iron vs. aluminum

[nihon]

what are the pros and cons.

iron vs. aluminum block, (i.e. sr vs. rb20)

doesnt iron overheat faster or something?

if i swapped in a rb20 in my s13 would i be able to beat on it all day with the same reliability of an sr?

which motor is better for a drift car that is drivin on the track 3+ hours at a time?

im just trying to verify if an rb20 is suitable motor for serious motorsports, because i dont want to spend more money on an sr

[Nali]

I havent done Chem or D&T since Highschool, but from what i gather and i may be wrong is.

Iron: Heavier, more durable.Aluminum: Lighter, less durable.

As for the RB20 vs SR20 debate.IBTL!

[RCA]

Iron absorbes more heat then AluminumIron stays hotter longer then AluminumIron is heavier then AluminumIron handles heat better then Aluminum (ei takes longer to warp)

[numbnuts240]

what are the pros and cons.

the differences won't be enough to make one better than the other.

[nissanman04]

i dont want to spend more money on an sr

Up front cost for the RB is less, but once you start modding the RB, the SR would have been the cheaper option. SR parts tend to be cheaper and more readily available, in general.

[Space Monkey]

RB20 and the SR20 almost put out the same HP depending on the version of SR. I would say SR over RB20, but RB25 over SR. Heavier more costly mortor for same power output FTL.

[Nali]

Heavier more costly mortor for same power output FTL.

RB20 is more expensive than the SR20?Or are you implying the SR20 is heavier than the RB20?

[Bumnah]

An RB20 is cheap for a reason. No market for it. Low aftermarket support in comparison to the sr20. It's also longer because it's an I6, so the weight distribution isn't as good.

Frankly I don't know why anyone would put an RB20 in their 240sx.

Iron handles heat for a longer period of time, better than aluminum, but the weight savings and the reliable tune of an OEM SR20, makes it a mute point.

[fender-startocaster]

i like this debate.

[asoomal]

....

Frankly I don't know why anyone would put an RB20 in their 240sx.

....

Lot of people do here. I've actually seen more RB20's then the SR20's here.

I think it's cause then they can brag about their base model Skyline engines or something.

[VRoy]

I'm still not quite sure why anyone would lose the KA for any of those options. A decent rebuild and a turbo is the same ballpark $ wise. With 2.4L and a Iron block. Anyone have the weights for each motor?

[Didderson]

OP, you should be more concerned about the mechanics of the SR20 versus the RB20 when selecting an engine for its reliability. Take note of the redline, stroke and bore, and valve-train design.

If you're a drifter who's going to beat the piss out of his car, I'd actually suggest the rb20 because of the valvetrain cam on bucket design. Hydraulic lifters do fail, and valve float blah blah blah.Timing belts suck though :P I mean changing them sucks. RB's have timing belts, not chains.

RB:Cam on bucket valve train.Bore x stroke mm: 78.0 x 69.7oem redline =7600. I'm sure you can increase that reliably with much less effort and money than us SR guys.Also, 6 cylinders will fire much smoother at the same RPM as a 4 cylinder engine, IMO making it more reliable.I could argue that the increased cylinders also will provide more torqueYou can always bore out your RB when you blow it up to rb25 status :P I'm serious, this is the ONLY reason why I think people buy an RB20.The difference in weight bias because the engine is heavier/more far forward is up to you. Think of other reasons before weight if you're thinkin reliability/robustness

SR:Most people forget aluminum blocks are sleeved with iron/steel anyway. What I mean is the piston travels inside a steel cylinder, so yeah.OEM Redline: 7500. SR has 86mm x 86mm bore and strokeChain driven timing system (IMO basically maintenance free granted you take the chain guide off) But arguably chains vs belts add rotational weight :P

The only drawback to an sr20 is the rocker arm and hydraulic lifter design. It's been extremely reliable for me, but I have only hit 7500 rpm once or twice. Aluminum is more beautiful (to me) than iron :PTechnically you could argue it wears quicker than steel because of density but that's what crank bearings are for.

I'll stop before this gets too long, but you should choose your engine based on the mechanical aspects of it rather than the metal it's constructed of

You might want to consider the RB's little brother, the CA:http://www.driftcentral.com/fo...=1379

Dangit, all this text for a 1 post new guy. He better read this lol.

[Nali]

Lot of people do here. I've actually seen more RB20's then the SR20's here.

I think it's cause then they can brag about their base model Skyline engines or something.

By here do you mean NICO?

More RB20s than SRs

i like this debate.

Im actually amazed its still open.The Iron vs Aluminium was just a guise for SR vs RB, either the mods let it slide or they havent seen it yet.Either way, i think we might as well milk the freeposts while we can.

My vote goes RB20 for low HP goals(i.e stock).SR20 for higher HP goalsand CA18 for the win

[fastass]

By here do you mean NICO?

More RB20s than SRs

Im actually amazed its still open.The Iron vs Aluminium was just a guise for SR vs RB, either the mods let it slide or they havent seen it yet.Either way, i think we might as well milk the freeposts while we can.

My vote goes RB20 for low HP goals(i.e stock).SR20 for higher HP goalsand CA18 for the win

all good opinions an iron block is way heavy wich=power to wait ratio.. and alu. is light again= power to wait ratio.. but as stated a iron block can handle way more heat than alu. so its your judgement call lol.. but ka has tourqe.....

[asoomal]

By here do you mean NICO?

More RB20s than SRs

Im actually amazed its still open.The Iron vs Aluminium was just a guise for SR vs RB, either the mods let it slide or they havent seen it yet.Either way, i think we might as well milk the freeposts while we can.

My vote goes RB20 for low HP goals(i.e stock).SR20 for higher HP goalsand CA18 for the win

Here as in the city I live in.

Edit: Oh and also, I dunno why, but no one likes the KA around here.

I have yet to see a KA-T.

[Chris28]

KA. Lots of aftermarket support, iron block.

[fastass]

KA. Lots of aftermarket support, iron block.

sad but true.. but alot of tourqe.. but as you said much support for the ka.

[Nali]

Here as in the city I live in.

More RB20s than SR20s

But atleast the SXs sound amazing there.

[fastass]

im workin on my ka-t.. but be diff. where ever you live stomp some a** with a ka.

[VRoy]

Edit: Oh and also, I dunno why, but no one likes the KA around here. I have yet to see a KA-T.

USDM hate is still holding out in a few pockets of resistance across the country

[Nali]

but ka has tourqe.....

but alot of tourqe

Do you actually believe Torque is spelt like that?

[fastass]

Do you actually believe Torque is spelt like that?

i could care less lol..

[fastass]

i ts a forum not a spelling bee.. haha

[Nali]

i could care less lol..

how much less could you care?

[fastass]

quite a lot, but i didnt come here to argue..

[Nali]

quite a lot, but i didnt come here to argue..

Now look here foo, if you didnt come to argue then what reason are we having this conversation?

[fastass]

Now look here foo, if you didnt come to argue then what reason are we having this conversation?

hahaha i have no earthly idea..

[AZ89two4Tsx]

RBs sound cool.

That's all you should be concerned about.

[Bluefire]

OP, you should be more concerned about the mechanics of the SR20 versus the RB20 when selecting an engine for its reliability. Take note of the redline, stroke and bore, and valve-train design.

If you're a drifter who's going to beat the piss out of his car, I'd actually suggest the rb20 because of the valvetrain cam on bucket design. Hydraulic lifters do fail, and valve float blah blah blah.Timing belts suck though :P I mean changing them sucks. RB's have timing belts, not chains.

RB:Cam on bucket valve train.Bore x stroke mm: 78.0 x 69.7oem redline =7600. I'm sure you can increase that reliably with much less effort and money than us SR guys.Also, 6 cylinders will fire much smoother at the same RPM as a 4 cylinder engine, IMO making it more reliable.I could argue that the increased cylinders also will provide more torqueYou can always bore out your RB when you blow it up to rb25 status :P I'm serious, this is the ONLY reason why I think people buy an RB20.The difference in weight bias because the engine is heavier/more far forward is up to you. Think of other reasons before weight if you're thinkin reliability/robustness

SR:Most people forget aluminum blocks are sleeved with iron/steel anyway. What I mean is the piston travels inside a steel cylinder, so yeah.OEM Redline: 7500. SR has 86mm x 86mm bore and strokeChain driven timing system (IMO basically maintenance free granted you take the chain guide off) But arguably chains vs belts add rotational weight :P

The only drawback to an sr20 is the rocker arm and hydraulic lifter design. It's been extremely reliable for me, but I have only hit 7500 rpm once or twice. Aluminum is more beautiful (to me) than iron :PTechnically you could argue it wears quicker than steel because of density but that's what crank bearings are for.

I'll stop before this gets too long, but you should choose your engine based on the mechanical aspects of it rather than the metal it's constructed of

You might want to consider the RB's little brother, the CA:http://www.driftcentral.com/fo...=1379

Dangit, all this text for a 1 post new guy. He better read this lol.

Good comparison. But RB20's and RB25's also utilize hydraulics lifters. But still much better than a hydraulic lifter and rocker setup.

Also the Iron vs Aluminum factor will not come into play unless your looking to make like 700+ hp. An aluminum block will have get sleeved whereas an iron block is good to go.

Anyways stick with either sr20 or rb25/26. rb20's aren't worth playing with...

[fastass]

you sure your not thinkin heads?