8000 rpm KA24DE?

What would you need to run 8000 rpm safely in a KA24DE.  I know its $, but i plan on getting everything in the engine rebuilt for 32 PSI of turbo anyway.  I figured i would need new cams, completely new valve-train for the head, along with tons of material removed from the ports.  I want to get custom JE pistons @ somewhere around 7.5:1 - 8.0:1 and pauter custom titanium x-beam rods.  I then wanted to get the block sleeved with ductile steel cylinders and an o-ringed head.  The crank has me thinking though.  It's forged so should i just have it worked on and if so what can you do to it, or should i just have crower or someone like that make a custom billet one?  Anything else that i would need to rev to 8000 rpm w/ 32+ PSI & nitrous?
Oh yeah, i want to get magnesium or titanium retainers, dual valve-springs, and (any suggestions on material???  Maybe titanium, or stainless steel??) lightweight oversized valves.  I would be looking for a powerband between ~5000-8000 rpms w/ quarter times in the high 9's - low 10's w/ a T-76 turbo.

[ca18guy]

Why try to make the engine something it isn't?  Work with what the engine gives ya (a stout/torquey powerband)  Anyway I guess destroke it to say 2.2 liters, upgrade everything in the head, upgrade internals while your at it, knife edge crank all the good stuff. Even then your just making the motor something it isn't, so it may not work the way you expect.

[Nismos14]

hmmmmm is 32 lbs 2 bar?

[thewholefnshow]

No, a little more. 1 bar is 14 psi so 2 is 28... and 32 psi though a t-76 turbo? That is nuts. And why do you have to spin to 8000 rpms? Your are building a torqu machine if you use the ka, so you would get more low end no matter what. I would look to keep peak between 4 and 6.5 and you will be fine. higher revs won't mean faster necesarrally and you won't have to sppin that high to get that turbo to spin, it should be up and ready by 4.

[chinderer]

Well still, could i rev it at least to 7000-7200 rpm with the stock crank and just single valve-springs?

[boosteds14]

i would go with dual, thats what i got. but 32psi. i am sorry i dont believe that. u will need to put a crazy cams in and a custom intake manifold. i mean, oo aaa. 32psi, anybody can make 32psi but can u get the hp with 32psi. if u dont have the correct airflow u will have the turbo building pressure in the motor  but not going in and comingout of the motor correctly.

and do u think this will be street driveable, what about traction, driveshaft, axles, and tranny, and stage 3 open air wastegate. it will be a pure drag car w/32 psi and NOS. it is possible but the money to put into it is insane.

[S13Grl]

I am in no way supporting your idea of 32psis, but would like to know if you ever do get this done.

Now, just so you know, the KA block is unbelievably strong. The crankshaft can handle up to some 450-500 horses before it's endangered. You could very well take it out and have someone freeze it if you'd like, since you'd be rebuilding the rest of the motor, but it's not absolutely necessary if you plan to push less then 450hp.

[sykikchimp]

He Would need to push the rev's higher on the engine on a turbo that large though.  Lag would be crazy.  Would finish spooling till around 5,500 rpm.  If your lucky.  Shit, why not run a twin turbo setup, and reduce the lag and keep the RPM's lower.  Plus it would be unique.  How many Twin turbo KA's are there???

Of course if you gonna shoot N20 then that'll straighten out the huge turbo lag problem.  I think if you did all that to the car, you'b be running low 9's High 8's.  That would be INSANITY!!!  Shit, you'd have to get the wheel wells Drummed just to get enough rubber on the ground to get traction.

[luey02]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from thewholefnshow on 11<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':0'>4 am on Feb. 26, 2002
No, a little more. 1 bar is 14 psi so 2 is 28... and 32 psi though a t-76 turbo? That is nuts. And why do you have to spin to 8000 rpms? Your are building a torqu machine if you use the ka, so you would get more low end no matter what. I would look to keep peak between 4 and 6.5 and you will be fine. higher revs won't mean faster necesarrally and you won't have to sppin that high to get that turbo to spin, it should be up and ready by 4.
</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>


Being able to rev to 8000 is faster than revin to 6000 on the same engine. &nbsp;You'll be able to stay in lower gear longer which will get you faster start. &nbsp;

[DuffMan]

Some people SAY the stock valves can take 8000rpms, but to be really safe I would start looking into a custom solution.

Obviously you would want a custom ground cam optimised for high RPM and turbo application.

I'd say stick with stock stroke. It seems to work well at this stroke despite the sense that it seems like too much for a high powered 4 banger.

[White240sx]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Chinderer on 10:18 am on Feb. 26, 2002
w/ quarter times in the high 9's - low 10's w/ a T-76 turbo.
</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

The current 10-second full interior (~3000lbs) KA24DET S14 ran its record time on a STOCK head. You don't need all of those flashy, expensive parts (why sleeve an iron block?). Just work the bottom end and then focus efforts on gutting the interior, bracing the chassis and setting up a competent drag launch suspension set up; low 10's won't be too far off.

luey02, exactly my point. &nbsp;An engine that had that much boost could still make unbeleivable power but each gear would be very shortlived. &nbsp;Also, i intended to use nitrous only to spool the large turbo, not any actual peak power adder. &nbsp;I would intend the car to still be driveable, only without the high boost and nitrous. &nbsp; &nbsp;

boosteds14, Traction would be my major concern, rather an obstacle. &nbsp;I guess i would end up running 10.5 in. or 11 in. slicks and hope to still grab some. &nbsp;Other than that, because of the fact that the nissan tranny's and rears are near indestructable, I would only worry about the clutch. &nbsp;For this i was going to get ClutchMasters to make one of their twin-disc setups. &nbsp;The other thing, cams and int. manifold, i am already working on a sheetmetal intake with 4 indivisual throttle bodies. &nbsp;The cams are another story. &nbsp;I don't know what to get done. &nbsp;I'm trying to decide what company to custom grind the cams. &nbsp;Any suggestions?

[S13Grl]

JWT is definitely the most popular as far as the cams go. I would contact them regarding this matter.

Also, contact CTC Motorsports (http://www.ctcmotorsports.com). They've taken over as the sponsors of the 10.86 second KA24DE+T that belonged to Duy in Texas. They're doing the cams and all the headwork that the car previously didn't have done to it, but still ran a 10-sec 1/4 mile.

[s15dude]

Remember that kid that claimed that he had built a 10,000 RPM KA and he said that it blew up on the freeway? Somebody pulled the B.S. flag and we never heard from him again.

[boosteds14]

since there are not alot of people doing things like this to there ka, cams would be very hard to get the right grind. it is more like a trial and error process. unlike hondas where everything possible has been done and tested. i mean 10s timeslips are so dope but 9s timeslips are hard to believe and having it streetable.
check out my site, i got some shit on there but nothing like what u want. i made mine into a streetable 12s car and a 11s track car.

ps. my suggestion--get linelock, i love it, i am having some much fun with it and it does the job --hehe

http://boosteds14.tripod.com/1997nissan240sxturbo

[wherezmytofu]

main question...do u plan 2 drive it one the street?....with 32psi i really dought that would be possible....also...7.5compression ratio w/ 32psi......100 octane wont cut it...your car will will be drive on 110 octane all the way.....

now my help:
*the ka engines powerband doesnt really go that hight but what the heck right? <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'>

u'll need an all titanium valve train...u can get titanium valves from crower, and springs, titanium retainers, u get can titanium hydrolic lifters from a machines shop...and all the other parts from teh valvetrain..im not sure but since the ka uses a timing chain u'd probuly need a lighter one....the key is a super light valvetrain..less mass = less rotaion mass = higher reving! <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'>

believe me....32psi with a t76 turbo = 8's...fuck 9s-10s....of course u wont be ever driving it on the streets <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':('>

[misnomer]

An 8000 RPM car will ONLY be faster than a 6800 RPM car ONLY if it keeps the same torque characteristics. The reason Honda 4 cyls need to rev to 8000 RPMs and the KA spins to 6800 is primarily because the engine is not as powerful (yes, not as powerful). It needs the pistons firing that much more often to get the power out of them. Same deal with drag cars. You could build a bitchin' high revving car, and still lose to a torquier, low revving car simply because it produces more power in the lower RPM range.

Of course I'm just wasting my time here, because we all know this already. ####, you want a high-revving KA, go for it. It's an uncommon implimentation. I do agree that sleeves will likely not be necessery. They were put to use on aluminum engines because the blocks flex when things get hot. Of course, we all know that too. . .

I'mma just go away now :-)

[drift freaq]

ok, you want a high reving KA then you get to step into expirimentation land. There is a theory put out by a member a much respected member that you could possibly use a crank out of a Z22 engine that was one of the forebearers to the KA it is a fully counterwieghted 2200cc crankshaft if the crank journals are the same then you will be in business. You will then be destroking your engine to 92mm which will make it pretty rev happy. IF you are going to do this you want to cross drill and chamfer the oil gallerys on the crank, and knife edge it. Also deburr the inside of your block. Get yourself a gated oil pan to cut down on oil slosh(oil slosh actually impedes rotation of the crank. bad at high revs:() get some forged 8:1 pistons. Balance the whole bottom end also either get a lightwieght flyweel or lighten the steel one( I have a lightened flywheel in my car and its pretty #### cool) . ON the top end you need to have cams ground that are longer duration(remember folks this is not a HOnda hahahaha) don't worry to much about lift. the idea is to keep the valves open as long as possible so the Turbo can pack a denser charge in the combustion chamber. upgrading your valve springs would be a good idea. Ok on the intake side indvidual throttle bodies is seriously overkill and completely unnecssary. Get 720cc or even 850cc injectors. Cobra maf or even a stand alone computer with map(tec II). Yes computer reprogramming is very important here.
Now on your Turbo a T76 is not needed get a good T3/T4 ball bearing hybrid with a very large trim i.e. .83 these mods should put you in the ball park of where you want to be .
Oh yeah my stock engine(91, lightened flywheel,intake,exhaust) revs to 7K right now and several socal240sx.org people have seen it in action. Soon to be Turbo:biggrin:

[Drift Style S14]

how does it rev to 7k? i guess i don't understand what you said, could you please explain it to me

(Edited by Drift Style S14 at 4:21 pm on Feb. 27, 2002)

[DrDubbleB]

Ok, Chinderer, I got as far as you saying that you would still want this to be a streetable car before I had to say something.
The turbo you plan on having on that is not a street friendly turbo, no matter what boost you are running it at, be it 32 PSI or 7.
Remember you would also have to upgrade the fuel system immensly, I don't even know how massive the injectors would have to be to handle the kind of flow that you would require.
The cams that you would have to upgrade to would not be very streetable either, it would have a very very tough time idling.
If you can do it, and actually make it streetable...more power to you, anything is possible with enough $$$ as they say.

I am well aware that it's more than just bolting on a big turbo and running it. &nbsp;The specs i gave were general and I am only in the beginning stages. &nbsp;However, I do realize that a T-76 isn't going to be streetable. &nbsp;I am now leaning more towards sykikchimp's idea of twin turbo's. &nbsp;I like that idea of that, and the fact that i could get used or remanufactured TD04's for much cheaper than the T-76 with ceramic ball-bearings, a wet housing , and tuff-turbo option that I wanted.

[drift freaq]

drift style s14 asks me.....
how does it rev to 7k? i guess i don't understand what you said, could you please explain it to me

----------------------------------------------------------------------

what do you mean how does it rev to 7k?? 7K or 7000rpm. Now my rev limiter does not kick in till 7.2 don't ask way ? Probably because the car was an auto originally . My top speed is also 126. mph:biggrin:
Beyond that the engine just spins right up there plain and simple . when I go to shift it drops back right into the peak of the rev band.
Results ? Acceleration. hehehehehe

Ok now on to chinderer, chinderer did you even read my post?? Everything I outlined is what you need to do to get what you desire. Twin Turbo's on a I4 is just foolish. One, there is no need . Two , unless your goal is be mister show car, which i think it is not,then its a waste of extra money that could be used in other areas Twin Turbo setups are usually a six cylinder or V8 thing because of the size of the engines and the banks of cylinders.
Do you really know what you are proposing?
I Suggest you pick up some books on Turbo charging and start reading.

I know that inline-four twin turbo set-ups are few and far between, but for my purposes (almost all-track car), twin-turbos are not only would spool much easier than a T-72 or T-76, but would also make the car much easier for me to handle. &nbsp;Not suggesting that it will be easy to handle, just that it would be much more easy to drive without the use of nitrous to spool the turbo. &nbsp;And, of course, the fact that it would be a twin turbo four cylinder would be unique to boot. &nbsp;I am also leaning more towards all track vehicle, which means going all out, so twin-turbo would be a very intriguing possibility.

[drift freaq]

ok chinderer you seem to have tunnel vision. What I laid out in a previous post would put you right on target HP wise and rev wise for a track car. You seemed to totally ignore the suggestions and cling to this crazy idea of a huge Turbo or Twin Turbo setup.
Now people seem to get upset around here when I bring up my experience but its times like this where I just have to speak up. You are idea's are offbase . What I layed out for you was logical and doable and it would get what your looking for . I have been around these cars and engines for over 20 years and I don;t want to come off as being smug. That is not the intention, the intention is to help you, and suggest you listen to people that have a good idea of what they are talking about . Ideas that pop into are heads are great, but then you have to research and ask questions to see if they are feasible. Now you have started to do that but everytime someone (and I am not the only one in this thread) points out its illogical and gives you good suggestions you ignore them and jump on the next illogical idea.
Do we have to beat you over the head with a baseball bat? To get you to wake up and realize, there are people here who have the knowledge and ability to steer you in the direction you want to go <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt='???'>?With more standard tried and true ways, rather than pie in the sky ideas??
I will say this again, go out and get some books on Turbo charging and start reading them.
Maximum Boost by Corky Bell would be a real good start

[boosteds14]

WELL twin turbo might not work. remember u got 2-cylinders powering one turbo while with one turbo setup u got four cylinders to power the turbo. u wont get enough &nbsp;back pressure on the turbine to acutally spin the compressor.

take a look at www.turbonetics.com and look at the compressor maps. i dont think u are going to have enough back pressure. plus with the t76 the boost will not generate until mid range rpms. maybe u should look at a t62-1. just think, i just bought a t60-1 hifi, and i will boost up to 25-28psi. with the right airflow and optimal hp figures. for 32psi i believe u need a t62-1, it is more race then street

Also i wanted to get cylinder sleeves because i wanted to go with a bigger bore. &nbsp;Without sleeve's what will the stock block take? &nbsp;I've never heard of anyone boosting enough to have any problems with the block. &nbsp;Same with the crank. &nbsp;What will the crank take? &nbsp;I've revised my plan to, already stated, twin-turbo but with revs only to 7200 or so. &nbsp;I was just finding opinions on the high rev idea, but it seems too complicated and rather impractical. &nbsp;Also, the intake manifold with four indivisual throttle bodies, is this not needed for a turbo set-up? &nbsp;I've did some more research and have only seen them on N/A cars. &nbsp;Should i just make a manifold for just the one throttle body or the four? &nbsp; &nbsp;

Also i wanted to get cylinder sleeves because i wanted to go with a bigger bore. &nbsp;Without sleeve's what will the stock block take? &nbsp;I've never heard of anyone boosting enough to have any problems with the block. &nbsp;Same with the crank. &nbsp;What will the crank take? &nbsp;I've revised my plan to, already stated, twin-turbo but with revs only to 7200 or so. &nbsp;I was just finding opinions on the high rev idea, but it seems too complicated and rather impractical. &nbsp;Also, the intake manifold with four indivisual throttle bodies, is this not needed for a turbo set-up? &nbsp;I've did some more research and have only seen them on N/A cars. &nbsp;Should i just make a manifold for just the one throttle body or the four? &nbsp; &nbsp;

Also i wanted to get cylinder sleeves because i wanted to go with a bigger bore. &nbsp;Without sleeve's what will the stock block take? &nbsp;I've never heard of anyone boosting enough to have any problems with the block. &nbsp;Same with the crank. &nbsp;What will the crank take? &nbsp;I've revised my plan to, already stated, twin-turbo but with revs only to 7200 or so. &nbsp;I was just finding opinions on the high rev idea, but it seems too complicated and rather impractical. &nbsp;Also, the intake manifold with four indivisual throttle bodies, is this not needed for a turbo set-up? &nbsp;I've did some more research and have only seen them on N/A cars. &nbsp;Should i just make a manifold for just the one throttle body or the four? &nbsp; &nbsp;

[boosteds14]

individual throttle bodies arent needed, u want to make a manifold with one throttle body that has less restrictions and better aiflow to the ports giving the boosted pressure an eaiser way to get into the engine

[ca18guy]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Chinderer on 12:36 pm on Feb. 28, 2002
Also i wanted to get cylinder sleeves because i wanted to go with a bigger bore. Without sleeve's what will the stock block take? I've never heard of anyone boosting enough to have any problems with the block. Same with the crank. What will the crank take? I've revised my plan to, already stated, twin-turbo but with revs only to 7200 or so. I was just finding opinions on the high rev idea, but it seems too complicated and rather impractical. Also, the intake manifold with four indivisual throttle bodies, is this not needed for a turbo set-up? I've did some more research and have only seen them on N/A cars. Should i just make a manifold for just the one throttle body or the four?
</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

Allright you can't really bore it that much cause it would make for a really thin gap between the cylinders. &nbsp;Twin turbo's would be a horrible idea, better off with a nice hybrid turbo. Now nobody is gonna get to in depth with this, if you have enough money to do all of these things you listed, then you have enough money to talk to a proffesional tuner. &nbsp;Either that or buy a bunch of books on how engine's/turbo's work (even then it isn't gaurenteed you'll completely understand it) You'll also relize why twin turboing a 4 cylinder is pointless.

[sykikchimp]

lol.. &nbsp;he took me seriously.. &nbsp;ROFL. &nbsp;anyway.. The reason they run seprate intakes on each cylinder on N/A is because they can get more air in the cylinder that way. &nbsp;With Turbo, there is already WAY more air going in. &nbsp;To do with turbo you'd have one pipe comming from intercooler, then seperating into 4 pipes to the intakes.. &nbsp;Extremely restrictive, and hard to control Manifold pressure.

[White240sx]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from ca18guy on 1<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':0'>9 pm on Feb. 28, 2002
Twin turbo's would be a horrible idea</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

Not necessarily:

http://forums.freshalloy.com/forum/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=9;t=008871

[eddy770]

havent you been listening to the advice that people are giving you drift freaq and boosted have already said that TT is not as good T, and whats with your insistance on 4 seperate throttle bodys, also S13grl already said that the crank supports up to 450 hp.

Thank You White240sx!!! &nbsp;I think i found my new favorite forum. &nbsp;What i'm getting at now is what would be better to make 650+ HP?

Those motors on the freshalloy forum must have some practicality to them or all the money wouldn't have been spent on them.

[ca18guy]

Read the actual posts under the pictures. Those look nice but they don't offer you a greater capacity of HP. &nbsp;All those pretty formulas there throwing around are just theory's... &nbsp;I really don't care for arguing though, go talk to a professional and they can laugh at you.

[chinderer]

I'm not trying to find, or imply, which one makes more peak HP, rather which will make the HP with a more linear powerband.

[White240sx]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Chinderer on 8:34 pm on Feb. 28, 2002
Thank You White240sx!!! I think i found my new favorite forum. What i'm getting at now is what would be better to make 650+ HP?
</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

650+ streetable horsepower isn't going to happen with 4-cylinders and pump gas. For that much power why don't you step up to a 6? You have the RB series, VG series, and even the 2jz if you've got the money. A VG30ET would probably be the most cost effective route, as well as the most compact installation, but the I-6s are going to yield more streetable power over all (the 2jz particularly).

The TT SR's in those pictures are mostly just TAS items. Just like bodywork is all the rage in the states, engine work is popular in Japan.