Mad Crazy Idea!!!!!!

ok guys, this may seem like a stupid idea. Thats why im posting it. Ok you all know im saving for the ka-t setup. I have 2500 saved to date. BUT i was thinking, i could buy an s13 silvia sr20det front clip. IT HAS to be an s13 silvia so i could use the front end for a conversion. If i cant get that, then im not going sr. SO, when you order an sr20, do you get what they send or can you tell them specifically that you want a silvia front. I mean i would get a turbo engine and a front end all in one shot. I know the front end may be dinged dented and what not, im not worried about that. As long as there not mangled to hell and still usable, i can knock little shit out. PLUS this leaves me with an EXTRA ka lying around the house. So.....i thought that i could just do a little clean up job to that and just buy new pistons(and whatever else seems to be worn out), and just have a reliable ka-t that would be no greater than 8lbs of boost. I could throw that into my auto hatch, and cruise that as the daily driver. Nothing big and outstanding, just a reliable engine to run low low boost on.

My job is really boring, and gives you all the time in the world to think up random shit, so thats how i came up with this lol. I dunno it seems good to me. The ka-t prolly wouldnt be done for a while though. I want a ka-t so bad!!!! But a front end and an sr is about the same price as a ka-t. So i figured why not!!! Then the extra ka, i mean i dunno wtf to do!!! Tell me if i have officially gone retarded!!!!!! I know i made it sound so easy on here, but you get what im saying.

well, i emailed Jarco for info on the CA18DET, it'd cost $2100 for a front clip (also comes with an LSD! :naughty:) but they don't come with any body parts or headlights, it would cost about $900 more to get it with the complete front end they said

however, venus-auto has s13 front end conversions for $600!! i've asked for pics of one i could possibly get, so if it's good, i'll let you know if it's worth it

but ya, generally front clips do not come with body parts unless you pay extra, so for a sr20det front clip with body parts i'd imagine it'd cost around $3k, which isn't too far off the average ka-t kit

Its up to you man. Just lay out your goals, desires, and most of all, needs, and see what that leaves you with.

The clips don't come with body parts anymore, they take off the fenders/hood/bumper/headlights/brackets because they can sell those seperatly for a little under a grand and still sell the clip for the same price.

doesn't sound bad at all.

so basically you've gone from a ka-t guy... to a sr-guy.

not at all!!!!!!! im definantly a ka-t guy. As i mentioned i still want a ka-t. But why not have both, but since they say that the front clips dont come with the body mods i dont know now. Ill have to do some more research. I just thought if i could get a silvia front with a turbo motor why the hell not do it!!! Cuz i want a silvia front bad, i hate the one-via look, i think hatches look better with flip ups. Then id have my ka left over after i swap the sr, to build up then put in my other ride. I mean just a minor ka-t setup. you know, like fmu, small turbo, not a major setup. Like i said, around 7-8 psi on the ka-t. Doing all that sounds like im getting more for my money, rather than just buying a fully rebuilt ka engine with mani and a dp. I mean id get a sr20(hopefully runs lol) with a front clip. So id have a performance enhancer (over stock ka) and a looks enhancer (because my personal preferance) all for the same price as bascially just a rebuilt ka engine, unless i have some one go down and pick up the ka rather than having it shipped. But still that would cost me some jack too.

I dont know, like i said it was just a random crazy idea that got me thinking. I still have to do some mass researching to see whats the best ins and outs. Just thought id run it by you guys to see what you think. Thanx for updating me on the bodyless clips. As i was reading a 3 year old SCC, so i thought i would get body panels.

3-4 years ago, you have gotten all the body panels, but today, they smartened up and realizes they could make more money this way, if you do get body panels, they will be FUBAR.

what is wrong with a liiitttel SR love!!! its light, happy revving motor, with a crappy t25 t that ONCE you swap it out to a T28, i will be the best motor ever...

The only problem I see is that if you still want the KA-T, once you buy the clip, that means start from scratch on the KA-T fund. But IDK. :dunno:

RB25DET swap $2000 shipped....OSAKA JDM MOTORS...

OSAKA is a ripoff unless you go to them in person.

Osaka Motors warning (http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB9&Number=67948657&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1#Post67949965)

I you have $2500 that is more than enough to get your KA-T running. You should be able to get the basic parts for around $1000. The blow off valve and intercooler are optional. My dad bought a 1986 Mustang GT Turbo (same as the 5.0 GT but with a 2.3L turbo 4 cylinder) a few months back and it had just a turbo w/ integral waste gate (which I visually verified) running 10 psi (so my dad said). The 1985.5 SVO used the same 2.3L block but ran something like 15 psi and was intercooled and had the blow off valve. I'd ask to take another look at the 'stang but its been sold and he now has a S2000 (grrrrr). Anyway, the moral to the whole Mustang tale is that unless you have a big, sluggish turbo or a lot of boost you don't need the blow off valve and without a lot of boost you don't have-to-have the intercooler either. Though with $2500 and some good shopping you should be able to get the whole package.

I have a good idea for the turbo scenario: instead of larger injectors, run an additional injector, spraying "into the wind" at the compressor inlet. Spraying upstream will help atomize the fuel so the drops aren't slamming into the compressor vanes and the evaporative cooling would lower the compressor outlet temperature. This isn't actually my idea, its the way the new Ford Cosworth Spec engines for CART are designed. You would need an additional injector controller or perhaps you could trigger the additional injector off one of the injector looms of the factory harness. You probably cannot yet afford this setup if you are going to buy the blow off valve and intercooler. However, the evaporative cooling of the fuel going through the compressor may outway the cooling of the intercooler. I'll be experimenting with this setup once I go KA-T style, but that will be some time from now. I'm determined to get into 13s naturally aspirated and on stock compression, then go turbo!

did that confuse anyone else?

What's confusing you, guy?

my opinion: its worthless to go ka-t if you are running only 5 psi because you dont have an intercooler. all that work for 5 psi? only if you are immediately going to start saving to get the boost higher.

There is no excuse for less than 190-200 WHP at 5 psi w/ no intercooler or BOV. Anything less is a result of poor tuning, or "safe" tuning such as over rich and severely reduced advance. Get a good FMIC and get 210-220 WHP. 7 psi after that should get 230-240 WHP. Some may say that these numbers are too high but it really comes down to the tuning. Ignition advance, plug gap, and A/F ratio are all critical and if you change one you must change the others to match unless you want severely compromised performance. These things must be adjusted to work with various intake charge temperatures and densities. Richer mixtures and more dense air make the formation of the spark more difficult and thus the ignition system must be upgraded or the plug gap reduced. Ignition timing can even change the peak dynamic compression ratio. If I were to dyno tune a car I'd start by adjusting the a/f ratio, then the ignition timing, and finally the plug gap. Repeat the process to get even closer to optimum. And the more high strung you build your engine, the more critical accurate and precise tuning become.

An additional injector is a bad idea. If yo look at the manifold design, its gonna be super hard to get equal distribution to all cylinders. Original idea behind direct port fuel injection is to get a nice equilibrium among all cylinders. Larger injectors+fuel controller is a much better route. I ran 5psi for a while. I run 6psi now because I want to do this the right way and do a tuned ECU+615cc injectors. That way I can safely run more boost than this engine can handle plus when I finish my built engine, I can just swap the stuff over and make 400whp no prob.

Ignition system on the KA will do 500whp before it isn't strong enough to ignite the mixture. An upgraded coil is a must when turboing. Thing is you will be running below .020" gaps which won't blow out, but will make off boost cruising very weird.

I would start timing off based on what I know. Timing retard isn't needed until 8psi and it should be retarded about .5deg per additional psi of boost.

If an additional injector before the turbo won't get even fuel to all the cylinders the turbo isn't going put equal volumes of air to all the cylinders either. Spraying against the air going into the compressor inlet aids in atomization of the fuel. Once the fuel reaches the compressor outlet there won't be any liquid remaining, it will all be vapor due to the temperature increase that occurs from compressing the air and fuel as well as the mixing effect of the compressor wheel. If gasoline in a gaseous state is not evenly distributed to the cylinders, oxygen in a gaseous state will not be evenly distributed either. This principal has been proven to work in Ford Cosworth's XFE Spec engine for the CART series. The intake manifold is a plenum, fed closest to the front cylinders, with runners going from the plenum to each cylinder. Now I'll just copy and paste that statement to describe the KA24DE intake manifold: The intake manifold is a plenum, fed closest to the front cylinders, with runners going from the plenum to each cylinder.

Well...Imagine that. And lets just say that maybe the manifold doesn't evenly distribute the air either. Wouldn't each injector be a different size or run a different pulse width in order to maintain correct a/f ratio in each cylinder? And then each cylinder would require a different plug gap and slight offset in ignition timing. Each crank journal and counter weight would have to have a maching offset. It would be so much easier just to make a manifold the has relatively even flow distribution, and that is what Nissan did.

Now if you have a more powerful ignition system on top of your additional injector you can run a plug gap of .040-.050" and your cruising works well too.

Air has much less intertia than fuel. It can change direction much quicker than fuel. Prolly doesn't distribute equally to all cylinders anyway. But the injectors are placed on top of the manifold for a reason. That is so all of the fuel makes it into the cylinder and doesn't puddle in the bottom of the manifold like it prolly would.

Since when does fuel come out of the injector in a gaseous state? Most high performance injectors aim toward a stream pattern. Call RC injectors and ask. Fuel atomization for high performance engines takes place in the combustion chamber.

Now I'll bet that cosworth engine had the IM plenum on top of the runners, not on the bottom like the KAs right?

Sure can. Powerful ignition is always a plus.

Placing an additional injector before the turbo is a bad idea. The fuel has to travel a long way before it even reaches the combustion chamber. There are a lot of places for it to puddle. Plus if you VTA, fuel will be released into your engine bay. it will puddle really bad in the intercooler.

Fuel comes out of the injector in liquid state, then is vaporized in the compressor housing, there is no liquid to puddle. As I said this system has been provem to work. Write a letter to CART and tell them you have a less expensive and more reliable turbo system to use on the spec engines. Or write Ford Motor Company and tell them. But after you do you'll have more than just me snickering over your rediculess criticism of this layout. :smokin:

BTW: Kudos to RC Engineering for their expertise, but they don't have the R&D facilities and resources of a large automaker. I'm with Ford/Cosworth on this one.

They don't have eight foot of charge piping.

Point of my criticizm is the thought put into this idea, which obviously has potential to work(I haven't said it wouldn't work), should be harnessed into just installing larger injectors and a fuel controller. I'm not writing a letter to anyone as I already have a rather reliable setup without the aid of your/Ford's/Cosworth's superior additional injector design. Do as you wish.

Well dang dude, I'm sharing information and here you come saying it won't work when it already has. Lets lighten up a bit; its like you said, in the end everyone here will do as they wish anyway.

I never said it wouldn't work. I only said it was a bad idea. And I still think it is. As you say Cosworth does what is best, so does Phatka-t, all the high HP KA guys on Ka-T.org. All of them run larger injectors with fuel management. I still don't see the superiority of an additional injector, but I will drop the subject now.

Agree to disagree?

Yeah, we're on the same page now. I almost started thinking you are kind of jerk but now I know better. :wink: