NA Build?

[Ajax]

Nope. At one time I had a dyno that showed 172 peak hp, but that was before stroking and is a dubious dyno. Less than a year after that dyno, AMS pulled 132 peak with no modifications (engine was still burning excessive oil- cracked rings). We only pulled 163 peak after the stroke, but it honestly felt more powerful than when it was "172".This winter is going to be maintenance of suspension, getting a smooth idle, hopefully redoing the interior, and rebuilding 2 rims. ITBs would be freaking cool, but that's at least 2g without tuning. I need to start saving some money for either a house or relocation to another city. This is an expensive hobby...

[i240sx]

160-170hp on a healthy ka with serious weight reduction will make it feel like a 200hp ka...lol

[Leachguy]

Actually Big Vinnie all engines will always have the horsepower and torque curves cross at the 5,252 RPM mark because horsepower isn't an actual measurement. Horsepower is a calculated measurement found by multiplying torque by RPM then dividing by 5,252. So all that dynos do is measure the torque produced at the wheels then use this formula to find out your horsepower measurement. This is referring back to the first page of this thread btw, seems kinda late haha.

[Ajax]

I'm sure Vin knows that- (referencing different user?- didn't bother to look back too hard to figure out)

[Bigvinnie]

Actually Big Vinnie all engines will always have the horsepower and torque curves cross at the 5,252 RPM mark because horsepower isn't an actual measurement. Horsepower is a calculated measurement found by multiplying torque by RPM then dividing by 5,252. So all that dynos do is measure the torque produced at the wheels then use this formula to find out your horsepower measurement. This is referring back to the first page of this thread btw, seems kinda late haha.

Naturally no engine crosses HP to torque exactly at 5252 RPM. All crank strokes are different, all rod lengths are different. 5252 RPM is the ""AVERAGE" range that all engines fall in. Dynomometers need this number to calculate HP output. In realworld situations a diesel engine compared to a unleaded engine will not realistically in a realworld situation cross at exactly 5252RPM. Again it's just a measurement, and all dyno's do is measure power using a statistical formula . Dynomometers don't calculate the revolutions per minute and actual power through crank shaft rotation, it's just calculating the tire rotation and power to the wheels through out power band.If dyno's just used torque to calculate HP then diesels would typically have extradoninarly high HP numbers "which realistically they don't".

[chrismo240sx]

yo BigVin....why do you have to live in Ca man?

I want YOU to tune my car right now...you obviously know your $***everytime i read something you posted its golden...i know i sound like an *** kisser but im serious

Any chance you'll be visiting the opposite coast anytime soon?

I have a ka with bolt-ons and JWT ecu and want to tune with SAFC.However i feel like my motor is making nowhere near the 160whp mark

[wanksta21]

No vin, leach is almost right. All graphs cross at 5252 because hp is a mathematical function of torque and rpm. Torque is a measure of force and hp is a measure of work(force x time). But dynos measure hp then use an rpm pick-up to calculate torque. At least that is how my dynojet works.

[wanksta21]

The torque dive was obviously something that couldn't be tuned with the settings that I used on the SAFC.

The setting I used changed the K value, but ultimately an safc doesn't change or adjust ignition, only fuel through (theoretical pulsewidth).No matter what adjustments were made to fuel, it was too rich for the timing that was selected by the K value. It's not really that much of a bumber, the HP is so much more of a linear feeling the torque band doesn't matter that much.

The torque dive appears to be from running ridiculously rich AFR for an NA engine. If his AFR was 13.5 to 14.0 like it should be then maybe he wouldnt think he needed bigger injectors.

[wanksta21]

You want long runners for vacuum, and velocity. In a state of high rev longer is better, as velocity will only increase down the runner length the longer it is.

Now you can look at instances with Honda were there is a designesd skunk 2 manifold specifically for Honda B,D and H series engines. The runners are increased in length for higher rev and velocity... But it only makes the engine more top end and high rev.....

Modified by Bigvinnie at 6:15 AM 9/16/2008

Wrong. I dont mean to be a d!ck but I hate when people post lots of false info. Long runners help with low end torque, short runners and a larger plenum help move the curve towards the top. That is why Greddy manifolds for SR's are made that way, do you really think Greddy was trying to improve the low end torque. Stock IM's for Hondas have bigger plenums and shorter runners than KA's and the Skunk2 versions even more so. Turbo Dave and I fabricated an intake for my KA and the hp climbs all the way to the rev limit. The stock DE intake manifold is definitely the worst design possible for high rpm hp, but makes for an easy to drive commuter car which was unfortunately the goal of Nissan's bean counters.

[Ajax]

Thread resurrection. Wanksta, welcome to NICO. Got any pics of said fabricated manifold?

[Bigvinnie]

Wrong. I dont mean to be a d!ck but I hate when people post lots of false info. Long runners help with low end torque, short runners and a larger plenum help move the curve towards the top. That is why Greddy manifolds for SR's are made that way, do you really think Greddy was trying to improve the low end torque. The stock DE intake manifold is definitely the worst design possible for high rpm hp, but makes for an easy to drive commuter car which was unfortunately the goal of Nissan's bean counters.

I'll give you credit in some what being correct, as long length will be detrimental to high end, and is designed for low end. I really don't care to edit a post that is almost 7 months old.Although diameter size of runner length does effect peak HP.Also plenum design should only be .8 to 1.5 times larger than displacement of the engine.

[seang]

Remember the 1999 concept 240z? It had a 200 HP, 180 lb/ft. n/a ka24de. Interesting considering all the hype about the 200 hp goal. And that 180 lb/ft. was cool too. You should google it. It had lightweight pistons and rods, race cams, etc...
Modified by seang at 11:34 PM 4/2/2009

[a_ahmed]

cant find anything on that one

[Ajax]

Could have gone without seeing that picture- that concept looks like a porsche with fetal alcohol syndrome.Hey Vin (or anyone for that matter)! Can you clue me in as to the difference between the N60 and N62 MAFs? I've got one of each sitting in a box waiting for their chance to be installed and tuned along with 370cc injectors. They look pretty much identical physically- is one a better fit for my NA application? Is the N62 going to be so overkill that it won't work well? Any thoughts would be awesome- tuning with AFC Neo BTW.Memorial weekend is scheduled Dyno day.

[ztunelover]

Since I have a bit of money to waste, can anyone tell me if the z32 or the nismo MAF are good for the job? Im guessing they are definitely overkills, but i love the nismo unit, the z32 isnt bad either.

[a_ahmed]

My stock KA24DE maf is on it's way out, is this the "n60"... if so... let me know.

What does the n62 come on? What's the difference? I will get nistune so... its something I'd look into if there's more concrete info.

[Ajax]

N62 is the Z32 MAF. I've decided to go with N60, so I will be selling my N62. Got it from FRSport, so I'll be taking a loss, but at least I can get some money back.

[sav180]

if u look on zilvia a guy uhh ..project-d180..he made 181 with jus a lil block work 11.0.1 pistons,bc 264 cams n xcessive intake (I/H/E/basic ECU tune)and has a dyno sheet..not bad i say..he should be able to break 200-220 with better tunnin and maybe bigger injectors