune, and he hasnt had the car for long...DAMMIT DONT TAKE MY WIN FROM ME

hehe, but, bottom line....im a ca fan forever...

they are getting very rare where i live. No engine importer in calgar has had any in for like 3 months, and they all say the chances of having one any time soon are slim to none.

[Ca_Silvia]

Thats why the internet is your friend when you own a CA.

Edit: I see your form Calgary also......GO FLAMES!!!

[snowy_s13]

woot Calgary, now if only my Ca wasnt parked....damn

[redtop91]

The CA is a sweet motor in my opinion. Definitely not superior performance wise to the SR20. More like equal. But it's a helluva lot cheaper for essentially the same thing. The SR20 was designed as a cheaper production engine to the same end as the CA18 because it was so over engineered.

[davidricardo86]

Quote, originally posted by float_6969 »

"The bottom end is capable of it, and with cams,lifters,springs,port match, and polish, the head is capable of it as well. It could probabaly be done with just cams, but valve float on an interference motor is a one time mistake... "

Qoute, originally posted by sideways danny >>

"yeah but why? that's so far past peak power you're just giving the engine hell for the sake of it."

"for what it's worth it's my strong belief that the limit of standard rods and pistons is around 7.3k rpm and not at a given power. Revs kill rods, it's as simple as that"

Very good to know this because i will be using stock rods but with cp forged pistons and a balanced recpri. assembly. Do you think that would make a big difference? (Probably not)

Im now thinking about using stock valvetrain for small overlap and an sr t25 for starters. I can upgrade some more later. I want to start using the car after winter. I have adj. cam gears, rebuilt lifters, and the rest stock. MLS headgasket, ARP head studs, Grex timing belt and new pullies are going to the head.

[ca18detpowered]

I smell a calgary ca18 owners meet.....

hehehehe

Pm me calgary ca owners. Would love to meet up

[dvd]

i dont know but posted 2 links on high powered ca's doesnt really mean a lot since there's probably even more srs thaat have some crazy amounts of power too.

[redtop91]

i dont know but posted 2 links on high powered ca's doesnt really mean a lot since there's probably even more srs thaat have some crazy amounts of power too.

Too many to list in a single topic. The "weakest" high power sr I've seen is the Hyper Lemon and that badboy puts out around 800 if I recall correctly.

[JaPPster]

ca was designed as a race engine, sr was designed as cost killer and as engine to be used in many variants from fast hatchs to family sedans.. sr in NA form, responds fantastic to mild upgrades/bolt ons, but when comes to big power in revs all day long, then we talk serious iron engines like ca na rb

they both are fantastic engines, but ca is a performer from the beggining

[themadscientist]

That board must have IP banned me or something, haha. I guess I make an impression. My post count was like 4 or something.

[BACARDI_DWB]

ok lets break it down to the design featuresiron> aluminumbelt >chain1 lobe= 1 port> 1 lobe=2 portssquare bore/strove > over squarelight > heavybuilt with great aspects in mind > built as a cheaper alternative to the CA18Detcam on bucket > rocker arm

the design was based off the nissan's first born race engine the FJ20ET and then they made the RB engines with the same design features in the head along with the block. the CA is often refered as the RB's little sister. pretty much you knock off the back 2 cylinders off the RB and you have the CA. the SR was made to keep the costs of engine designs down. hmm lets think of this for a second, they stopped making the CA's cause it was costing too much to produce such a high tech engine that they replaced it with the Cheap alternative SR20, YET they still kept on producing the GREAT RB engines with the same design features cause it was making nissan money in the race circuits.

Just in the design alone the CA takes it over the SR. The ONLY thing the SR has is the Aftermarket support and the popularity of the VERY uninformed masses.

[redtop91]

LOL Don't be haters now. Every engine has it's drawbacks and although I don't know what the CA's are I know it has many. I think these drawbacks are missing from your posts.

[BACARDI_DWB]

yes there are drawbacks. the biggest one being VERY little aftermarket. and some may say displacement, but i am not worried. other than that there are not too many drawbacks besides the 2 different head designs. 8port vs 4 port intake. but that really isn't a flaw, just gives you more choices haha

[Liquid_Neon]

"square bore/strove > over square"

isnt the ca 83.6 and 83mm? with the SR 86mm x 86mm?im just wondering if that is what u meant...

also... whats over square???

either way.. id like to see a stock SR rev like a ca and come back asking for more!

my ca18de survived RPM>8500 a few times and kept purring till i yanked it still would run if i hooked it back up i bet!

[BACARDI_DWB]

ya your right on that one, i forgot the SR20 was 86x86.

[themadscientist]

The only weakness I have discovered so far on the CA side of the fence is

1. lower displacement

2. smaller (weaker) rod bolts

Other than that the CA comes out on top in any comparison.

I maintain that the SR is a very good motor in and of itself, It is just not better than the CA on anything other than a size comparison.

It will be interseting to watch the SR faithful defend themselves in 5-years when Nissault drops their beloved sodacan for the QR or whatever new flavor of 4-banger takes the forefront. Will we hold them close and rock them gently as they cry about dwindling aftermarket support and getting disrespected by the "new breed"?Considerering a lot, not all, but a lot of SR guys are bandwagon types they will be in a spot. The guys who went SR for legitimate specific reasons will hang on and take our place on the net, the old-timers, the freaks. CA guys will become like yeti or something, people will remember us though "I saw a CA once, it was crazy"! I will still have an FJ and an L running though kids, hell the CA is my "new motor"!

[dash]

I like the ca18, but it ain't no "great" motor. Good maybe.It does nothing exceptionally well - power or durability.What else beside camshafts would you need the 'aftermarket' to do ?Quit with all the "race design" crap, because the ca18 is not.Seems like merely a copy of toyotas 1984 4age, built on their 'old' ca18E bottom end.... except the following improvements;* extra 200cc displacement over 4ag* turbocharged from factory* crank girdle* starter and oil filter under intake where it belongs instead of under a hot exhaust manifold.* distributorless ignition system instead of a distributor stuck right ahead of 4ag exh manifold (which is a pita for turbocharging)..

Drawbacks that come to mind;-#1 motor for rod bearing failure (read sxoc & ns.com)-Durability; won't rack up 150k+ unopened, like a DSM @25psi for eg.-Half counterweighted crank-Not a 'smooth' revver (even my 2000mile/like new motor wasn't). I will see how much balancing my will help on my rebuild.-Crank angle sensors-coilpacks; will move them and run GM coil/wires, ala miata/4g63-Exhaust cam splines-Dipstick has to be the worst pos ever designed-Poor cylinder bore wear (ridge seen when couple heads pulled)-oil starvation due to poor oil drainback with sustained revs. Some adopt RB 'top end oil restricton' tricks, others add cooler/increase oil capacity.-UK reports of abnormal valve and guide wear in some 4 port years.

CA18 has its 'issues'. Be realistic about what to expect from it.

[r34 gtr]

we be travellin' through time, hatin' on people!

seriously though, my CA revs like no other 4-banger ive driven. and ive driven a lot of them. i cant speak for all CA's, but i built mine up kinda loose so it screams.

[AmoebAssassin]

"My CA has a better designed head!!"

Please, I'd like any of you CA loyalists to point out to me, from an engineering standpoint, why a CA18 head is better than an SR20 head. And if your argument is bucket-tappet valvetrain vs. rocker valvetrain, you've already made it clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. Thanks.

"Aluminum is for soda cans, not blocks! LOLOLOLOL"

Aluminum is only for soda cans and not engine blocks when you know nothing about metallurgy or engine construction. Every aluminum block engine ever made has steel sleeves, just like your precious, rusty iron block motor. Sleeve strength and the ability of a motor to keep its cylinders vertical and their bores perfectly round is the determining factor of whether or not a motor will be adept at making power. As far as SR20s are concerned, their steel sleeves and closed decks make them equal to CA18s.

"My CA18 can hold more boost than your SR20!"

I've never, ever heard of an SR20 experiencing an engine block failure due to excessive boost. Also, SR20s are proven reliable on well over 400whp on stock internals, and shops have coaxed numbers in the high 500whp range out of stock internals.

"The CA18DET is a race motor y0, the SR20 only replaced it because it was cheaper, dawg"

No. You have no idea what you're talking about. First of all, lets take a look at material prices. Aluminum is a good deal more expensive than iron. I can get steel for ****ing cents. Aluminum is more pricey to refine than steel/iron is, end of story - this is reflected in material cost.

Okay, now let's look at production costs. Aluminum is less tolerant of lax casting processes and is prone to bubbling or density fluctuation if cast improperly (look at all those poorly cast eBay intake manifolds), requiring a more skilled production line and a cleaner production facility.

Combine that with the cost of retooling engine production facilities, and costs of research and design for a motor -- the SR20 is hardly beginning to look like the "cheaper option" here.

"My CA18 can rev higher than your SR20 d00d!"

SR20s do not suffer because of rocker arms. They suffer because of hydraulic lash adjusters, the same equipment CA18s use. All you CA guys revving to 8+K on stock valvetrain -- you're pretty foolish to do it on stock HLAs and stock valve springs/retainers, and doubly foolish to do it seeing as how spinning your motors that high gives you no advantage when your stock cams allow you to make no extra power, and your stock turbo is wimpy, at best.

A good friend of mine recently built a stock bottom end SR with tomei solid lifters. He texted me the other day when he hit 10KRPM. Yeah, SRs sure suck at revving, right

I'm sorry - the CA18 was phased out because it was an older design and was not cutting it in the competitive market that the early to mid 90s saw. That doesn't necessarily make it a bad engine, but you guys need to stop the anti-SR backlash. That **** is so played out.

[r34 gtr]

hate hate hate hate!

im not going to get into a fight over which engine is better. neither one is better than the other. its all based on the owner's opinion. yeah, my stock turbo was crap, so i ditched it. couldnt make power to 8500 with stock cams, so i ditched them. i personally love the "aluminum is for cans, not blocks" thing because im american and damnit if i dont love me an iron block (plus it annoys every friend of mine with an aluminum block engine, even though mine makes the least power right now). no engine sucks at revving with enough money. mine revs like a bike but it cost me a lot to do it.

lastly, im sure an sr20 would have been cheaper at this point, but i love my CA and i wouldnt trade it for the world. have fun with your SR, ill have fun with my CA.

[Liquid_Neon]

Ya know, a flow bench would solve these problems about better designed heads. that way we could actully see some numbers!

also, the revving higher thing is kind of a moot point... both motors will rev stupid high. the point is neither one are any good at making anything but noise up there, same as honda boys and girls. 10k rpm means squat on stock manifolds and cams.I think the important point is how the CA revvs a bit peppier then an SR. basicly when rev matching for a downshift, or in neutral for example, cas rev quicker both up and down. easier to shift without clutch like that (so when ur slave dies u can still get home!)

If i may point out, i dont think its the raw materials that made the CA more expensive. more like the technology involved with the cars at the time, was too expensive in the 80's. Think about what other 88-1991 year cars had 7.5K redlines, coil on plug, variable runner length (8port), and the power figures for the size motor. 125hp and 175hp, not many other cheap 1.8L cars had that sorta setup.

just my couple dollars worth anyone care to add or subract from my change may do so.