CA18DET vs SR20DET

[oliverfehr]

Hi

Can someone please list the pros and cons of each engine in an Exa, I don't want prices I know them. Is a Ca18det thaaaaat much slower than an sr20det? Can it easily be made faster with a bigger turbo and more boost?

In Perth there is a mega shortage of FWD ca18det I know people that have searched for them at wreckers and they have non. I read someone fitted a RWD ca18det. What extra work is involved?

[Jimi]

oli,

we covered this in HUGE depth about 2 years ago, i'll try to remember everything i researched..

the ca18det has a direct action valve train. meaning the cam shafts act directly onto the valves.
the sr20det has rocker arms, which means the cams act onto rocker arms, which act onto the valves.

direct action is much better, as it allows the engine to freely rev, breathing better, etc.

the turbos on the two engines are very similar. the CA18 is the T25, the SR20 is the T25G. the sr20 turbo is slightly bigger and can handle a bit more boost.

now from memory the intake runners on the ca18det are better, being that there is two per cylinder (i think) compared to the SR20s one (i think also, i know the ca has double the intake runners)..

HOWEVER, the ca18det is an older engine, with an older turbo, and usually more km's under its belt.

the sr20 is still being built (S15) so bolt on parts and replacement parts are easily available.

the sr20 is a symmetrical engine, being more efficient.

the sr20 in my opinion is stronger, newer, and responds better to mods.

just check out driftworks.org and their (well, speedworks (www.speedworksauto.com.au)) SR22 (JUN 2.2L) pulling like 732hp at the rear wheels.

if you can afford the sr20, go for it
otherwise, the ca18 will hammer home and be an excellent value for money performance engine!

[Akela]

SR are over rated. CA can do quite the same job as an SA. Yeah they are old but then again an FJ i about the same age and they are better than both these engines. Personally i have an option between an SR and a CA and chose the CA. Plus alot of CA parts are interchangeable between the CA range (16de, 18de, 18det, 20e) i.e. parts are pretty easy to get cause alot nof theses are aussie released early model engine(cheap). However pistons cost heaps.

[oliverfehr]

Yeah but an sr20det can smoke an sti with a little more boost. Can a ca18det do this? What cars can ur ca18dets eat? supposed tom money you save getting a ca18det can go to stuff like intercooler and shit.

[Akela]

i got mah, ca18det in mah exa. I been havin clutch trouble so boost was only set at 7psi. i have a microtech and frount mount intercooler. We doin a rebuild and an new clutch is goin in. Before the rebuild i could easily smoke most ss comodores. most calais(turbo) with similar mods as mine. I've beaten a few R33 Skylines. Obviousloy some beat me but i am only running 7psi. Wait till i get the engine back in, not too many people will have a chance. 15-18psi of boost. T3 very shortly afterwards.

[Akela]

Oh yeah im even with a sr silvia or 180 if they are on standard boost.

[fatmanracing]

Both motors have very good potential.
In the N13 body, it is far easier to install a CA series motor because it was offered in that chassis, but the SR was not.

The CA is an iron block, SR is aluminum, sleeved.
(just info, not saying one is better than the other)

the SR does have more performance parts available imho.

a stock SR with upped boost and a decent intercooler will get you DEEP into the 13s with an open diff, probably better with an LSD.
(Stock T25 @12-13 psi)

I have done the SR swap, its NOT straight forward, and unless you are very confident in your welding skills, and wiring skills, I wouldnt recommend it.

[nick]

nick
hay exa lover from michigan is your 1987 exa all wheel drive if so would i be able to make my 1984 exa all wheel drive (ps) would a sr20det or a ca18det fit in a 1984 exa

[Jimi]

Originally posted by Akela
SR are over rated. CA can do quite the same job as an SA. Yeah they are old but then again an FJ i about the same age and they are better than both these engines. Personally i have an option between an SR and a CA and chose the CA. Plus alot of CA parts are interchangeable between the CA range (16de, 18de, 18det, 20e) i.e. parts are pretty easy to get cause alot nof theses are aussie released early model engine(cheap). However pistons cost heaps.

I don't think you have any grounds for this arguement except that there is a wider range of ca engines available!

The SR20 is still in production, there is way more parts available for it.

They are quite different engines, driving them gives quite a different feel, the SR being quite torquey, almost feeling light a straight 6 once on boost, and the CA being revvy and feeling hyperactive

For a light performance build up, the SR shits on the CA, having a bigger turbo from factory, and being able to handle more boost on stock internals.

There is plenty of CA engines making more power than Sr engines, but there is more the otherway around.

a SR engine will have no problems putting down 300 rear wheel hp before needing major internal surgery


as for the FJ, i've never pulled one of these apart, so I can't comment.

[Akela]

Thats often a miss conseption of the SR. Just because it produces more power than the CA it doesn't mean its stacks better. I think the are overated because of this.
The CA is a very good engine and could also easily put down in excess of 300hp without block strengthing. Bpoth engines would obviously need forgies but nothing more than that.
I never said the CA is better than the SR, i just people think its so much better than a CA just because of stock power, wen the a really quit comparable.
Fundamently it easier to have a CA in an exa, and is the slight power advantage worth the hassel of a SR when a CA will be quite comparble down the road.
Check this site out, what this guy says about the SR and CA are my pretty good...
http://www.turbophile.com/sr20transplants/motor_selection.html

[Jimi]

i completely agree, JDM N13's came with CA18DET's so it makes sense to use that engine as a transplant!

Your point on internals strength is also taken, however speaking from experience my friends CA18DET blew the bottom end on 14psi, and i know people with SR20DE's (yes, non turbo engines) that have 10psi jammed into them with no problems (8,000km's!).

I think if the CA18's were being built at the same time as SR's we could compare a bit better, getting two engines of the same km's and age and comparing

[Akela]

Hey amn your friend running 14psi on a CA blowing the bottom out? Was he running standard managment? If he was well thats asking for trouble, 14psi on standard managment, kinda obvious you'd destroy something, that would happen on most engines, or sever damage. I've seen the inside of a CA running 18psi on standard managment. Not a pretty site. Fried piston rings, conical bores and stuffed pistons.

[Jimi]

if by standard management you mean standard fuel maps, ignition timing, etc, then no,
it had been tuned but it still let go due to pure age and previous thrash history

i think we can all agree the bottom line is:
if you have a n13 put a ca18det in it unless you want to go v.hardcore and have a big wallet

[Akela]

Word, but i think you can go very hardcore with a CA if u want to.

[WHI55L]

I agree with all of the above comments...

it really depends how much u wanna spend???

There is definetly a shortage of FWD ca18det's Australia wide at the moment, so trying to get one will be very difficult..

As for the strength of both engines, the ca18det is slighty more stronger than the sr20det as it has an iron block... Other than that, with minimal mods the sr20det will be able to produce a significant more amount of HP than the ca18det with the same mods... But if u do forgies, front mount, ecu, bigger turbo and more boost, a ca18det will smoke a sr20det with just exhaust, and boost increase...

If u are willing to spend the extra $$$ on a sr20det swap, the results will be well worth the dollars outlayed... but if u are on a budget the ca18det on a low psi setting will do u fine... Well u know the prices for both swaps, so u work out which one u can afford...

[Vampire]

is there any difference between the ca18de and the "t" block" I know dif internals, but what about the block itself?:bat:

[EXRace]

he following is Glenn "Lumpy" Campbell comment on the SR20 vs CA18:

Some Points of Interest – the CA18DET –vs- SR20DET

Certainly there appears to be a great deal of interest out there in which one of Nissan’s ’hot-4’s is the hottest of the bunch.

Nissan have made some very formidable hot 4’s in the past, but this note is aimed directly at S13 owners who may be looking at either the CA18DET or SR20DET engines.

Firstly let me say that the SR was never designed to technically supersede the CA in any way other that cost. As with natural evolution and development the SR became more powerful. How much of that power is directly attributed to the fact that it is a 2 litre rather than only 1800cc?

Many of the famed benefits of the SR20DET were in the CA18DET too. Piston oil squirters and crank stud girdle for starters.

Externally, The 2 engines look completely different, and they should. The first obvious difference is the SR’s shiny alloy block, Next you notice the different inlet manifolds. The list goes on. Don’t mistake that alloy bloke as being lightweight either – there is that much alloy in the thing to keep it strong that they weigh no less than the CA.

A lot of people refer to the CA as ‘the plastic motor’ – why I don’t know, when the SR has exactly the same item made from plastic right on top too. Obviously the CA looks a bit boxy and I guess plasticcy (?), but….

Lets take a quick look at the intake design of the 2 engines. The SR uses a 4 runner manifold and a 4 port head. Standard garden variety manifold design. The CA on the other hand starts with a 4 runner manifold and then splits into 8, entering the head as an 8 runner manifold. Every second runner is only flowing air under certain circumstances (high air flow). Much more sophisticated design, and much more expensive to produce. I think the theory of this manifold design was to regain some low-down torque missing as a result of the comparatively lumpy camshafts used in the engine.

Some feel that the combustion chamber design of the SR20 is also better than the CA, however I am yet to hear that report from anyone who has actually seen both types of engine in S13 RWD trim for a valid comparison.

There’s more to the head than that too. Looking above the valves, the first thing that grabs you with the SR is that is only has 4 cam lobes per cam, not 8. Doesn’t it have 8 valves per side? Yep, and to get around that Nissan decided to use a rocker arm arrangement to actuate paired valves simultaneously from the single lobe. Not a bad way to do it actually. Certainly cheap to make, but at the cost of increased valve train losses and noise. The CA on the other hand has true 8 lobe cams which act directly on the top of the valves. Minimal components. Maximum revs, and no noise.

The SR has also gone back to the classic timing chain idea, and dropped the tooth belt. My theory here is it has something to do with reduced maintenance costs and less damage when the belts fly from lack of maintenance.

Obviously, the SR is a bigger engine in capacity, it has a relatively long stroke and is ‘over-square’ in design, meaning that the stroke is longer than the width of the bore. Fortunately the stroke to rod length ratio is at such a point that the engine can still rev, but it suffers classically from excess stroke. Sure, they rev out, but not anywhere near as willingly as the little CA with it’s square design (stroke=bore).

Many hi-po USA engines are using oversized pistons from the 300ZX, bringing the stroke/bore relationship back a bit, and providing a cheap source for forged pistons and further increased capacity.

Sure they rev out OK, but not anywhere near the same as a CA. I'm talking stock engines here too, not comparing an SR with aftermarket cams on modified lobe centres, which wouldn’t be a fair comparison now would it!

In retaliation to the plastic tag for the CA, I would now like to refer to the SR as Nissan’s 4 cyl domestic truck engine. The TRUCK MOTOR !!!

So, in conclusion, there is no real winner in this debate - they are not predecessor and successor that is for sure.

I guess the best thing about the SR is that it is almost still in production (although getting very old by other examples) and is well supported by the aftermarket industry. This makes it an excellent choice if you are going to be rebuilding the engine for a specific purpose or inflicting a lot of bolt-ons to it.

There are obviously many more variations between the engines. This writing is simply a small part of it. I will continue this article soon. Any comments appreciated and if anyone has some facts of would like to contribute, please forward them to me lumpy@wasp.net.au

The CA will have to remain the unsung hero.

Ê

*** Glenn LUMPY Campbell ***

Racing, Performance, Motorsport (RPM)

[68IOU1]

AS posted previously... couldnt be bothered quoting

>>>>>There’s more to the head than that too. Looking above the valves, the first thing that grabs you with the SR is that is only has 4 cam lobes per cam, not 8. Doesn’t it have 8 valves per side? Yep, and to get around that Nissan decided to use a rocker arm arrangement to actuate paired valves simultaneously from the single lobe. Not a bad way to do it actually. Certainly cheap to make, but at the cost of increased valve train losses and noise. The CA on the other hand has true 8 lobe cams which act directly on the top of the valves. Minimal components. Maximum revs, and no noise.

To avoid problems from the sr20's so called 'cheap' rocker arrangement, dont remove the rev limiter and dont sit at 6.5 grand all day. there are plenty of aftermarket options to rectify this, although they arent as troublesome as written in some text

>>>>>>The SR has also gone back to the classic timing chain idea, and dropped the tooth belt. My theory here is it has something to do with reduced maintenance costs and less damage when the belts fly from lack of maintenance.

nothing at all wrong with that. IMO chains are stronger & more reliable that belts because they are less likely to break. they just make slightly more noise

>>>>> Obviously, the SR is a bigger engine in capacity, it has a relatively long stroke and is ‘over-square’ in design, meaning that the stroke is longer than the width of the bore. Fortunately the stroke to rod length ratio is at such a point that the engine can still rev, but it suffers classically from excess stroke. Sure, they rev out, but not anywhere near as willingly as the little CA with it’s square design (stroke=bore).

EXCUSE ME????? where the fuck did you get this info??? the sr20 has an 86mm x 86mm bore & stroke making it a perfectly square engine compared to the ca18's 83mm bore x 83.6mm stroke making it slightly over square... see above for the meaning of that



>>>>>Sure they rev out OK, but not anywhere near the same as a CA. I'm talking stock engines here too, not comparing an SR with aftermarket cams on modified lobe centres, which wouldn’t be a fair comparison now would it!


lets see...
'normal' sr20 redline 7000
sr20 GTi-R redline 7500
ca18 redline 7500
From experience, the SR20 in my pulsar has no breating difficulties at high rpm, and likewise with a ca18 i have driven, even @ 14psi on both engines



i am not doubting this guys knowlege or abilities of engines, but it seems to me he is 'nitpicking' all the badsides of an sr as he seems to show a likeness to ca's, and some of the things written need to be checked for truthfullness. if i was going somewhere for an engine build, he just lost my business even if what he wrote was a typo.... even though i said this, he can build you an awesome engine

i could point out the badsides of a ca, eg shitty plenum constant coilpack probs etc but whats the point? all engines have pros & cons

for an honest opinion for yourself, go to a local import yard and test drive a turbo ca silvia and a turbo sr silvia and decide the difference yourself.

power handling - an sr can handle 400 hp with no internal mods, although i would recommend at least forged pistons..
i have no idea on the ca, although i have seen 200hp @ wheels with standard innards driven every day

driving - sr is more torqey on the road, ca seems to 'respond' better at high rpm, but only slightly. do not forget the gear ratios are different on ca gearboxes to what sr gearboxes are, and a lot of people do not take this into consideration

Finally, before anyone decides to flame me (and i have no doubt they will) i am not saying either powerplant is better. i have nothing against glen campbell even though it looks like it from my post, and I AM NOT BIASED!!!! make the decision yourself based on what you think, not what the masses tell you, and get your info from a RELIABLE source. CA18DET vs SR20DET debates shit me big time because a lot of what is said is unreliable

happy deciding!

[Jimi]

i agree with 68IOU1,

the timing chain is better! never have to change it.. the timing belt could snap on my 1JZ-GTE, and wind me up bending my fucking valves and writing the engine off.. thus i have to change it for $300.

and yes, the SR20 is perfectly square, i never knew where those figures came from.

I have read alot of Lumpy's stuff, and I have met him before.

He does favour CA18's alot,
he (www.driftdivision.com.au or .org or something) rewrites ca18det computers.

People will always be biased, the engines are quite different so its up to you,

Personally If I had the chance, i'd be going with the newer and more reliable engine.
But it depends on budget

[boost_boy]

Here in the U.S. , there a few FWD pulsar/EXAs around with CA18DEts in them making around 225whp @15psi and some with less. I actually own a B12 sentra/sunny which is built on the same platform as the kn13 pulsar/exa and I also installed a CA18DET in it. I'm a bit of an extremist and I do believe in pushing the envelope a little harder than the average person and by being such a person, I was able to extract 312.5whp@18psi out of my CA18DET with the only change to the physical engine being a set of reground CA18DET cams. My first dyno pull during that session netted me 284whp@15psi of boost. Took out 1% fuel from 3k rpm to 7k rpm and netted 299whp at 16psi. Most of the FWD SR20DET powered cars are in the ballpark of 199-280whp (at least around here). The CA18DET can take massive abuse and is possibly the best bang for the buck. Every vehicle I've raced with the SR20 has supported the fact that SR20's have good low-end power, but anything past 3500rpm the rules of engagement changed. I've installed a few SR20 in S14 240sx's and S13 240sx's as well as FWD B14 200sx or sunny's on your end. In FWD, the gearboxes have proven to be incompetent towards accepting abuse. And as far as comparing a belt to a chain, the mechanic or maintenance-minded tinkerer would prefer the belt because it is much easier to change than the chain and the belts don't wear out that fast like some make it seem. The SR is a good motor, but a very sensitive one at that. You lean out that motor and there's a high possibility that you will eat mess up that block as well (Seen it too many times). The CA18DET is a good motor, but if you want big power, be prepared to open up the purse. 312whp equates to nearly 370hp at the crank, so one can easily assume that a stock CA18DET block and head can support 400hp. My next goal is 500whp from an un-bored CA18DET block, forged pistons, strengthened rods, big cams, port and polish and a few other tricks I have that will be needed to accomplish this feat. I'll let you guys know very soon if I can do it.

[Packrat]

i personally prefer the ca18de for the pulsar /exa swap just because the sr swap is waaay to expensive. the sr20 is indead a good and powerful motor, we just got the first n12 sentra sr20det powered car in our club here. i got to ride in it. it hauls ass pretty well. as well as fatmans car, that thing rockets like crazy!
but im sure i can get mine to perform just as well with the ca18det *if i had fatmans budget or even a job* but its going to take some time. and the timing belt is a bitch, i hate that annoying piece of rubber, i wish there was a chain conversion kit for it. anyway, and as far as the valve train works, i do believe its more efficient to run it like the ca18de, but thats my opinion *makes it easier to rebuild the bitch* which i have done, i know that motor inside and out. i have a completely new bottom end, new crank,rods,bearings, pistons, rings, and oil pump, shaved head, and overbored pistons. so the bitch really does rev out. the thing i do not like however is the ignition system is old, its well designed, but old, the coil pack thing is rather annoying, but it makes for an interesting motor :)
whatever u do what u want, theres a kid inmontreal who hangs with JJ who is pushing like 375 at the wheels with his ca18det....talk to him he knows how to mod em, i think his name is rafi?

[GPexa]

Originally posted by 68IOU1
lets see...
'normal' sr20 redline 7000
sr20 GTi-R redline 7500
ca18 redline 7500
From experience, the SR20 in my pulsar has no breating difficulties at high rpm, and likewise with a ca18 i have driven, even @ 14psi on both engines

the CA gets to 7500 far faster than the SR though....

[EXRace]

My Ca went to 8500 with new sparkies easily, then the rev limit cut in.

[68IOU1]

Originally posted by GPexa
the CA gets to 7500 far faster than the SR though....

it had better get to 7500 faster.... look at the gear ratios the CA gearboxes run compared to the SR's

[boost_boy]

look at the gear ratios the CA gearboxes run compared to the SR's I don't know about the ones you guys have over there, but my 4th and 5th gears are exceptionally longer than that of the SR20's and my tranny is 5 times more reliable (Haven't busted one yet after 7 years). I've raced both SR20DET powered sentras and 240sx's and have gobbled them them up and laid them out in the long run. The SR gears are short and very good for drag racing and street racing. The CA18's (at least in my case) are very good for both drag racing and highway (Top end) racing. You will rarely catch an SR powered car exceeding 150mph especially the FWD. But this argument about this SR and the CA is an age old discussion that everyone will have an opinion about which is best. If you have an early to mid 90's or late 90's car, you'll opt for the SR20 regardless of how crappy or weak the gearboxes are or how cheap the valve train design is. If you have an early 90's and below car (especially a sentra, pulsar or 240sx) you would most likely choose the CA18DET for power because of it's ease of install for the S12,S13, B12 and kn13 chasis, cost of application and the beauty of it's relation to the RB series as well as the VG series in which the CA was the prototype for all of them:tonguepla Happy arguing guys......I'll take the CA18DET anyday over the SR for pure reliability, cost, ease of serviceability and it's happiness to rev as well as being relatively smaller than the SR20, but no less weaker.

[Packrat]

HAI HAI!!!! ^.^ hahaha

[SeGGy]

i rekkon tha majority of people will go for tha ca18det simply coz of cost, i mean who wonts to spend over $5g's for a motor...but im only 15, so i cant say much.

[boost_boy]

i mean who wonts to spend over $5g's for a motor And for 30hp more? It's time to wake up, young lads! CA18DET=175hp=$500+$200 for tranny U.S. -vs- SR20DET=205hp=$1700+500 for tranny (not to mention cost of axles) which leaves us CA18DET people $1500 to go blow on go fast goodies especially if each of us had a $2200 budget:hitwall:

[Packrat]

well the way fatman did it he used an infinity g20 trans and used the stock ca half shafts if im not mistake? but the motor mounts for an sr20det to fit a pulsar would be a pain and expensive, besides, why not stick with in the pulsars original format, i mean not many people up here even know what a ca18de is let alone see them, of course the sr20dets every retard and his brother knows em, its like a cliche buzz word now, kinda like the b16 honda, everyone knows what that is...i dunno i personally prefer to be different but thats just my choice, and besides the ca18de is a really good motor, its just when the electronics are old, they crap out...what do you expect from a motors thats almost 15 years old?

[boostinhard]

Hey,
you fools! Just get an e15et!!! lol, I'll leave now..... :p
Sam

[boost_boy]

i mean not many people up here even know what a ca18de is let alone see them I experience that same problem here.They say it looks like a skyline motor turned sideways and I just laugh at them.
what do you expect from a motors thats almost 15 years old? Actually, it's around 17 y/o being debuted in 1986 in the S12 sylvia and Gazelles in japan. Which makes since because we saw the 1st CA's with DOHC motor in the 1987 pulsar which I do believe debuted in late 1986. AHHH, age and refinement:love: , just makes the market just that much feasible for us cheapy-cheapos. And besides $1700 for a freakin' 13 y/o motor (SR20DET) that produces 30hp more than it's $500 predecessor is ludacrist or better yet, plain 'ol foolish. Too much fast and the furious and reading too much about the JUN hyper lemon Sylvia car has started a wicked bandwagon. Pretty soon, they will be putting SR20s in hondas and the term "Out of the frying pan and into the fire" will be truly displayed. Happy boosting:devilburn

[boostinhard]

Too much fast and the furious and reading too much about the JUN hyper lemon Sylvia car has started a wicked bandwagon.

lol - does this mean I have to change my signature? hehe
Sam

[boost_boy]

does this mean I have to change my signature? You're an exception because you don't have an SR20:heehee: And most of these guys with those motors are not at all happy, especially the FWD guys. And because the trannies break so often, they have virtually fished all the fwd lsd trannies out of japan. Trannies are going for as much $1000 U.S. around here because they've destroyed them all. Where as the rest of us old school nissan lovers got parts paradise in the Junkyards.

[boostinhard]

Hey,
hmmm yeah - but e15et trannies are becoming extremely rare in Aus now... Mind you, the rest of the parts are cheap as - I bought a whole spare engine for $140 AUS lol - nothing wrong with it either, needed a rebuild (rings and bearings worn)- but that was the plan anyway!
Sam

[boost_boy]

The e15t uses the same gearbox as the CA16DE with theonly difference being the bellhousing. The CA16DE can be bolted to the CA18DE motor as long as you use the CA16's clutch set and flywheel, axles and mounting brackets (been here and done this already). So why don't you look into the CA18's gears or at least the box itself. All of my trannies are hybrid now and you won't believe what I'm using, but i do now have a helical LSD in both of my cars now. Experiment a bit if you're having tranny-breakage problems.

[boostinhard]

Hey,
this sounds very interesting. Gearbox's are another thing I really dont know all that much about (except for on Drag bikes lol ;) ) and would love to know more on how to go about this. Any information oyu have on adapting these gearbox's to e15et's would be very appreciated.
Sam

[boost_boy]

It would take someone with patience and tranny experience to sit down and open these things and see what can be done and where. Though I have the general idea of what can go where, I still pay a friend to that nasty work and luckily for me, I've been right everytime.

[boostinhard]

Hey,
ok - fair enough. If you could ask him if there are any easy(well, not impossible) options with the e15et - that I could do (or get someone else to do) over here in aus that will make a string box for decent cash...
Sam

[euroboy]

first off
should i remind everybody that the sr is heavier by 50lbs over the ca?
ca18det 282lbs
sr20det 328lbs
fj20et 366lbs
just because is alloy don't mean it's lighter.
Second should i remind that a lot of that mass is due to the
rocker arms
chain
those are moving parts which in equation 1lbs of that is a ton more in the long run son
may i remind you that i have never heard of a sr rev to 10500rpm?
i hear ca rev to 9000 everyday
may i remind the sr owners how much better flowing the ca head is?
may i remind that the coil pack failure you can just avoid that by a costless manner?(have air get to it to cool them down...........)
btw ca motor was introduced in 83.5-84 the first year it came to canada with ca18et
happy sr'ing boys signal auto is comming to you
change your maf plz coz it craps out after 280hp
belt driven? the happier they rev the lighter they rev and put more power to the wheels rather than turning the chain
there is no point having a chain on a I4

[BROADZ]

geez this is an old thread been dug up......

i say go e15et all the way, the top 10 fastest front wheel drives consist of hondas and e15et powered pulsar/exas

the little e15et of mine (my old n12) was equal performance to a slighly modified sss pulsar SR20de

[chedda_bob]

i wouldn't really consider price in this argument..
it just makes the engine cheaper not mechanically better..

[chris2]

just some errata here...
the VG has been around longer than the CA, but you are correct with CA and RB being cousins...this is very easy to see on the first of the RBs,then the RB style ports were done like the SR wich is from skyline r32 onward.(no twin port)and is also where the rep for this donk started.

the vg30c was available in 1981 in a 300C(sohc) -but obviously 2 of em!

[KAMELEON]

well e15 to ca16de gearboxes arnt the same. the gears are slightly bigger and all teh ratios are different. i wish my gearboxes were as strong as sams dont touch it or it could break e15 gearbox.
i think this entire sr ca thread shouldnt be on here as i would say there would be about 4 people who know their salt engine wise on the physics of how they work and what is inside each of them and 20 who don't.they're are people who percevere with both and both can be turned into power houses. i dont agree with christians head airflow theory purely because neitehr of us have had it on a flow bench otehr then that yes the sr has the technology edge on the ca purely from later deisgn. but each and every engine has a weakness and i dont think naming the weaknesses makes either a bad motor. if the engineering was dont correctly at the factory (ala 2jzgte, s50, s52, s54 etc)extra power isnt the hardest to unlease. the sr does have a mass of aftermarket performance parts that are straight fiot which makes it popular due to the magazine order/internet ordering that seems to be sweeping the world. thanx america!
anyway i like both but i would choose the sr over the ca.

[Mervic]

Just to add, SR front drive tranny cant hold big power boost. It is a common problem here in NA as many SR tuners here found out. Most of them get their tranny case welded and the gears cryo treated. CA tranny, I dont hear many problems about it. Both engines in my opinion are great engines cuz they were made by Nissan.

[skindoe]

both motors are great in my opinion. i just chose the ca cause of ease of instalation. although i am looking at stroking a ca18det to a ca20det, which i beleive would produce more power than a sr20det. but thats just my personal opinion. like i said, both motors are kick ass and would thoroughly enjoy driving an exa with either one fitted to it. just my 2 cents worth.( by the way, i have an idea what im talking about. i did a complete rebuild on my det myself, even the machining. also did the convertion myself)

[jazza]

this arguement will never end. Its like the sr20det Vs rb20det arguement!
I think that Nissan shud of ended it. They made the sr20 n dropped the ca18.
For their own reasons and this is why i believe the sr20 to be better (widout goin into detail!!!)

Edited: Oh and a ca20det.. that wud be cool wid me :)

Jaz

[skindoe]

they replaced the ca with the sr cause of two main reasons-1. the ca cost too much to produce. nissan needed to design a engine that they could produce cheaper and still be efficient and powerfull.-2. people were unhappy about the step-down in power from the fj20 to the ca so nissan stepped up the capacity to 2L with a new design motor, the sr20.thats why nissan changed from ca to sr.

[jazza]

Natural evolution..
Things always seem to get bigger and better
And thats what happened!

:)

[skindoe]

i didnt mean that a sr20det would be a better motor than a ca20det(stroked ca18det) i just told you the reasoning behind nissans desicion(spelling?). why do you think a ca18det was more expencive to produce than an sr20det? more precision= more expencive to make. The ca18det is better technology, though. they didnt want an engine that would either last under constant pressure or major modification, they wanted a motor that was cheap to make and would last until the next generation of motor would be designed. sorry if i misled you, but thats the way big companys like nissan think.

[jazza]

Coz u worked on the ca to sr decision from nissan right lol
A stroked sr20 (sr22det) would shit all ova a stroked ca18, you cant compair like that..
This is like tryin to compair rb20det vs rb25det.. both have ads/disadvantages but the better motor carried on..
Its simple they didnt have the technology back then, Variable valve timing, they would of asked wtfs that. Somethin that was introduced abit later into the sr20 range..
Alot of the ca18 problems are to do wid old electrics..
And if u think a new ca18 wud fix that, well a new ca18 wont stand against a new sr20 will it? Compair stock vs stock or modified vs modified, only fair..
Sr20s are awsome engines to modify, thats why ppl choose to modify them.
I know we are a site based around the ca engines, but do you think Nissan would of gone lets change the ca engine because its costing us too much??

This arguement wont ever end... so why cant we accept that Nissan settled it by ditching the ca18??
It aint that hard to understand... not a shot at anyone who loves the ca18 if your ca18 is killin sr20s on the dyno then good on you, deserve some praise :), just stating facts as they have happened

[jazza]

Things in life progress dont they
Bigger, better, more efficent...
Ca18, less power, less torque, smaller, heavier...
It has its advantages, but so does the sr20

Sorry bout the double post :P

[skindoe]

good point. ca18 has its advantages, but so does the sr. either way, i enjoy driving both. :-) but nissan did stop production of the ca cause of production costs. thats a fact!

[jazza]

debatable :)
I think they was always going to upgrade from 1.8 to 2L tho dont u?

[skindoe]

it is possible that they could have had a ca20det on the drawing boards, i know they produced a ca20e. would have been interesting to see. But the ca18has a 'bucket and shim' style setup in the head. this allows stronger,smoother, quieter operation and the ability to maintain integrity at a high rpm in comparison to a 'rocker' style setup in the head or a sr. thats why so many people admire the design of the ca18 from a mechanical point of veiw. but this design also ultimately became its demise cause it cost so much to produce the head(among other things-crank girdle etc) so nissan started looking at other motor designs to take over where the ca left off. i dont know if you ve ever pulled a ca18 apart, but if you have, all the piston looking things under the camshaft are shims. each and ever one of them are produced with a maximum clearence of 0.058 of a mm between the shim and the head. close, eh? thats an example of how close the tolerances are in a ca18 head and thats why they costed so much to build. in a sr, you just slap in a rocker assembly thats adjustable.

[jazza]

Nar i havnt opened one up, well not past the coils/spark plugs haha :P
I heard they rev so well because bore/stroke is very close? Cant remember exact figures, where as the sr20 isnt as close (a few mm off), thus the ca is rev happy n sr isnt.
Im not a engine wizard.. and obviously dont know as much as yourself so ill settle on the arguement.. :)

[Injured Pegus]

jus wondering can u stroke a sr to a 2.5?
you can stroke a ca up to 2.5....
the ca is a stronger engine

[SeGGy]

the only reason sr20det is more popular than the ca18det is bcoz the parts are cheaper due to its massive aftermarket support, everyone makes parts for em
i think rhys said that the HKS cams only cost $200 more than stock..thats amazing
id choose ca18det over an sr20det for an exa any day!

[jazza]

Ive never in my life seen a ca18det stroked to ca25det.
Can you show me the website of the ppl who do this? Ie Jun, Tomei etc?
I believe the sr20 can be stroked to 2.2 and i dont think there is others

[Omni]

if you could stroke it to 2.5 the pistons would be out of the block
lol

[SIR _NX]

Hi Boostboy,
interesting you talk about lack of top end in an sr20 - probably why nissan developed the GTiR!! Quad throttles and larger turbo=kickass top end... I have just installed one into my NX Coupe and found that it is the top end of the rev range where it performs the best! As with any engine, the way it performs is related to how well turbo's, intakes and exhausts are matched... for top end performance, the T25 is perfectly sized for the smaller 1.8ltr CA motor - the same turbo on the 2.0 SR is a little small and runs out of efficiency before the redline..... Hence the reason the larger T28 is now used on later model S14/15's. My advice to you is go for a drive in a car with an SR20det and a car with a CA18det. Physically feel the difference between the power delivery of the two engines and then decide what's for you. I like a boost "HIT" rather than progressive boost buildup, so I have the SR with the bigger turbo. In the end it will all depend on what kind of power delivery you want........

[SeGGy]

not true omni
there are a group of pplz in melbourne who know exactly how to make the ca18det to 2.5ltr
i wouldnt laff
they choose em over sr20det's these days

GTiR engine is just a beast however....

[GTS20tExa]

JUN and Tomei have 2.0 and 2.2 stroker kits for the CA18 and SR20 respectivaly, they retail in Australia for $13,500 even SubZero in NSW who 'make' their own 2.2 kit for the SR20 sell it for $13,500. It would be cheaper to fly to Japan and buy the parts from them out right.

[jazza]

Yea.. its stupid i mean id never buy a stroker kit from these for that much... go buy an rb26dett and you'll have it running in most cars for under 13.5k!!!
Then stroke that ;) hahaha

[SeGGy]

the ca25det isnt done by using a stroker kit
genisis racing have perfected the art
they have no website running
like i said, they choose the ca18det sr20det's for this reason
the ca18det are stronger and they have a larger potential, even tho the sr20det has more readily avalible parts, the ca is stronger

[xXPnOY_PiMPXx]

how do you make a ca18 into a ca20

[oliverfehr]

bigger bore and stroke.

[Hairball]

Oh no... not this thread again....
Will the debate ever end? lol

[HiToRiKo]

sr20 imo is better simply cause its still being made and there will be more parts both stock and aftermarket avaliable for alot longer

[LiquidNeon]

wowie... talk about raising the dead! this thread wasnt touched since july 2004!

ca and sr are apples and oranges.... the only thing that they share is that they are both fruit! and by that I mean they are both nissan I4's...

lets all agree the both these motor kick the crap out of ga16's!

[KAMELEON]

ca25? that would have paper thin cylinder walls and a low rev limit. bit of a waste if you as for to push a ca that far. the engine will be quite weak all for 700 extra cc's stop playing wioth toys and build up a 2.5 litre qr25de if 2.5 litres of nissan is your game.both engines are good in their respective forms and both have downsides get over it.

[DEVILsEXA]

Well how about the old FJ20 aye... now that would flog the CA and SR! :P

Mind you the KA24DE aint all that bad either!!!

[kitten 88EXA]

would the fj20 fit in an exa? my mate has a dr30 skyline with the fj and it FLYS!

[KAMELEON]

fj would be hard as its very broad and has a wide sump. it would also require adfapter plates etc. the fj is the gun nissan 4 cylinder. being very bulky etc but also very fucking strong.expect and this isnt a preminition that the qr25de will be the next "gun" engine. although the internals arnt as strong as a fj people will build hipo bits for these engines.