VG30DETT into the truck
VG30DETT into the truck
Buddy of mine has a Pickup with the V6. It's 4wd with a 5 speed. Anyone know of anyone doing this swap?
-
boileralum00
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 10:23 am
- Car: 94 Miata, 95 FZR600R
-
s13sr20chris
- Posts: 4148
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:32 am
- Car: '89 Nissan S13 w/redtop running 13psi and not leaking fuel anymore
- Contact:
-
Und3rprshUr
- Posts: 570
- Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 5:53 am
- Car: My 300Z
-
s13sr20chris
- Posts: 4148
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:32 am
- Car: '89 Nissan S13 w/redtop running 13psi and not leaking fuel anymore
- Contact:
-
Und3rprshUr
- Posts: 570
- Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 5:53 am
- Car: My 300Z
-
s13sr20chris
- Posts: 4148
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:32 am
- Car: '89 Nissan S13 w/redtop running 13psi and not leaking fuel anymore
- Contact:
ok, besides the obvious exaggerations there are some fundamental nontruthes in the above statement. do you really believe that dohc does not mean its better? i will agree that a dohc engine is not necessarily better than another sohc engine, but all things being equal(as many are in this case) dohc is definitely better. simple bucket type valve actuation is possible, no long rocker arms, centered(optimal) spark plug position, more versatility in cam gears, wider valve angle possible without more reciprocating mass, etc. next we shall address the 12 old valves. it has been proven that given the same bore you can get more valve area with four valves than two and allows a true crossflow cylinder head. that will always net higher top end torque. you will also have smaller runners for the smaller valves giving a natural tuning that produces enhanced bottom end torque. i have documentation for all of this by the way. add to all this that the later motor has vtc for a wider usable powerband, coil on plug ign.(way better than dist. system), sequential fuel injection(as opposed to batch fire), galley feed injectors, way better transmissions(no borg warner crap to deal with), and i cant remember what all else. i am sure a real vg guy could go on beyond this. bottom line for me is if you wanna go et then do it for ease of install, cheapness, or old times sake. dont try to say that it will make comprable power. shoot, even if you match peak hp, you wont have the drivability/usable power band of dett.
disclaimer:we are all nissan people here; i am not trying to fight or "flame". that would be stupid. we can always agree to disagree.
disclaimer:we are all nissan people here; i am not trying to fight or "flame". that would be stupid. we can always agree to disagree.
-
Und3rprshUr
- Posts: 570
- Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 5:53 am
- Car: My 300Z
o.k. 1st of all.. Dohc doesnt mean it is better . it "is" in some cases but not in all.
2nd:The rocker arms on a e-t sohc are not long at all. Not long enough to amke a difference when considering the extra cam being turned.
3rd. you can achieve an optimal spark conditionon a sohc vg with tuning of various gaps and plugs..
4th-" it has been proven that given the same bore you can get more valve area with four valves than two and allows a true crossflow cylinder head." a true cross-flow cylinder head is better your saying ? and two valves flow more than one big one..? sounds like twin turbo vs single.. lol also if you wanted to compare cost to power ratio the et would win all day long.. if heads didnt flow enough becuase they are alil on "could be larger side" you could always port them and still save tons of money compared to the stock dett heads.
5th-more top end torque ?
We are talking tubro's here so there is to many options that can effect this. have you ever compared dyno's from a vgdett and a vget ? I have. and there is almost no difference in top end torque as in one having more than other.
6th- coil-plug IS better than dist. but doesnt mean coil-pplug makes more power than dist.
7th-We are talking nissan here" the king of designing intake runners for maximum torque.. no difference here as its still same vg series motors.. maybe 1-2 hp on the dett ? still worth the money ?
8th- Batch fire works great as sequantial does.. one is more accurate but both can produce same power output and both can achieve a hihg maximum power. 9th-better transmissions? Don't forget where the z32 came from- the z31 the 1987-88 z31's have the an identical transmission as a tt just in a diffrent tail casing. inside guts are the same. as you speak of the 84-86 models and the cost of a 87-88 z31 transmission to a 90-96 tanny is a huge diff.
We are talking turbo so we will have a comparable power band to a dett..
I am a "real" VG guy
2nd:The rocker arms on a e-t sohc are not long at all. Not long enough to amke a difference when considering the extra cam being turned.
3rd. you can achieve an optimal spark conditionon a sohc vg with tuning of various gaps and plugs..
4th-" it has been proven that given the same bore you can get more valve area with four valves than two and allows a true crossflow cylinder head." a true cross-flow cylinder head is better your saying ? and two valves flow more than one big one..? sounds like twin turbo vs single.. lol also if you wanted to compare cost to power ratio the et would win all day long.. if heads didnt flow enough becuase they are alil on "could be larger side" you could always port them and still save tons of money compared to the stock dett heads.
5th-more top end torque ?
We are talking tubro's here so there is to many options that can effect this. have you ever compared dyno's from a vgdett and a vget ? I have. and there is almost no difference in top end torque as in one having more than other.
6th- coil-plug IS better than dist. but doesnt mean coil-pplug makes more power than dist.
7th-We are talking nissan here" the king of designing intake runners for maximum torque.. no difference here as its still same vg series motors.. maybe 1-2 hp on the dett ? still worth the money ?
8th- Batch fire works great as sequantial does.. one is more accurate but both can produce same power output and both can achieve a hihg maximum power. 9th-better transmissions? Don't forget where the z32 came from- the z31 the 1987-88 z31's have the an identical transmission as a tt just in a diffrent tail casing. inside guts are the same. as you speak of the 84-86 models and the cost of a 87-88 z31 transmission to a 90-96 tanny is a huge diff.
We are talking turbo so we will have a comparable power band to a dett..
I am a "real" VG guy
4 valve head flows better than 2 that's a fact... it's nothing like single vs twin turbo... Assuming that both heads are optomized you can simply get more area with 4 circles in one than you can with 2 in the same. bust out an old cd and draw the biggest 2 circles you can w/o them overlapping. Now Draw 4(in a square patern). Now measure the diameter of your circles.
A = 3.14*d^2
You will find that the 4 smaller circles have loads more area combined that the 2 big ones.
Thats is a fact
A = 3.14*d^2
You will find that the 4 smaller circles have loads more area combined that the 2 big ones.
Thats is a fact
-
s13sr20chris
- Posts: 4148
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:32 am
- Car: '89 Nissan S13 w/redtop running 13psi and not leaking fuel anymore
- Contact:
i dont mean to offend. you are clearly a person with considerable experience with the vg's. i am saying that in a technical sense the features of the later motor are better in my opinion. this is of course assuming that price is not so important. im sure price to hp could be plotted on a graph showing the per dollar efficiency of an et as compared to a dett, but by that rationale why not just got with a small block chevy? heresy. i have a lot of respect for the ol e. its still in current nissan lineups and i work on them everyday. just for the fun of it, let me respond to your rebuttal.
1)your right i believe i said that dohc is not necassarily better, but all things being equal(as in this case they almost all are) it is definitely better. hence the many advantages noted above.
2)you may be right when it comes to parasitic drag. i dont know for sure. i will say however that the natural inertia of those rocker arms(iirc they are like 2") will require stiffer valve springs and a lower redline for valve float control. i believe this will add up to a power loss. look at the domestics with their pushrod dinos. they lose big power just to the majorly stiff valve springs that they must use to control all that mass being actuated by the cams.
3)sure you can get optimal spark for a given combustion chamber using different plugs and gaps, but you will never be entirely optimal without having true crossflow. that is intake-plug-exhaust. on an et you have them arranged in a triangle sorta pattern(locating each object by its center would be a triangle). this simply is not optimal. how many ft*lbs is this good for? i dont know. i am simply dealing with the hypothetical question of what is better, capital notwithstanding.
4)i will have to divide this one up furthera)yes i am saying that a true crossflow head is better. i know the old L motors were great and all. please dont bring up nascar or anything. the general engine tech public has just accepted that this is true.b)yes, usually two valves will flow more than one. with the combustion chamber as a constant two valves will allow larger total area if they are maxxed out to the extent of a large single valve. this of course does not even consider valve shrouding, but only curtain area achievable. i have formulae as examples somewhere. i am kind of hoping i dont have to go looking for them though.c)i actually prefer a properly set up single turbo system to a twin. the problem here is that the z31 does not have a properly set up single. it has what i will refer to as "whack manifold syndrome". that is the turbo is way over on the drivers side with that long connecting pipe in between. that is not at all optimal.d)yes, i will not argue the cost to power of the et.e)yes, you certainly could achieve flow comparable to a modern, stock, dett head with a ported, polished, and larger valve equipped et head i imagine. this does not have any relevance to the arguement(err discussion) as i percieve it. as stated, i see this as a most power possible discussion and the dett head has way more headroom(no pun intended) than any et head. the kind of flow numbers available to a fully massaged dett head should(i have no first hand experience here) be way beyond that of the et.
5)yep, torque is the only number i am concerned with here as hp is just a function of torque and rpm. this is kind of an advantage to your side of the arguement considering the higher revving potential of the dett.
we are in fact talking turbos here, but not really. there are many variables that we could consider, primarily turbo choice and boost. personally i would not even start that discussion. i am only refering to the engine itself per se, not externals and accesories like turbos, alternators, or whatever. i am not grouping turbos and alternators together really. i am just saying that this discussion could really get out of hand if we start talkin turbo size.
no, never compared dynos first hand. you win in this respect.
6)coil on plug is better; we agree. the ign. sys on the dett really has no need of upgrade untill everything else is maxxed out. the old et could at least use a better coil. you caught me, this has nothing to do with ultimate power and really would be more like an external thing(see turbos and alternators above), but in the long run it would keep cost down to not upgrade your ign. system. i only mention that last part because you bring up the high cost of the dett. would this offset the other huge costs of the dett? nope. just thought id say something about it.
7)no differance? whoa, gotta take issue with that statement. inside the head alone you are looking at runner tuned for much lower rpm(the high end being well taken care of by doubling the number of runners). then if you wanted to take it into consideration the intake manifold is far superior in every way. it has higher flow capacity, better low end tuning, dual throttle bodies for a wider torque curve, etc. in this respect the dett is "da bomb" to be colloquial. just look at that massive plenum. beautiful, isnt it? wait, aesthetics are not part of this:)1 or 2 hp? i dont know how much this is all worth, but a peak hp number is absolutely useless. worth it? up to the individual. again my understanding of the arguement makes this a moot(sp?) point.
8)numbers aside, i believe more accurate to be better in this case.
9)oops, your encyclopedic knowledge of z car transmissions embarasses me. you win here too. i was in fact only refering to the old borg warner crapboxes.
a turbo cant cover up everything. i guess it would be nice to see similarly prepped engines running side by side for comparisons sake, but that will never happen. in the end nissan made their choice didnt they? their choice was the vq via the ve. thats the nissan v6 family tree. the vg is no longer a performance or even a standard engine for nissan. it is a lowly truck motor. one that is soon to be phased out. that and the dohc version is long gone.
i believe you are a "real" vg guy. something i am not. i am actually more of an sr guy though i would like to be a vh/vk guy. come to think of it, im a nissan guy.
1)your right i believe i said that dohc is not necassarily better, but all things being equal(as in this case they almost all are) it is definitely better. hence the many advantages noted above.
2)you may be right when it comes to parasitic drag. i dont know for sure. i will say however that the natural inertia of those rocker arms(iirc they are like 2") will require stiffer valve springs and a lower redline for valve float control. i believe this will add up to a power loss. look at the domestics with their pushrod dinos. they lose big power just to the majorly stiff valve springs that they must use to control all that mass being actuated by the cams.
3)sure you can get optimal spark for a given combustion chamber using different plugs and gaps, but you will never be entirely optimal without having true crossflow. that is intake-plug-exhaust. on an et you have them arranged in a triangle sorta pattern(locating each object by its center would be a triangle). this simply is not optimal. how many ft*lbs is this good for? i dont know. i am simply dealing with the hypothetical question of what is better, capital notwithstanding.
4)i will have to divide this one up furthera)yes i am saying that a true crossflow head is better. i know the old L motors were great and all. please dont bring up nascar or anything. the general engine tech public has just accepted that this is true.b)yes, usually two valves will flow more than one. with the combustion chamber as a constant two valves will allow larger total area if they are maxxed out to the extent of a large single valve. this of course does not even consider valve shrouding, but only curtain area achievable. i have formulae as examples somewhere. i am kind of hoping i dont have to go looking for them though.c)i actually prefer a properly set up single turbo system to a twin. the problem here is that the z31 does not have a properly set up single. it has what i will refer to as "whack manifold syndrome". that is the turbo is way over on the drivers side with that long connecting pipe in between. that is not at all optimal.d)yes, i will not argue the cost to power of the et.e)yes, you certainly could achieve flow comparable to a modern, stock, dett head with a ported, polished, and larger valve equipped et head i imagine. this does not have any relevance to the arguement(err discussion) as i percieve it. as stated, i see this as a most power possible discussion and the dett head has way more headroom(no pun intended) than any et head. the kind of flow numbers available to a fully massaged dett head should(i have no first hand experience here) be way beyond that of the et.
5)yep, torque is the only number i am concerned with here as hp is just a function of torque and rpm. this is kind of an advantage to your side of the arguement considering the higher revving potential of the dett.
we are in fact talking turbos here, but not really. there are many variables that we could consider, primarily turbo choice and boost. personally i would not even start that discussion. i am only refering to the engine itself per se, not externals and accesories like turbos, alternators, or whatever. i am not grouping turbos and alternators together really. i am just saying that this discussion could really get out of hand if we start talkin turbo size.
no, never compared dynos first hand. you win in this respect.
6)coil on plug is better; we agree. the ign. sys on the dett really has no need of upgrade untill everything else is maxxed out. the old et could at least use a better coil. you caught me, this has nothing to do with ultimate power and really would be more like an external thing(see turbos and alternators above), but in the long run it would keep cost down to not upgrade your ign. system. i only mention that last part because you bring up the high cost of the dett. would this offset the other huge costs of the dett? nope. just thought id say something about it.
7)no differance? whoa, gotta take issue with that statement. inside the head alone you are looking at runner tuned for much lower rpm(the high end being well taken care of by doubling the number of runners). then if you wanted to take it into consideration the intake manifold is far superior in every way. it has higher flow capacity, better low end tuning, dual throttle bodies for a wider torque curve, etc. in this respect the dett is "da bomb" to be colloquial. just look at that massive plenum. beautiful, isnt it? wait, aesthetics are not part of this:)1 or 2 hp? i dont know how much this is all worth, but a peak hp number is absolutely useless. worth it? up to the individual. again my understanding of the arguement makes this a moot(sp?) point.
8)numbers aside, i believe more accurate to be better in this case.
9)oops, your encyclopedic knowledge of z car transmissions embarasses me. you win here too. i was in fact only refering to the old borg warner crapboxes.
a turbo cant cover up everything. i guess it would be nice to see similarly prepped engines running side by side for comparisons sake, but that will never happen. in the end nissan made their choice didnt they? their choice was the vq via the ve. thats the nissan v6 family tree. the vg is no longer a performance or even a standard engine for nissan. it is a lowly truck motor. one that is soon to be phased out. that and the dohc version is long gone.
i believe you are a "real" vg guy. something i am not. i am actually more of an sr guy though i would like to be a vh/vk guy. come to think of it, im a nissan guy.
-
Und3rprshUr
- Posts: 570
- Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 5:53 am
- Car: My 300Z
I did just that and you have the same area space in 2 large circles as in 4 smaller ones, taking up same total space.. you actually get less with the 4 smaller ones. you try it. Bust out paint and go.
just because you can fit 4 small ones doesnt mean it will out flow 2 large ones. its all in the total surface area
if you have the same dome shaped head. and one with 4 small valves and other with 2 large ones. how does the smaller surface area valves flow more than the 2 ?
maybe your right when your talking 2 nickle sized valves _vs_ 4 nickle sized valves. but we are talking 2 "large" valves_vs_ 4 small. same surface area.
just because you can fit 4 small ones doesnt mean it will out flow 2 large ones. its all in the total surface area
if you have the same dome shaped head. and one with 4 small valves and other with 2 large ones. how does the smaller surface area valves flow more than the 2 ?
maybe your right when your talking 2 nickle sized valves _vs_ 4 nickle sized valves. but we are talking 2 "large" valves_vs_ 4 small. same surface area.
-
Und3rprshUr
- Posts: 570
- Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 5:53 am
- Car: My 300Z
1-will require stiffer valve springs and a lower redline for valve float control. i believe this will add up to a power loss i think your saying more rev's equals more power ?? negative.
ok im not going through this 123445576 crap. dont have the time.
I stated the et would be cheaper easier and just as powerful thats it wether dohc is better or not or anything else what i said was correct.
The tt made 300bhp with twin turbo's and 8:5:1 compression@ 8.5lbs
the et made 225bhp with one turbo and 7:5:! compression @ 6.5lbs
See the diffrence? then we talk about the 7:5:1 producing more torque and less hp than the 85 providing the opposite. and what moves you ? torque.
with the price of a dett you could buy a et and install the dett pistons on the et rods and have 8:5:1 compression viola! and still a huge diff in cost.
coil on plug is better-but in the long run it would keep cost down to not upgrade your ign. system. i only mention that last part because you bring up the high cost of the dett. would this offset the other huge costs of the dett? nope. just thought id say something about it.
well until you have to replace the coil packs due to over heating and melting. Also. note the stock coil used on Z31's are plenty spark for 15lbs of boost in stock trim. pretty good if you ask me. as i'm almost positive you need a spark amplifier for the tt to run high boost. only diff is i have to replce a cap and rotor and once in a blue moon some wires. but i also have more room for eaier tunring capabilities..
i'm done with this. et cheap eaieir and can be just as powerful with less money.
i dont care what the other guy has de dett single whatever v8 i dont care as long as im winning. and am in a streetabel car.
ok im not going through this 123445576 crap. dont have the time.
I stated the et would be cheaper easier and just as powerful thats it wether dohc is better or not or anything else what i said was correct.
The tt made 300bhp with twin turbo's and 8:5:1 compression@ 8.5lbs
the et made 225bhp with one turbo and 7:5:! compression @ 6.5lbs
See the diffrence? then we talk about the 7:5:1 producing more torque and less hp than the 85 providing the opposite. and what moves you ? torque.
with the price of a dett you could buy a et and install the dett pistons on the et rods and have 8:5:1 compression viola! and still a huge diff in cost.
coil on plug is better-but in the long run it would keep cost down to not upgrade your ign. system. i only mention that last part because you bring up the high cost of the dett. would this offset the other huge costs of the dett? nope. just thought id say something about it.
well until you have to replace the coil packs due to over heating and melting. Also. note the stock coil used on Z31's are plenty spark for 15lbs of boost in stock trim. pretty good if you ask me. as i'm almost positive you need a spark amplifier for the tt to run high boost. only diff is i have to replce a cap and rotor and once in a blue moon some wires. but i also have more room for eaier tunring capabilities..
i'm done with this. et cheap eaieir and can be just as powerful with less money.
i dont care what the other guy has de dett single whatever v8 i dont care as long as im winning. and am in a streetabel car.
OK the valve thing is just plain wrong. Here is the proof for you.
Notice that you can in fact fit 2 larger valves in there. the 4 ahve to be smaller... however... (the measurements are in pixels)
yellow = 89green radius = 44.544.5^2*3.14 = 6217.985 6217.985 * 4 = 24871.94 sq pix / circle
pink = 111red radius = 55.555.5^2*3.14 = 9671.985 9671.985 * 2 = 1923.97 sq pix / circle
thats 7.7% more surface area with 4 valves than 2.thats 7.7% more power all else being equal.
So if you have a motor with 250 bhp with 2 valves. Swapping to a 4 valve head that is similarly well designed will net a 19.25 HP increase or 269.25 HP.
(by the way those are the largest 2 circles you can draw in that circle. Also just making one bigger shrinks the other so it still holds even if the valves are different sizes)
Notice that you can in fact fit 2 larger valves in there. the 4 ahve to be smaller... however... (the measurements are in pixels)
yellow = 89green radius = 44.544.5^2*3.14 = 6217.985 6217.985 * 4 = 24871.94 sq pix / circle
pink = 111red radius = 55.555.5^2*3.14 = 9671.985 9671.985 * 2 = 1923.97 sq pix / circle
thats 7.7% more surface area with 4 valves than 2.thats 7.7% more power all else being equal.
So if you have a motor with 250 bhp with 2 valves. Swapping to a 4 valve head that is similarly well designed will net a 19.25 HP increase or 269.25 HP.
(by the way those are the largest 2 circles you can draw in that circle. Also just making one bigger shrinks the other so it still holds even if the valves are different sizes)
-
pcbootleger
- Posts: 152
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:42 am
- Car: Cars, music, bootlegging
- Contact:
another CADD User. Sweet! I've done so many math things with that. Its so easy to prove things with CADD. Speaking of VG30ET... I have one that comes with a car that I decided I will be selling. I was going to do a swap but I just dont have time with my busy life. Plus I decided that I actually like to keep cars stock. Its more fun telling people you just go beat by a stock car. The engine runs GREAT. Had a mechanic check it out. Selling whole car for $400. Everything else needs work.
-
pcbootleger
- Posts: 152
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:42 am
- Car: Cars, music, bootlegging
- Contact:
another CADD User. Sweet! I've done so many math things with that. Its so easy to prove things with CADD. Speaking of VG30ET... I have one that comes with a car that I decided I will be selling. I was going to do a swap but I just dont have time with my busy life. Plus I decided that I actually like to keep cars stock. Its more fun telling people you just go beat by a stock car. The engine runs GREAT. Had a mechanic check it out. Selling whole car for $400. Everything else needs work. body is missing 1/4 panel but still in pretty good shape.
-
s13sr20chris
- Posts: 4148
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:32 am
- Car: '89 Nissan S13 w/redtop running 13psi and not leaking fuel anymore
- Contact:
-
Und3rprshUr
- Posts: 570
- Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 5:53 am
- Car: My 300Z
go buy your dett in put in your truck.. good luck.. oh and with the money you spend to do it you could ahve installed a 225dett..
so have fun spending your money. spend your money so you can say i have 4 valve heads instead of 2..
and i'll have fun going fast in my et.and i'll say i have 2valves and still keep putting down 540rwhp and 620 ftlbs of torque.
so have fun spending your money. spend your money so you can say i have 4 valve heads instead of 2..
and i'll have fun going fast in my et.and i'll say i have 2valves and still keep putting down 540rwhp and 620 ftlbs of torque.
-
s13sr20chris
- Posts: 4148
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:32 am
- Car: '89 Nissan S13 w/redtop running 13psi and not leaking fuel anymore
- Contact:
well that is fun i agree. nostalgia rules. thats why L28's are kicking butt in older z cars. for that matter more than a few 510's are rollin quite strong with L series four cylinders. then there are the ca/silvia guys who prefer the ca to the sr. thats all good. not better or worse just different. worse would be a pushrod engine(non nissan that is).
-
king_johnthegreat
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 4:16 pm
- Car: Anything rolling fast
-
McAdam
- Posts: 423
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2003 10:33 pm
- Car: I like cars and my motorcycle. boats are fun too
- Contact:
yeah I'm gonna have to jump in here and put down my 2 cents, not that its worth much (vile pun).
If its going in a truck, I would say put in the ET because it produces more low end torqeu than the DETT. and that truck is a biton the heavy side, so you'll need all the low end you have to get 'er off the line. that, and its butt loads cheaper.
I wonder how the drive line will hold up?
A freind of mine wanted to do this to his pathfinder. talked to a nissan service master tech and he said that the V6 4x4 transmission was internally identical to the VG30DETT 5 speed. well, except for the transfer case. I think that would be a weak point. If you had LSD in both ends (I beleive they did), that would be a skyline~esque nasty hook up! especially with that solid rear and some nice 4 link going on.
Now, for a truely wicked swap, take a 85 V6 4x4 frame ( I know they made them, rare option) and put a 73 to 79 body on it ( it is a bolt on) then lower it and trick it out. that would be one wicked ride.
as far as the older L series being picked just for nostalgia, thats BS. they pick them because the make awesome power and because the bottom ends are bulletproof. infact....... there is some team out there with a Z32 body with a L28ET in it that races in some SCCA class. the reason for this bizaar swap is that with the L28ET being non crossflow SOHC, they are allowed to run a much lower weight than they would with the VG30DETT, but they can still pull massive amounts of power out of the L28ET. there is also a B14 200sx with a L16 turbo converted to RWD on the SCCA track. its just gets stranger every day, don't it folks?
McAdam
If its going in a truck, I would say put in the ET because it produces more low end torqeu than the DETT. and that truck is a biton the heavy side, so you'll need all the low end you have to get 'er off the line. that, and its butt loads cheaper.
I wonder how the drive line will hold up?
A freind of mine wanted to do this to his pathfinder. talked to a nissan service master tech and he said that the V6 4x4 transmission was internally identical to the VG30DETT 5 speed. well, except for the transfer case. I think that would be a weak point. If you had LSD in both ends (I beleive they did), that would be a skyline~esque nasty hook up! especially with that solid rear and some nice 4 link going on.
Now, for a truely wicked swap, take a 85 V6 4x4 frame ( I know they made them, rare option) and put a 73 to 79 body on it ( it is a bolt on) then lower it and trick it out. that would be one wicked ride.
as far as the older L series being picked just for nostalgia, thats BS. they pick them because the make awesome power and because the bottom ends are bulletproof. infact....... there is some team out there with a Z32 body with a L28ET in it that races in some SCCA class. the reason for this bizaar swap is that with the L28ET being non crossflow SOHC, they are allowed to run a much lower weight than they would with the VG30DETT, but they can still pull massive amounts of power out of the L28ET. there is also a B14 200sx with a L16 turbo converted to RWD on the SCCA track. its just gets stranger every day, don't it folks?
McAdam
-
s13sr20chris
- Posts: 4148
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:32 am
- Car: '89 Nissan S13 w/redtop running 13psi and not leaking fuel anymore
- Contact:
i really dont think anyone would choose an l motor as opposed to a more modern engine with all things equal. an advantage in scca rules? sure, that makes sense. just want to be different(common thing in japan)? that also makes sense. but if you want the best no holds barred, then i think the l series, z series, ca series, and even the vg series is completely outclassed by the rb,sr, and vq series. the vh45 is supposed to be hot stuff too.
-
McAdam
- Posts: 423
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2003 10:33 pm
- Car: I like cars and my motorcycle. boats are fun too
- Contact:
I would say go for the VG, RobDET. in whichever form, it can be made a tough competitor. the SOHC would be the easier bolt in, as the DOHC sits on different mounts, I beleive. plus as mattback pointed out to me in an earlier thread, the SOHC VG has 5 cyulinder head bolts per cylinder as opposed to the DOHC VG being 4 bolts. and the old SOHC'er can handle tons of power. especially with a turbo or 2 hanging off the sides.
as far as older motors being not as good as newer motors, all thing being equal. thats the thing. you could build a stout L series motor, bottom end and all for the price of a stock SR20 motor and trans alone. you tell me which one will hold more power. a cast iron deep skirted block with years of refinement behind it or a aluminum block four cylinder.
granted the L series cannot hold the 700hp plus that a RB26DETT can, but hell, they will pull 500rwhp with not too much trouble. and thats plenty in a 240Z taht only weighs 2400lbs.
btw, the CA is a superior design to the SR. the only reason nissan started building the SR was that it was cheaper to produce than the CA.
McAdam
as far as older motors being not as good as newer motors, all thing being equal. thats the thing. you could build a stout L series motor, bottom end and all for the price of a stock SR20 motor and trans alone. you tell me which one will hold more power. a cast iron deep skirted block with years of refinement behind it or a aluminum block four cylinder.
granted the L series cannot hold the 700hp plus that a RB26DETT can, but hell, they will pull 500rwhp with not too much trouble. and thats plenty in a 240Z taht only weighs 2400lbs.
btw, the CA is a superior design to the SR. the only reason nissan started building the SR was that it was cheaper to produce than the CA.
McAdam
-
s13sr20chris
- Posts: 4148
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:32 am
- Car: '89 Nissan S13 w/redtop running 13psi and not leaking fuel anymore
- Contact:
i would go sohc in your case as well. the ease of installation alone would make it my choice. although i would be tempted towards an sr20. i dont know too much about the ca series. i have worked on the sohc variety, but have not torn into a de or det. tell me how you think it is superior. personally i prefer the t-chain to the belt and i hate the shower rails on the ca and the old sr. does the ca have oil squirters? then there is the oil cooler on the ca. i think it is crap. its under the intake manifold and doesnt cool the oil all that much. starter is a pain to get to. really all it has going for it that i can see is and iron block. however the sr can be sleeved to be just as tough as an iron block. that and the stock al block is not exactly weak.
-
McAdam
- Posts: 423
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2003 10:33 pm
- Car: I like cars and my motorcycle. boats are fun too
- Contact:
one other thing to consider is you would have to get custom exhaust manifolds. I dont think there is enough room between the firewall and the engine in a truck for the cross over tube. If you do find someone who has done this before, be sure to post some pictures or a link to theur website if they have one! I would be interested in seeing this as well. a turbo V6 AWD (well, 4X4) truck would be king at the drags!
on the CA note...... the CA has a much better head design. 8 ports vs. 4. individual intake runners all the way to the ports. the valves are operated by a direct acting camshaft as opposed to lifter fingers. the DET CA's have oil squirters built in. the DET CA's also come with a factory girdle. another nice feature. plus, one thing I like about the CA's as opposed to the SR's is that you can rev the snot out of the CA's all day long, where as the SR's are more of a low end motor. I have owned a pulsar NX SE twin cam and I currently own a 1st gen SE-R. I am putting/building a CA18.5DET to go in my 240sx coupe. check the website, its kind of quirky.
McAdam
on the CA note...... the CA has a much better head design. 8 ports vs. 4. individual intake runners all the way to the ports. the valves are operated by a direct acting camshaft as opposed to lifter fingers. the DET CA's have oil squirters built in. the DET CA's also come with a factory girdle. another nice feature. plus, one thing I like about the CA's as opposed to the SR's is that you can rev the snot out of the CA's all day long, where as the SR's are more of a low end motor. I have owned a pulsar NX SE twin cam and I currently own a 1st gen SE-R. I am putting/building a CA18.5DET to go in my 240sx coupe. check the website, its kind of quirky.
McAdam