Whats the most HP you can get with the KA24DE/T motor

[nissan240sx92]

I was wondering how much hp you can get out of the ka24de. I have talk to a guy at jim wolf and he told me that some of the people who go to them to get some parts where pushing over 500 with there ka24det motor. I was just wondering if anyone has done that to there motor, and if so if they have a dyno sheet to prove it. And also what is the fastest 1/4 mile run time with the 240sx hatchback ka24det car can get. Thanks

[USDM240]

i have seen dyno charts of KA-T's putting down over 400rwhp. however, i have no idea what the most powerful KA-T is making.

[InsanityInc]

well, the most HP you could get out of it would probably be about 1500.

Of course that's with some hardcore race fuel, and what would be a non-legal race only engine. And it wouldn't be cheap, either.

If you're talking streetable, I'd venture a guess at 600 whp or so, with a turbo obviously.

[S13ChucKAT]

Secret services was at like.. 600 with stock internals?... i forget the # they were pulling.. but it was high as heck.

[InsanityInc]

stock pistons? I find that a little hard to believe. Stock rods, yeah, they're already forged.

I'm sure they had a different intake manifold, too. They'd have to be making around 600 torque to make 600 horsepower with the stock one. That would be a little nuts.

[nissan240sx92]

What would have to be bought to make over 600 hp on the ka24t and how would it be done

[:: orion ::]

This is a better question for the KA24DE-T forum, ya think?

But with that said, a guy in AZ has made 540rwhp (with stock intake manifold "insanity"...it's not that bad) with a T66, fully built motor, JWT 96lb/hr program with Ford Lightning MAF, etc...it was ~24psi IIRC.

Stock motors have done 350-400 repeatedly with anywhere from 15-18psi..."D240T" from ATL did 351rwhp years ago with a JWT program, and recently, the "Phat KA-T" guys at Sound Performance did +400 with custom wired AEM EMS standalone.

And there's plenty more of us running 12-14psi daily with T3/T4s, sitting right around the 300rwhp mark.

And "chuck" - Secret Services car was an SR...not KA-T.

Hope that helps - Brian

[nissan240sx92]

do you know where i can contact that guy from AZ

[InsanityInc]

This is a better question for the KA24DE-T forum, ya think?

But with that said, a guy in AZ has made 540rwhp (with stock intake manifold "insanity"...it's not that bad) with a T66, fully built motor, JWT 96lb/hr program with Ford Lightning MAF, etc...it was ~24psi IIRC.

Honestly, it really is. If your car redlines at 7000 but makes peak power at 5600, it's not really living up to its potential.

[:: orion ::]

do you know where i can contact that guy from AZ

His username over on Freshalloy is "T66240" I believe...send him a PM.

But first, seach through his posts...he's posted all the info on his setup there already.

- - - - -

And "Insanity"...check out a few KA turbo dyno graphs...the power typically drops at ~6000, unlike stock KA graphs. And it doesn't drop like a rock...

Here's an example:

http://ka-t.org/klattr1/images/390rwhp.jpg

And i'm not saying there's no need for a KA intake manifold, but the stock one's not as bad as you make it out to be...

- Brian

[S13ChucKAT]

Im willing to guess the fastest a KA24DET could get is in the high 9's.. adn that is with extreme modification to everything possible.. SHedding mad weight, adding lots and lots of boost, nitrous, internal works. wide *** slicks in the rear, HLSD, and a few other things.. is it possible.. sure.. do you have money for it.. im betting NO

[Florida240sx]

Actually as son as I hit the lottery I will have the money. MY project is going backwads being I started school again and my hours are cut not to mention there is no1 at the hotel to tip. I get a bonus check tomorrow for a $150(supposedly)Got work tomorrow and wednesday so maybe i can get back on track with my project.

[InsanityInc]

Quote »And "Insanity"...check out a few KA turbo dyno graphs...the power typically drops at ~6000, unlike stock KA graphs. And it doesn't drop like a rock...

Here's an example:

http://ka-t.org/klattr1/images/390rwhp.jpg

And i'm not saying there's no need for a KA intake manifold, but the stock one's not as bad as you make it out to be...

- Brian [/quote]

I doubt that has a stock intake manifold. I've seen KA turbo graphs that lose torque much sooner. Hell, the SR graphs I've seen lose torque sooner.

[InsanityInc]

as a counterpoint to yours, I found two graphs that exhibit exactly the behavior of having a stock intake manifold:

http://ka-t.org/klattr1/images/dyno1.jp ... /dyno2.jpg

torque starts dropping at 4300 rpms.

[:: orion ::]

Yeah, but are we trying to increase top end with an intake manifold, or low end torque...???

The stock one is great for low end...that much is given. No need for improvement there...

But the dyno I posted, and the 2 you did, show HP still climbing above 6000rpm...doesn't climb for much longer, but it's not dropping straight down at ~5500.

And that motor has a 100% stock intake manifold.

- Brian

[Scott McLellan]

the TPI engines in the 86-89 or whatever Camaro's have long intake runners kind of like our's on the KA. They have several different options starting with larger diameter runners that are the same length all the way up to intake manifolds that are a very direct, no runner, design similar to the LT1 in newer camaros. I'm just wondering how much bigger the stock manifold on a KA could be enlarged. they say for the camaro it gives better top end while keeping the longer runners which are awsome for low end. Has anybody tried taking a die grinder to a intake manifold and seeing how thick the material is? Maybe a job that was more of a combination of porting the intake/enlarging it would change it's characteristics some. Would take a long time thou...BYW- there are a lot more variables than just intake manifold that effect the torque curve.... the torque curve directly follows the volumetric effeciency curve of an engine generally and could be cams, cylinder head, intercooler, I don't know but i'd say that's a pretty wild guess to just blame the drop off of the torque curve which by the way happens on every engine, on the intake manifold

[klattr1]

my JWT cams made it alot better compared to stock cams obviously. i wouldnt mind getting a shorter runner intake manifold with a bigger plenum because my low end is already hurt with my cams and my turbo. Its not like I drift or anything. I just keep the rpms in the right starting range when i race (just like anybody would).I'm just curious if i would need to raise my redline a few hundred rpms if i got the intake manifold.orion, when did you get your JWT cams and how do u like them? stock sprockets or adj.?

[InsanityInc]

Of course a camaro is going to have long runners, the engine isn't designed to rev very high.

Also, torque drop does mean a drop in volumetric effeciency, you are right about that, however, it has been shown in many different ways that changing the other elements of volumetric efficiency causes little to no change in a KA. Look at graphs of KA's with different cams, they still drop off low, and still make peak power at 5600. The cylinder head is a 16 valve dohc head. Trust me, it can breathe better than at 4000 rpms. 2 valve pushrod engines can do better than that. KA's don't have intercoolers, so that's a rather moot point. Also, I'm not talking about all engines, I'm talking about the KA. In addition, you are incorrect in saying that all motors drop off at low rpms. New engines which have proper technology put into them do not. Look at an s2000 and a 350z graph for some good examples. Torque is nice and flat just about to redline.

The KA is a 2.4L DOHC I4. Trying to use design philosophy from a 5.7L pushrod V8 isn't the best idea I've heard all day.

[InsanityInc]

Quote »Yeah, but are we trying to increase top end with an intake manifold, or low end torque...???

The stock one is great for low end...that much is given. No need for improvement there...

But the dyno I posted, and the 2 you did, show HP still climbing above 6000rpm...doesn't climb for much longer, but it's not dropping straight down at ~5500.

And that motor has a 100% stock intake manifold.[/quote]Top end power, obviously. Unless you're into towing things with your 240, I don't know why you would want your torque peak at 400.

The point isn't that the horsepower drops fast, it's that the TORQUE drops fast, which causes the horsepower to be much lower than it should be, even at your peak. If you make 10 less torque, but make it all the way to redline, you will gain a LOT of power, even at the current peak with that engine.

Also, unless you can prove that the engine in the first dyno has a stock manifold, and prove that the dyno graph was not in error, I'm not going to believe it. Every single other KA-T graph with a stock intake manifold I've ever seen does exactly what the ones I've posted did.

[klattr1]

Also, unless you can prove that the engine in the first dyno has a stock manifold, and prove that the dyno graph was not in error, I'm not going to believe it. Every single other KA-T graph with a stock intake manifold I've ever seen does exactly what the ones I've posted did.

hmm, if you are talking about the 390 rwhp dyno sheet, then its mine. I have a stock KA intake manifold and Jim Wolf cams. The cams are making the difference up top.

Here's Jeff's S14 turbo KA with stock intake manifold and JWT cams as well.

[InsanityInc]

Quote »hmm, if you are talking about the 390 rwhp dyno sheet, then its mine. I have a stock KA intake manifold and Jim Wolf cams. The cams are making the difference up top.

Here's Jeff's S14 turbo KA with stock intake manifold and JWT cams as well.[/quote]I've seen KA's with different cams, it hardly makes any difference at all, and certainly not that much. Can you show that the dyno you have isn't in error? I've never seen any KA dyno hold it's torque for that long, not even ones with different cams.

Also, Jeffs looks exactly like it has a stock manifold, notice how his torque starts dropping very early, at about 4300 rpms.

[klattr1]

well, the difference between his torque and mine is due to my bigger turbo. if you look at my 310 rwhp run up top, you will notice that my torque band is just like his since i used to have a t3/t04e (60 trim .63 ar stage 5 wheel).its all due to the lil bit laggier turbo that i have compared to him.an even better example:this is Rick's turbo ka (stock cams, big nasty turbo-TO4X2, stock intake manifold). look where his peak tq is. he never finished off the run since his spark was blowing out.

[:: orion ::]

I've never seen any KA dyno hold it's torque for that long, not even ones with different cams...

And my point is this:

You jumped into a few different threads claiming that the intake manifold was the culprit of all the KAs TQ drop and top end power loss.

Now we show you a dyno that proves that, as I said before, "it's not as bad as you make it out to be"...

My argument is that all the dynos you've been looking at, no ones gotten the combination right..."klattr1" has. Smallish-ish turbine housings like we all like to run on KAs flow OK, but not great...so the VE starts to drop quickly. "klattr1" runs a big-a** hot side on his turbo, and it lets the engine breathe up top, paired with the right cams, of course.

Here's a turbo dyno from my car at ~6psi...notice the TQ carries on to +5000rpm...

I attribute the decent VE to a dumped wastegate (less backpressure in the exhaust manifold), plus a .63 A/R turbine housing with a stage III wheel is not a restriction at that boost level...it becomes a problem at higher power level as illustrated in the dynos you posted above...and the TQ drops like you say.

But that's not from the intake manifold design.

My .02...

- Brian

[InsanityInc]

Orion : Your graph drops immediately after reaching 5000. Sure, having a turbo will allow you to dodge the effect somewhat, since at lower RPMs, you can put enough pressure into the manifold to stop anything that occurs inside the manifold from hindering (or helping) your volumetric effeciency.

The two graphs we've seen that made torque above 4000-5000 were ones from turbo engines with massive turbos. However, not everyone wants a massive turbo, or even a turbo engine. Not to mention that in klattr's large turbo graph, the torque still drops off before redline, so a different intake manifold would still help.

Did anyone see that SR graph that was posted in the manifold thread? He pretty much had a graph that looked like yours, orion. Then he changed just the intake manifold, and started making near-peak torque all the way to redline.

So, if you're running a massive turbo, you're not going to benefiet as much, but as I said, that's not everyone with a KA.

[klattr1]

to effectively push the limits of the turbo ka's peak hp, that would require a combination of better cams, shorter runner int. man. w/ bigger than displ. plenum, and a larger turbo (to push the torque band further down). but there are also some complimentary things that could be done as well for those higher than stock rpms (headwork, valvetrain work thanks to ka24de.com).Some people just want a streetable turbo car with a little low end though. its all up to taste and money.

[InsanityInc]

something else I noticed about the SR graph that was posted was that while you'd think the low end would be all around worse, it was actually better for the most part. It peaked lower, but before it peaked, it looked a lot smoother with the different manifold, presumably just because the thing flowed better. Though, it did make 9 less torque at the peak.