my comments on 248/240 s13 cam swap

Information on the naturally-aspirated KA24E and KA24DE engines.
User avatar
DjPantsSpecR
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:49 pm
Car: 93 MS13 92 RMS13

Postby DjPantsSpecR » Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:50 am

really, youre getting that 98 cam to work? i thought i heard of it being okay, but there was something stupid like the number on journals on it was wrong or you need to screw in the oil plug a little more, but maybe im thinking of altima cams....

watchout when intstalling that 98 exhaust cam, because they clock those differently since in 98 they switched over to the single row chain. this is just me typing and trying to remember at the same time, but in those years they switched the cams so they are installed with the pins and the dots on the gears at the same angle, as opposed to 12 oclock and 3 oclock like on all previous KADEs. i think its actually 12 oclock adn 12 oclock, but i dont entirely remember, its jsut something to look out for, id hate to see someone with bent valves becasue i know ive bent 12 at once.

so you probably already figured out what you need to do, but i want you to look into that if you havent. ands its good to ehar to got the sohc pistons in, thats something i still couldnt afford to do yet, hence the 30 dollar intake manifold....


User avatar
InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Re: (Vkoslak)

Postby InsanityInc » Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:08 am

Vkoslak wrote:even with 11.1:1 compression ratio?
I figured you meant you were already running on that and were going to bump it specifically for the cams.

User avatar
Vkoslak
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 11:20 am
Car: 1992 240SX SE rb26dett, 2004 Subaru Forester
Location: Pflugerville, TX
Contact:

Re: (InsanityInc)

Postby Vkoslak » Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:07 pm

no, it was stock before. I dont even know if I should do an ecu upgrade or injectors due to the higher compression. But I have another 240sx I can drive until this motor is done.

I'm pretty sure the higher compression ratio will require the 93 octane. Cams is just something to get a little more out of it and I have them already so I don't have to buy anything. I've already done a cam swap on a 98 240sx auto. That's how I nabbed the 232 cams.

struckinc
Posts: 316
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:23 am
Car: 93 hatch.stock.well mostly anyway-SOLD
97 kouki-stock
12 sentra sr-wifes new car
97 maxima-wifes car-SOLD
02 maxima se- daily
1936 austin 10/4 lichfield

Postby struckinc » Thu Aug 31, 2006 3:49 pm

the 98 cams will work. you just have to tap the oil plug at the back of the cam in to block off the last journal. i too am still playing with the cams..this weekend i will be able to let yall know about the altima exhaust on intake and the s14 exhaust. after my engine build i lost alot on the bottom end and need to move some of the power back low. its kinda sluggish below 3500 or so but 5- redline is a beast. i think alot of that might be the cheap pacesetter header though. havent heard good things about a 4-1 header but figured i would try it and see

User avatar
Vkoslak
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 11:20 am
Car: 1992 240SX SE rb26dett, 2004 Subaru Forester
Location: Pflugerville, TX
Contact:

Postby Vkoslak » Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:24 pm

I havent heard anything about blocking any journals. When I put the 92 cams in a 98 I didn't block or open anything and they worked fine.

struckinc
Posts: 316
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:23 am
Car: 93 hatch.stock.well mostly anyway-SOLD
97 kouki-stock
12 sentra sr-wifes new car
97 maxima-wifes car-SOLD
02 maxima se- daily
1936 austin 10/4 lichfield

Postby struckinc » Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:57 pm

the 98 have an extra cam journal that the s13 head doesnt have..if you look at your s13 next to the s14 cam you can seelthe last journal..all you have to do is look at the back end of the cam like you are trying to look through the middle of it like a telescope and you will see the oil cap..take a small allen or screwdriver and tap it in so it blocks off the last journal..thats it

struckinc
Posts: 316
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:23 am
Car: 93 hatch.stock.well mostly anyway-SOLD
97 kouki-stock
12 sentra sr-wifes new car
97 maxima-wifes car-SOLD
02 maxima se- daily
1936 austin 10/4 lichfield

Postby struckinc » Thu Aug 31, 2006 6:13 pm

my bad bro. i was backward..if you are putting the 98 into an earlier one then you are ok..it is the earlier ones that have the extra journal...here is a part of tloofs post from FA.....MAJOR NOTE: if an earlier ’91-’97 cam is used in any ’98 up engine, then the rear oil plug in the cam will have to be punched in deeper past the oil feed hole that feeds the rear most #6 cam bearing in order to avoid spraying oil around in the valve cover area!!! (this is not necessary if a later ’98 up cam is used in the earlier ’91-’97 engines…but then why would anyone want to do that since the later cams have reduced duration specs & thus lower performance!).


User avatar
DjPantsSpecR
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:49 pm
Car: 93 MS13 92 RMS13

Postby DjPantsSpecR » Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:30 pm

Vkosak, i recently heard some tastey information about upgrading injectors for your high compression swap.

This is from Big Vinnie and it was backed up by Ajax, but i believe they are talking about using 10.5:1 CR and vinnie had a calculator from rc engineering and it said to use 282s. you would just send in your injectors to RC and probably get something a little bit bigger, use the calculator, but probably 290s or so.

you want it, or at least an SAFC, because im starting to run lean all over the place, and especially before 4K at WOT. so you want some fuel with your pistons

User avatar
Vkoslak
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 11:20 am
Car: 1992 240SX SE rb26dett, 2004 Subaru Forester
Location: Pflugerville, TX
Contact:

Re: (DjPantsSpecR)

Postby Vkoslak » Fri Sep 01, 2006 2:37 am

Thanks for the info!

I was thinking of trying to score some sr injectors off ebay using an rb20det mafs and a jim wolf tune ecu.

User avatar
InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Postby InsanityInc » Fri Sep 01, 2006 7:32 am

I have little doubt that you'll need bigger injectors once you do this, DJ.

I'm not sure what the stock ones are good to, but my guess is not much more than stock.

User avatar
Vkoslak
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 11:20 am
Car: 1992 240SX SE rb26dett, 2004 Subaru Forester
Location: Pflugerville, TX
Contact:

Re: (DjPantsSpecR)

Postby Vkoslak » Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:43 am

DjPantsSpecR wrote:really, youre getting that 98 cam to work? i thought i heard of it being okay, but there was something stupid like the number on journals on it was wrong or you need to screw in the oil plug a little more, but maybe im thinking of altima cams....

watchout when intstalling that 98 exhaust cam, because they clock those differently since in 98 they switched over to the single row chain. this is just me typing and trying to remember at the same time, but in those years they switched the cams so they are installed with the pins and the dots on the gears at the same angle, as opposed to 12 oclock and 3 oclock like on all previous KADEs. i think its actually 12 oclock adn 12 oclock, but i dont entirely remember, its jsut something to look out for, id hate to see someone with bent valves becasue i know ive bent 12 at once.

so you probably already figured out what you need to do, but i want you to look into that if you havent. ands its good to ehar to got the sohc pistons in, thats something i still couldnt afford to do yet, hence the 30 dollar intake manifold....
I just went and looked at the cams. There is a difference in the back end of them. The 98 has a groove ring around it and where the journal is its slightly bigger around. The 92 last journal looks the same as the rest of the journals.

On the front, the cam gears look identical. And if they weren't I wouldn't have been able to put 2x 240 cams in the 98. However at the time I didn't know about blocking that last journal and I sold that car about 10 months ago. Hopefully the new owner didn't have any problems.

Is that last journal on the 98 going to cause problems? I have an extra 240 and 248 cam I can put in. With the high compression, I don't imagine I will be revving it real high though.

Bigvinnie
Posts: 1079
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:07 am
Car: 2004 Nissan Frontier desert Runner, 2014 Nissan Titan

Re: (Vkoslak)

Postby Bigvinnie » Wed Sep 06, 2006 3:01 pm

InsanityInc wrote:I have little doubt that you'll need bigger injectors once you do this.
It's that opinion why when people bump up compression without using proper injector size to more advanced timing than stock don't make phenomenal numbers with the KA. Advancing the timing on the KA with bumped compression will actually effect scavaging more than likely dropping A/F ratio below 15.1:1 @ 5800RPM, using the stock 270cc injectors with an 10.5:1 or higher compression, timing will more than likely need to be retarded to prevent detonation from such a lean mix. Second problem is the knock sensor. Unless you can shut off the knock flags or run closed loop disabled I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMEND THE SLIGHTLY LARGER INJECTION. I believe to obtain optimum VE A/F should be around 12.3:1?, which is a close to slightly rich, but it would make optimim power and scavaging at the higher RPM that would be needed, without effecting too much knock.At 10.0:1 270cc injectors are maxed out, and don't show very much peek power than stock. With higher CR's cylinder temprature rise actually lowering the HP output. If you plan to keep the KA a low rev engine 270cc's are fine. But if the objective is to make peek power passed(or up to) 6500RPM, a larger injector would be needed IMO.I spoke with a rep at RC and a few builders at other performance shops, if the effect is to make more peek HP it was recomended to do away with the 270cc injectors, especially if you want to make more power with rev and advanced timing.


Modified by Bigvinnie at 3:44 PM 9/7/2006

User avatar
kansaschity
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 2:14 pm
Car: 92 240sx

Re: (DjPantsSpecR)

Postby kansaschity » Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:26 pm

I need to double check something before I put everything back together.I have 93 ka with the stock cams in. I cracked my intake cam and bent a couple valves due to some bad timing. anyways, moving on. I figured I might well try the 248/232 setup while everything is apart. if I put my exhaust cam into the intake cam position it would need to be rotated 4 teeth ccw. then I could take a s14 exhaust cam and put it into the stock exhaust position. but if I'm using a s14 intake cam I would have to turn 4 teeth clockwise, is this correct?

User avatar
InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Postby InsanityInc » Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:40 pm

er... vinnie, I think you added numbers to the wrong side or something.

14.7:1 is stoich, 10:1 is very rich.

Though, I definitely agree with the larger injector sentiment. I do agree that it's probably the cause of people not being able to see gains from the KA on the top end.

User avatar
DjPantsSpecR
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:49 pm
Car: 93 MS13 92 RMS13

Postby DjPantsSpecR » Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:11 pm

yeah, good eye insanity... but good discussion vinnie and thanks for adding what i wanted to hear.

tuning out some top end fuel should be a cakewalk with an SAFC though..... while expensive, the SAFC neo does look to be a more decent tuning tool with 16 adjustment points. however, a wideband, injectors, and this unit would easily cost a grand....

Kansaschity: all your assumptions are correct.

try out the s14 intake on the exhasut side, but you wont like it. but try it too, and give your impressions.

User avatar
InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Re: (DjPantsSpecR)

Postby InsanityInc » Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:56 am

DjPantsSpecR wrote:tuning out some top end fuel should be a cakewalk with an SAFC though..... while expensive, the SAFC neo does look to be a more decent tuning tool with 16 adjustment points. however, a wideband, injectors, and this unit would easily cost a grand....
Well, you might want to look into ECU retunes, because chances are you're going to severely outperform the fuel that 270cc injectors can do. They'll only be good to about 180 crank horsepower or so.

If I could get the hardware to write to the DOHC ECU as well as some sort of guide to the ECU disassembly that devious might have I could probably do it without any problems.

The other option is an adjustable fuel pressure regulator.

User avatar
DjPantsSpecR
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:49 pm
Car: 93 MS13 92 RMS13

Postby DjPantsSpecR » Thu Sep 07, 2006 5:26 am

im aware of this, i was refering to getting injectors rebuilt by either RC (ideal) or doing some SAFC tuning with 370s as these are much easier to get a hold of....

i really should start burning my own chips. devious is giving this to us for free, and not enough people are taking advantage.

i dont know about an adjustable FPR. i always consider this option, but what if i dont wanan run so lean in the low rpms? my narrowband reads nothing until about 4-5k, so i dont wanna go too much leaner. i dont know my **** about fprs really, but is it possible to adjust them for no vac (wot) and vac?

User avatar
InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Re: (DjPantsSpecR)

Postby InsanityInc » Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:00 am

DjPantsSpecR wrote:im aware of this, i was refering to getting injectors rebuilt by either RC (ideal) or doing some SAFC tuning with 370s as these are much easier to get a hold of....

i really should start burning my own chips. devious is giving this to us for free, and not enough people are taking advantage.

i dont know about an adjustable FPR. i always consider this option, but what if i dont wanan run so lean in the low rpms? my narrowband reads nothing until about 4-5k, so i dont wanna go too much leaner. i dont know my **** about fprs really, but is it possible to adjust them for no vac (wot) and vac?
Depends on the FPR. They make ones that let you adjust all kinds of stuff. Though, burning software will probably be easier and get better results anyhow.

User avatar
DjPantsSpecR
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:49 pm
Car: 93 MS13 92 RMS13

Postby DjPantsSpecR » Thu Sep 07, 2006 7:04 am

shouldnt you be in class or something?

lets go to page three.

User avatar
InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Re: (DjPantsSpecR)

Postby InsanityInc » Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:29 am

DjPantsSpecR wrote:shouldnt you be in class or something?

lets go to page three.
Class? I'm at work. I tend to screw around on the internet a lot while thinking.

Force-directed graphs for the win. Yay.

User avatar
DjPantsSpecR
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:49 pm
Car: 93 MS13 92 RMS13

Postby DjPantsSpecR » Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:59 am

so.... say ive been thinking about producing this intake manifold....

it would be stock upper runners, with a plate of 6061 t-6 welded to the runners, with a radiused entry. then you would bolt on an 11 gauge (just shy of 1/8 inch thick) steel plenum. this would be strictly for all-motor. the only included part would be a throttle cable holder. you only get brake booster and fpr vacuum sources. you're on your own for iacv and the like, you dont need it.

i could offer this service/product easily for half the price of the xcessive unit. 250 dollars for an intake manifold? with your stock upper runners as a core of course....

i would only offer this on the grounds that i get it dyno'd head to head with the xcessive manifold and i show all-motor gains. for this fact alone this project is a long ways off, but i wanna know if its even something i should waste my time with if i might only sell 10 or so. i can think of like 6 people who love N/A KAs

User avatar
InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Re: (DjPantsSpecR)

Postby InsanityInc » Thu Sep 07, 2006 12:31 pm

DjPantsSpecR wrote:i would only offer this on the grounds that i get it dyno'd head to head with the xcessive manifold and i show all-motor gains. for this fact alone this project is a long ways off, but i wanna know if its even something i should waste my time with if i might only sell 10 or so. i can think of like 6 people who love N/A KAs
I'm not sure you should use that as a basis for doing it, since the proof of power production is what will attract people to go NA instead of turbo. If you can put down 5-20 less WHP with a very cheap NA setup as opposed to a fairly complex and expensive turbo setup, then you will create a whole lot more business.

Bigvinnie
Posts: 1079
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:07 am
Car: 2004 Nissan Frontier desert Runner, 2014 Nissan Titan

Re: (InsanityInc)

Postby Bigvinnie » Thu Sep 07, 2006 12:38 pm

InsanityInc wrote:er... vinnie, I think you added numbers to the wrong side or something.

14.7:1 is stoich, 10:1 is very rich.

Though, I definitely agree with the larger injector sentiment. I do agree that it's probably the cause of people not being able to see gains from the KA on the top end.
You are right. I fubared on the ratio. No need for me to correct, you corrected it for me.....In reading further on the effects of scavaging and timing I believe that 12.3:1 is the required ratio to make more power in top end passed 40ATDC ignition timing. With stock injectors and raised compression that would be very hard to accomplish. When I did the calculator formula for cc injection on NA engines it stated that for 270cc injection 200 HP at the crank would be maxed for engine VE. If the injectors were increased to 282cc injectors which would be required for the higher compression that injection would be good for upto 230 HP at the crank.I believe that Top End performance set the example of maxed out 270cc injected 210 Crank HP KA24de that they sell, With minor internal work and every bolt on the engine. Looking at A/F ratio charts on some KA's with just bolt ons A/F ratio's were around 13.3:1 ~14.3:1, this was on stock compression. So using the stock injection on a higher compression would change the ratio to a much larger air content being much higher than stoich. Possibly assuming anywhere between 15:1~16:1 which would mean an extremely high octane would need to be used and timing would need to be retarded as if it were a turbo charged engine at something like 9~12ATDC at idle. There is a formula that can be used but I don't remember it off the top of my head.


Modified by Bigvinnie at 4:08 PM 9/7/2006

User avatar
DjPantsSpecR
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:49 pm
Car: 93 MS13 92 RMS13

Re: (InsanityInc)

Postby DjPantsSpecR » Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:05 pm

thats exactly it though. when have you ever heard of a cheap N/A set up having anything on an expensive turbo set up. i know thats not what you meant to say, or at least how im taking it, but unfortunately this is the truth thus far:

A cheap turbo set up rarely makes less power than an expensive N/A set up.

200 wheel horse.... for under 2k? it sure beats buying an SR, and no one will argue about autoX in an N/A KA.

Bigvinnie
Posts: 1079
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:07 am
Car: 2004 Nissan Frontier desert Runner, 2014 Nissan Titan

Re: (DjPantsSpecR)

Postby Bigvinnie » Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:35 pm

DjPantsSpecR wrote:thats exactly it though. when have you ever heard of a cheap N/A set up having anything on an expensive turbo set up. i know thats not what you meant to say, or at least how im taking it, but unfortunately this is the truth thus far:

A cheap turbo set up rarely makes less power than an expensive N/A set up.

200 wheel horse.... for under 2k? it sure beats buying an SR, and no one will argue about autoX in an N/A KA.
It would be great if you included a complete package deal with this manifold such as a biki rom, and injectors. You could technically sell manifold,injectors, and biki for a little under $1500. If you could show that it makes a 30+WHP gain over stock I believe that you could have the perfect setup to sell to us KA guys still using stock compression. The majority of the problem with most KA guys is that they don't think outside the box (they always think the problem is the KA engine, it's not since it used all the same engineering as the old L series engines). The majority of the problem isn't the KA engine itself or the bolt on's, it's the lack of power that is produced from a smog emission tuned ecu (horrible timing and fuel maps, the damn thing floods fuel at WOT). Stock cam placement and cams are fine since the CA engines used the same duration and overlaps and were extremely rev happy with power for little 1.6, and 1.8litre engine.

User avatar
InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Re: (DjPantsSpecR)

Postby InsanityInc » Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:07 pm

DjPantsSpecR wrote:thats exactly it though. when have you ever heard of a cheap N/A set up having anything on an expensive turbo set up. i know thats not what you meant to say, or at least how im taking it, but unfortunately this is the truth thus far:

A cheap turbo set up rarely makes less power than an expensive N/A set up.

200 wheel horse.... for under 2k? it sure beats buying an SR, and no one will argue about autoX in an N/A KA.
I never said beat, I said came close to. Even if you're 10-20whp down from a KA turbo (in other words, around 200whp), then it looks very attractive in comparison to the much more expensive, time-consuming and problem-prone turbo setup.

User avatar
DjPantsSpecR
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:49 pm
Car: 93 MS13 92 RMS13

Postby DjPantsSpecR » Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:29 pm

thanks guys, im actually exploring some options for fueling right now. its some diy stuff like biki rom.

this thread is turning into something ridiculous, and i thank you for your continuing participation

User avatar
Sleepy_Steve
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:01 pm
Car: I dream of a 240sx

Postby Sleepy_Steve » Fri Sep 08, 2006 10:20 pm

Personaly... if whatever this thread ends up being were stickied... and incorperated this thread by tloof on KA24DE Cams Specifications. zerothread?id=169323

I think it would make a very valuble addition to the NA KA forums.

User avatar
DjPantsSpecR
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:49 pm
Car: 93 MS13 92 RMS13

Postby DjPantsSpecR » Sat Sep 09, 2006 7:34 am

you are correct, but it needs a re-write and a new, more searchable title.

its definately something im willing to do, and thats for finding tloofs thread as well, its one of my favorites

User avatar
Sleepy_Steve
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:01 pm
Car: I dream of a 240sx

Postby Sleepy_Steve » Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:18 pm

yeah, the search feature on this forum sucks because if i search for "KA24DE Cam Specifications" I got zero results all day long... The second i search for KA24DE CamS Specifications" I found the thread i wanted.

One charicter and a linear search method like that killing someones results are unexcusable on a site of this size and volume i feel.

In more on topic discussion, i have an extra 248 exaust cam that i wont be using, and may be looking to pass it on sometime soon... and over my thanksgiving break, i will likley be putting in a 240 intake cam out of a '96 altima onto my 240. But i'll have to do the work myself as it dosent make sense to have a shop change em out for the gains ill be getting.


Return to “KA24E / KA24DE Forum”