http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...550789048&rd=1
I figured it'd be perfect. Considering your last few cars.
ATTN: Brittney. I found your next car.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...550789048&rd=1
I figured it'd be perfect. Considering your last few cars.
too bad I showed you the link, dumbass!
What a waste of a 240, 7M, why not RB25?
E
I love how it says it has the rear end of a 98 240. Yeah mine never looked like it was hacked up, zenki tailights, and dual exhaust.
God thats worse than a CA and almost as old.
Wow, someone has no faith in the 1.8L....Originally Posted by wtfISaPRIMERA?
-91 240SX -- CA18 Power...SOLD, now terrorizing the streets of Alabama
HAHA nope. Neither do Nissan engineers. Ask them how bad they suck and why did they put in an SR20 after 2 years.
Yeah CA's are junk.
Or how about Nissan got broke in the early 90s, and rather than sacrificing the VQ and RB series, they nixxed the CA, and put in a motor with a shitty head (no offense to my SR'ed friends)...
Last I heard, the CA was the motor used in all the Nissan entries into the Formula Nippon series.
CA has a higher redline
Cast iron block
Weighs damn near 50 lbs less
Size wise, makes the SR look like a 6 cylinder
And for the money I save on the half cut, I'll buy intake, exhaust, and a boost controller, and make the same power.
Don't knock it just b/c it's older and was replaced by something that's become the biggest bandwagon in the last 4 years.
BTW, do you REALLY expect to convince someone that a motor that has rocker arm stoppers is REALLY designed better than a motor without them?
-91 240SX -- CA18 Power...SOLD, now terrorizing the streets of Alabama
CA's don't rev as high as an SR. The rev limiter hits at 7200 stock compared with 7500 on an SR.
SR's have a better head design but the CA has a better block and slightly better valvetrain. So what, we have rocker arm stoppers? Doesn't mean the valvetrain sucks.
The reason the SR's are the band wagon now is because bang for your buck, parts avaliability,newer, more potential for big power and so on.
Toyota uses 3sgte's in their race car's does that make 2j's suck?
Last time I checked, the CA redline was 7600.
SR = 1 lobe per 2 valves, CA = 1 lobe per valve. The rocker arms have often been claimed as the weakest part of the SR, from some incidents that I've read, I've decided I'd rather use my money on more parts than preventative maintenance.
CA's are very potent, parts aren't insanely hard to come by like people make them out to be. Yes, I know the age is a real hard hitter in the CA, and that a rebuild should be performed before installing the motor.
And that's just comparing apples to oranges. You can't say that the CA is to the SR like the 3S is to the 2J. We're comparing 2 4 cyl turbos to each other, not a 4 cyl turbo to a 6 cyl twin.
If you wanna compare like that, then we'd have to talk about the differences between the CA and the RB...only difference I can think of, is the CA's lack of 2 cylinders...everything else in the CA is based of the RB's design as well...
So once again, I think the CA has a better overall design than the SR...
But that's my opinion, and I won't sway from it, and I can see you won't sway from yours (not that I'm trying to get you to).
-91 240SX -- CA18 Power...SOLD, now terrorizing the streets of Alabama
i thought that they canned the CA cuz it was more expensive to make than the SR.
=\ i like cam on lifter over rocker arms, but the after market for the SR kills the CA and it's a lot easier to get a good SR than a CA.
if it came down to it, i might even think about KA-T....
Last edited by HaloZ; 05-21-2005 at 05:20 PM.
Wondered when you'd pop up, Ric.
-91 240SX -- CA18 Power...SOLD, now terrorizing the streets of Alabama
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
