Ca18det haters

[bias]

Just wondering when was the last time any CA owners posted in a SR thread?

[r34 gtr]

a stock ca18det camshaft weighs 4lb 5oz.

and might i add i too am 2 years from a BS in mechanical engineering, but none of my classes have had any impact on how i view or work on engines. maybe if you were in automotive engineering. mechanical isnt crap.

can someone just lock this thread? this argument is pretty pointless, though it does keep me entertained.

and bias - i have never been in the sr forum, nor do i intend to. i mean whats the point? i dont have an sr.

[themadscientist]

I got 2095 grams for an HKS 264 with my uber accurate kitchen scale

The thread is heated but not to that point yet. I think we have some interesting tidbits of fact and educated speculation going on, it is a good exchange on the whole IMO. In the years I have argued the SR/CA thing several points we are now discussing were never even brought up. It's interesting and I would like to keep the dialogue going.

[float_6969]

See above post. I want someone to provide factual evidence for the claims you've all been making for some time now.

I would encourage you to find a post that I have made demeaning any other engine out there. Unless you go back YEARS I seriously doubt that you'll find any. I'm a relatively open minded person. In all actuality the MAIN reason that I chose the CA was because of weight and physical size. It was the lightest and shortest motor available that was easily swapped into my chassis.

No, and you're hanging on the slightest tidbits and blowing them out of proportion. I mentioned my degree once, to let TMS know that I'm not some stupid kid on the internet. YOU'RE the one who's making it seem like I'm trying to be your savior.

I merely stated an observation. If others feel that you aren't behaving in the same manor than I am, then so be it.

The SR is not an engineering marvel, and neither is the CA18. Stop treating it as such.

Once again, when have I done either?

Well you know the saying, opinions are like ***holes? I don't find it particularly worthwhile to argue about how you feel about me.

I couldn't agree more. Your input on anything regarding,well, anything has no effect on me whatsoever.

No, motors designed to operate within a narrow RPM range with no consideration of powerband design (fuel atomization, intake velocities, runner lenth tuning using resonance, etc.) would use the head design you've mentioned. Oh wait, just like nascar - where the engines only operate at a very narrow RPM range and are not expected to perform outside said envelope.

The flowbench is used not to measure, but compare. Flow benches are used to qualify the frictional losses in a head. This is a major design consideration, and believe it or not, it is one of the most important aspects of head design.

I'm not arguing that they aren't a measure of frictional losses. That's what they do. What I'm saying is that simply because one head flows better on a flow bench doesn't mean that it will make more total power (not peak).

What you have to understand about sport bikes is that even though they are very high revving, their volumetric flow rate is still very low compared to automobile engines. Therefore, port sizes can be reduced to increase intake tract velocities, and promote better atomization - this leads to more even combustion, and more power. This is a very specialized case, however, and should not be applied to automobile engine analysis.

Ok wait, so unless I'm misunderstanding you, you are telling me that because of their displacement the technology doesn't apply? I know that the revs that those motors turn at plays a large role in the port designs of the heads, but that doesn't mean that the theory doesn't apply. The point that I was trying to make was that once again, sheer flow rate doesn't dictate power. We have agreed on this so I see no reason to continue discussing that aspect of this argument.

I do agree with you wholeheartedly about my lack of numerical evidence, but the burden of proof is NOT on me in this thread. I've not once stated intent to prove the SR is better than the CA18, and you can re-read my posts if you don't believe me.

And the burden of proof isn't on me either. As previously stated, I don't give a rats *** about what you say or think. I chose this motor for the reason I stated above. I have never claimed that this motor was superior to the SR, simply different. The theories that you provided earlier are valid, but with out doing the number crunching to either prove or disprove your statements, everything you say and everything I say is smoke in the wind. All we're doing here is stirring the shlt and making it stink in here.

I've watched as CA18 owners have grown smug and become more comfortable denouncing SR engines as cheap or poorly designed. I'm here to ask you to prove it, and none of you have given ME any numbers. Nobody has given me production cost analysis, or any other numbers. The only one who has even attempted has been TMS.

When did you become the God of truth, traveling the far reaches of the internet, making sure that no false statements are ever made? You come in here demanding that we provide proof of statements made. I ask you to provide proof that what we say is wrong. To even prove that the SR is superior in design. The reason you haven't isn't simply because the burden of proof is on us. It's because you have no more information to back up the statements you've made any more than others have information to back up the statements they've made. As I said before, this is all hearsay, which defines it as crap in my book.

This is what I DO have. Compare the head designs of the RB, VG, CA, and even to some extent, the KA. Notice any similarities? Need I remind you that when the RB and VG series motors were introduced into the market they were some of the best motors available at the time. (Ignoring exotics like Ferrari, Porsche, etc). And except for VTC, their head and block designs have an uncanny similarity. You speak of the disadvantages of bucket lifters compared to the SR rocker lifter setup, yet many, if not most high end motors have used bucket lifters, this INCLUDES the exotics. Yea, it's a horrible design...

Yes, it does, but thats not what I'm here to argue. By the way, if you feel that strongly about paper vs. performance, why are you letting your friends tout HP/L numbers?

LOL, letting my friends? That's funny stuff. I don't control anybody but myself. I don't let or not let them do anything except what is laid out in the rules of the forum.

Like a flow bench, hp/l is merely one measure of the performance of a motor. It's not the whole picture, although a bit better indicator than mere flow measurements....

[utemhsa]

*shakes head*

jeebus

[Liquid_Neon]

despite some of the minor remarks that are minorly insulting, this IS quite an interesting debate. The whole weight and velocity topic is great! Good debates always bring out great points, and this is getting really good!!

[ragenasian]

I am also finding this a very interesting read.

[tyrannix]

i only got to the second page of this thread... time for bed,

if the arguement over flowbenches for the intake on a head is still in progress, heres the answer - go to http://www.mototuneusa.comread his in depth articles reguarding teh venturi principle and real-world results on race bikes (consistant results on many engines that he has built with pictures)

that sometimes reducing intake port size on the head (increasing velocity) is the best thing you can do for an engine. i want to say just doing that gained him 8WHP on a bike (it was either 5 or 8, cant remember)

now, a better flowing plenum is all gravy, i even have one for my CA - getting a huge mass of pressurized air *TO* the intake ports so that they (or their variable butterfly runners in teh CAs case ) can do their stuff is good thing

and i didnt even notice when ... but this thread became a half-civilized-debate, half-flame-war ..... why?

CJ

edit>BTW , 1JZ FTW

[sideways danny]

this thread reaks of K1 bollocks

[dash]

The CA has all the stops pulled out, it was cutting edge for it's time. No it was not a copy of the 4AG, that is a pretty assinanine statement.

themadscientistNo, THAT is a display of your 'assinanine' remarks.

Cutting edge ?? . you mean;Like 'the innovative'(old) cylinder head & inlet designCould it be the failure prone ignitor, Or the failure prone coil on plug, Failure prone CAS and the worn cam splines Crappy T25 durability Don't forget the worse oil dipstick any engineer could come up with......looks more like 'cutting teeth' than cutting edge

WHAT stops pulled out ?? Oh, that must be the.....block skirt ending at the crank centerline... then a "girdle added" ?Or was it the half counterweighted crankshaft ?

This is exactly the sort of propaganda that fuels these threads.

FYI these "issues" are non exisistent on the 'old' 4AGE. Stock block, crank & oil pump seen 10,500-11,000rpm boosted, no special prep work. All versions of the cylinder head flow well/have made good power. You act as if it was such a bad idea to copy a solid design. lolI'm fine with the ca18 as is... but lets try to 'keep it real'.

[Sil40sK]

I'll just say this, I respect anything that is respectable. Whether it be an LS7, CA18, SR20, VQ, RB, 426 Hemi, crazy blown 502, 4AGE that revs to 20k, whatever. Nearly every car company has made something incredable in there exsistance, some companies make more incredable things than others. But whatever, lets all at least pretend to get along. I honestly respect cars and motors for what they are, plain and simple. Now me respecting the person who owns them is a completely different story.

[themadscientist]

themadscientistNo, THAT is a display of your 'assinanine' remarks.

Let's see

Cutting edge ?? . you mean;Like 'the innovative'(old) cylinder head & inlet design

Wasn't "old" when it was introduced chief.

Could it be the failure prone ignitor,

The same igniter system that powers the SR, RB, VH etc and one that I have never seen fail ever?If one should fail it is because it overheated sitting next to the turbo and that would be operator induced if your turbo gets that hot that much.

Or the failure prone coil on plug,

The same design that powers the SR, RB, VH etc and again only fails when overheated and on 10-year-old motors? Were you trying to gain ground there?

Failure prone CAS and the worn cam splines

The same design as the SR(mounted different but same internally), RB, VH etc and I have only seen fail two times, on an RB and because the operator pulled the timing belt cover and cinched the CAS down to where the bearing was overloaded and failed, that one?

Crappy T25 durability

The same durability exhibited by the early SRs, and VG turbos. Is it just possible that 15-year-old turbos are'nt reliable. Na that would make sense and not support you flight of fancy so that couldn't be it.

Don't forget the worse oil dipstick any engineer could come up with.

I know that is the primary criteria for me when selecting my motors.

.....looks more like 'cutting teeth' than cutting edge

Haha? not really

WHAT stops pulled out ?? Oh, that must be the.....block skirt ending at the crank centerline... then a "girdle added" ?Or was it the half counterweighted crankshaft ?

The full girdle made an appearance in the CA, I guess you like shifty main caps, enjoy that. You would have to pop it out if you wanted to go SR though, they have it too

This is exactly the sort of propaganda that fuels these threads.

You are the one who is talking about something you obviously know little about.

FYI these "issues" are non exisistent on the 'old' 4AGE. Stock block, crank & oil pump seen 10,500-11,000rpm boosted, no special prep work. All versions of the cylinder head flow well/have made good power. You act as if it was such a bad idea to copy a solid design. lolI'm fine with the ca18 as is... but lets try to 'keep it real'.

Nothing wrong with copying a solid design. By your own statements the CA is not a copy of the 4AG which is what I said. Maybe you should read next time. On second thought don't, your posts are more rediculous and entertaining that way.

[themadscientist]

I'll just say this, I respect anything that is respectable. Whether it be an LS7, CA18, SR20, VQ, RB, 426 Hemi, crazy blown 502, 4AGE that revs to 20k, whatever. Nearly every car company has made something incredable in there exsistance, some companies make more incredable things than others. But whatever, lets all at least pretend to get along. I honestly respect cars and motors for what they are, plain and simple. Now me respecting the person who owns them is a completely different story.

I had a 20-valve 4AG and that little thing was pissed off! I miss it, it sounded like a sportbike and just screamed!

[Liquid_Neon]

I'll just say this, I respect anything that is respectable. Whether it be an LS7, CA18, SR20, VQ, RB, 426 Hemi, crazy blown 502, 4AGE that revs to 20k, whatever. Nearly every car company has made something incredable in there exsistance, some companies make more incredable things than others. But whatever, lets all at least pretend to get along. I honestly respect cars and motors for what they are, plain and simple. Now me respecting the person who owns them is a completely different story.

what has daewoo done?

[themadscientist]

what has daewoo done?

Given Hyundai a serious challenge for goofiest corperate name?

[dash]

TMSweak attempt at twisting words.

CA head looks like a 4age copy... "built on their 'old' ca18E bottom end". Never said the block is. Read u say ? ...and stop trippin'. You didn't explain what makes a ca18 head/inlet so 'different' either. Simply refute it, other 'obvious similarities' & the CA shortcomings.

Oil stick... criterion to choose a motor ? naahh.... why would anyone think oil level was important ? What a "dipstick"

Shifty main caps ? many cast iron hipo 4cyl don't have/need girdles. CA18det does, yet once again, offers no advantage over them. Next you'll be feeding us more bull about the benefits of our half counterweighted crankshaft. Here.... have one of those 'stops'

So "pull out all the stops", and wind up with what... an 'average' motor ? Which many will argue (amidst evidence), 'wears' substandard.I can see why you'd proclaim that and herald a CA as some standout.

Unlike 'in your world', the typical ca18 failures I've seen first hand or experienced is consistent with numerous posts on the higher traffic CA forums (undoubtly a virtual feeding ground for CA haters).

Now, if only you were a fraction as smart as you are patronizing... and half as amusing. .....you're welcome, chief

[float_6969]

Ok, so the CA is a run of the mill, crap motor with copied head designs and a worthless bottom end.

You win!

[GoTRicEo0]

intense thread

[Sil40sK]

what has daewoo done?

haha, that's why I said, nearly every company, because Daewoo and Hyundai were the first companies to come to mind that haven't really done anything.

TMSweak attempt at twisting words.

CA head looks like a 4age copy... "built on their 'old' ca18E bottom end". Never said the block is. Read u say ? ...and stop trippin'. You didn't explain what makes a ca18 head/inlet so 'different' either. Simply refute it, other 'obvious similarities' & the CA shortcomings.

Oil stick... criterion to choose a motor ? naahh.... why would anyone think oil level was important ? What a "dipstick"

Shifty main caps ? many cast iron hipo 4cyl don't have/need girdles. CA18det does, yet once again, offers no advantage over them. Next you'll be feeding us more bull about the benefits of our half counterweighted crankshaft. Here.... have one of those 'stops'

So "pull out all the stops", and wind up with what... an 'average' motor ? Which many will argue (amidst evidence), 'wears' substandard.I can see why you'd proclaim that and herald a CA as some standout.

Unlike 'in your world', the typical ca18 failures I've seen first hand or experienced is consistent with numerous posts on the higher traffic CA forums (undoubtly a virtual feeding ground for CA haters).

Now, if only you were a fraction as smart as you are patronizing... and half as amusing. .....you're welcome, chief

Dumb question, but if you seem to hate CAs so much, why do you have one?

[BACARDI_DWB]

both engines have thier goods bads and uglies. whether its engine design or aftermarket support. i think the thing that kills me is the general public who "know" about the SR20 and think its a godsend, So when you tell people that you have a CA18 they immediately say "why didnt you get the SR20?" and "the SR20 is faster" and of course "my buddy has an sr20 and...he would destroy your 1.8"

Those simple minded comments from people just kills me. Really it doesn't really hurt me that there is no aftermarket for the CA18. it just makes the build Unique. hell i was talking to Swedish mike and i was amazed at the ingenuity that some CA guys come up with to make a fast car when aftermarket support is not availible

"My last S13 were a budget car, total engine cost of 1500 USD.I gave the dyno sheet to the new owner as a proof of the power. Dyno´d it on a Rototest hub dyno, add 20-30 hp compared to the roller dyno´s. Had 290 whp at 6000 rpm and rev limit at 8500 rpm.

Volvo pistons and water cooler, Iveco truck IC, 4 bar fuel pressure, Mitsu 18T turbo, 3" turboback, 3" AFM, 444cc injectors, Audi RS2 fuel pump, Porsche oil cooler, mbc and 1,4 bar, ported head (exhaust ports), custom chip, re-grinded cams, ported manifold and volvo 940 fuel filter. Result: ET 12.8 and 120 mph."

Talk about making it work. I don't know too many SR20 guys that would go to those lengths to make a motor work like that. I am not singleing anyone out but the "basic" sr20 owner has the SR20 because the aftermarket IS there for it. I am not hating because there is a huge aftermarket for it, Just pointing out that there are different kinds of mindsets between the CA and SR guys, generally speaking of course.

[themadscientist]

TMSweak attempt at twisting words.

No, just refuting your points, or should I say your attempt at points.

CA head looks like a 4age copy... "built on their 'old' ca18E bottom end". Never said the block is. Read u say ? ...and stop trippin'.

So are you saying that during the same period in time two seperate manufacturers could not have possibly pursued the same design? And when did this become a 4AG-vs-CA discussion?

You didn't explain what makes a ca18 head/inlet so 'different' either. Simply refute it, other 'obvious similarities' & the CA shortcomings.

It is different than the SR20, that was the discussion you walked into, hello mcfly The 4A and the CA use similar designs, could be why I like both hmmm. For that matter the 1G and the RB20 look a hell of a lot alike too, Nissan must have stolen that design too.

Oil stick... criterion to choose a motor ? naahh.... why would anyone think oil level was important ? What a "dipstick"

Mine works fine, oh, you are trying to stick the loop end into the hole are'nt you? No silly the pointy end goes in the hole, figure that one out on the dipstick and you can apply in other situations

Shifty main caps ? many cast iron hipo 4cyl don't have/need girdles. CA18det does, yet once again, offers no advantage over them.

One prominent item I see for sale in my AE86 tuning catalogs are main cap girdles, let's ponder that for a minute. Well on second thought YOU ponder that as you seem to not get it.

So "pull out all the stops", and wind up with what... an 'average' motor ? Which many will argue (amidst evidence), 'wears' substandard.I can see why you'd proclaim that and herald a CA as some standout.

In the SR-vs-CA battle yes The CA is better for the reasons already pointed out. read again if it didn't stick the first time.

Unlike 'in your world', the typical ca18 failures I've seen first hand or experienced is consistent with numerous posts on the higher traffic CA forums (undoubtly a virtual feeding ground for CA haters).

I live in the same world you do. You should broaden you horizons a bit. I'm sorry we were'nt blowing them up left and right like you and your freinds seem to do. Sorry that doesn't support your rant. We were however smart enough to know what we were doing and not lean on old motors in need of a rebuild often divoid of good maintenance and then blame the motor. This is not just a CA issue, I pass through forums on all the engines and the same knucklehead moves are breaking KAs, SRs, RBs VGs etc, not just CAs. If you need to blame the machine for the stupidity of the user then go ahead if it helps you cope. My CA has 100000 miles on it has done 50000 of those with an S14 boosting just over 7K. that's it. My hasn't broken, how can that be? CAs are virtual hand grenades with dangling pins! Maybe I just drive slow? Eh, no Could it be that I don't beat it mercilessly daily, eh no Or could it be, could it just be that my crappy little CA is well built and I care for it properly? Naa, that can't be it, that doesn't help you, it must be magic or something. The CA is and average motor, so is the SR, so, now sit down and get ready for this it may hurt, is the 4A. They are all good though some are good in one area other ones in different areas.

Now, if only you were a fraction as smart as you are patronizing... and half as amusing. .....you're welcome, chief

This is not about "smart" it's about fact and opinion. The truth doesn't belong to one person, it is. If you are not amused, I really don't give a dam, you stepped up to the plate don't whine if I throw heat. You do amuse the hell out of me though and for that I thank you, chief?

[redtop91]

This thread is great. It's become fairly neutral and facts are being introduced. I'm intrigued.

[themadscientist]

That is why I like it. Even though the rhetoric is heated there are interesting bits mixed in like the little marshmallows in lucky charms. Even out of left field fella with the 4AG rant has contributed without likely intending to. In his foamy-mouthed tirade, I caught something, an interesting tidbit that I must admit I had never noted. This is crucial, this marks a new era for me. You know those moments that are pivotal, where your life is referenced as "before" and "after" the event? Now this is based on a quick Google image search spurred by one of Dash's comments buried deep in his post, please give him due props all because in all the years I have argued this nobody has ever even mentioned this, it's really frigging important too, you think some SR fanboy would have dropped it by now, hell, you would think I would have noticed myself. I get the impression that Dash has a CA? In which case it would be funny that a CA guy nailed the point that just made me say this.******ready?******no, seroiusly?******you are hating this are'nt you?******Redtop jump the fence and tell your freinds.******

I now like the SR20



I checked real quick so if I am misinformed somebody save me from the tomatoes flying at me right now. The SR20 has a fully counterweighted crank. Yes I still maintain the head sucks but a fully counterweighted crank is very notable, so notable in fact that it trumps the head's issues. I would tolerate the second-rate valvetrain to have it. Am I going to pull my CA, no. The CA is still the engine I hold close to my heart and the one I rock. What has changed is I will no longer spit at the SR when I see it. I will accept it as an engine I would use were I to pop the hood on a Silvia or 180SX and see one in there.

See, I did'nt lock the thread for a reason and through all the trials and venom something good came out of it. I am chagrined but pleased nonetheless.

[davidricardo86]

Good find! But i am curious to know why a fully counterweighed crankshaft would be "better" than one that isnt?

[redtop91]

Good find! But i am curious to know why a fully counterweighed crankshaft would be "better" than one that isnt?

Think about that one for a second. An unbalanced object of heavy mass rotating at 1000s of RPMs as opposed to one that is.

Redtop jump the fence and tell your freinds.

*jumps fence and tells his friends*

[oversteer180]

Holy ****. why did I just read all of that.

[themadscientist]

Good find! But I am curious to know why a fully counterweighed crankshaft would be "better" than one that isnt?

Internally balanced, no harmonic balancer required. That is why RB guys spend a bunch of money on ATI dampers, well because they can't afford an $8000 aftermarket full counter crank. The RB is not fully counterbalanced and neither is the CA and I would bet redtop's left nut that is contributory to the rod knock suffered by overreved CAs. For a street motor it isn't a must but it is VERY nice to have from the factory. The SR also has bigger rodbolts too but I always knew that. Everytime I saw SR cranks they were the 2.2 stroker kits which of course I expected to be full counter. I had never noticed the stocker was too.

[davidricardo86]

Thanks redtop91 for the response but i prefer TMS's response! Thats kind of a cool thing to have from the factory! Hey maybe the SR20 isnt "the cheaper alternative to the CA18 afterall?" I kid, i kid.

But our stock CA cranks arent the worst thing around right? I had my reciprocating assembly balanced when my block was assembled. I know there is a benefit to this but is it enough? I guess it would depend on what youre asking the motor to do and using common sense. My block is assembled and im starting to think about swapping my stock connecting rod bolts for a set of stronger ones like from ARP. Would you recommend this? Id like to avoid connecting rod problems as much as possible for example bolts stretching, rod knock, etc. Im using forged pistons with everything else factory and keeping it under 7000rpm. Im aiming for a safe and reliable range of 250-300whp.

[tyrannix]

^^^ needs a hug after coming out like that

dont worry big guy, its ok to like other engines.

if it makes you feel any better, theres some homies in new zealand that have nismo fully counterbalanced CA cranks (i had been trying to get one from Fraz for over a year, but he has vanished from radar) theyre from nismo sponsored rally teams. (thats besides teh norris or tomei ones)

and take the ad for the tomei 2.0 MHG out of your sig, i sent you loot already(with tomei 84mm forgies, 7.9:1 compression here i come)



BTW, i dont see the bottom of the block on teh centerline of the crank being a bad thing? weight savings by having more thin oil pan and less thick block, and extra regidity from the crank girdle?

but factory counterbalanced wins (4age does too )

[themadscientist]

done

I love the 4A, that 20-valve is just nasty. If I wasn't knee-deep in Skylines and Nissan engines I would be rolling in an AE111 BZR 6-speed with podfilters and a WRX hood scoop! Vroomvroom!