One thing I have learned about IA. No matter how right you are, and what argument you bring, you're still a moron. It's like highschool. This is a popularity contest.
One thing I have learned about IA. No matter how right you are, and what argument you bring, you're still a moron. It's like highschool. This is a popularity contest.
Unfortunately, you just surf around getting called a moron without being right or having good arguements.Originally Posted by nelson9995
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
Please learn to multi-quote. Two post in a row is not a big deal, four is just pointless. Mentioning that you are in your phone (if that is the case) doesn't help.
That is all.
1993 240SX single cam
Let me go ahead and end this for you, faggot. A 500whp NA LSx motor in a basic suspension setup fox body will walk both the 600whp RB26 car and SR20.
That's all you need to know.
NA LSx > 100hp more boosted 4/6 cylinder.
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
My point is that it is almost completely impossible to have the same conditions for both cars. There will always be more variables than just maximum hp and tq figures.
I will start with the assumption that we are starting from a dig.
Boost lag should be neligible as you can pre-spool and load up a turbo.
Different engine make different tq curves and have different values for volumetic efficiency. In this arguement over which engine is better, what you should be discussing is volumetric efficiency. Any other comparisons are useless as arguing points.
THANKS FOR PROVING MY POINT YOU FUCKING DICKHEAD
a 4 cylinder 2.0 sr20 WILL NOT outrun a 6 cylinder rb26 motor assuming both have the same amount of work/money in it
GOD DAMN you fuckers keep proving my point and not seeing it
What the fuck did you just get from me letting you in on a well known secret that fox body + lsx = owning everything?
God damn.
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
Thank you
It is known fact that the rb25/26 and ka24 all have a better powercurve than the sr20 and make more power per psi assuming everything is equal and proportional.
Doesn't this prove my point?
Why can't a sr20 make more than 450whp on pump gas?
Why can the other 3 motors break 500whp with a stock head and pump gas?
You proved my point
why will it win with 100whp less NA?
BECAUSE IT HAS A WAYY BETTER POWERBAND AND NO BOOSTLAG you prick
case closed
So boostlag doesn't matter when you shift?
A 800whp rb26 will walk away from a 800whp sr20 on every shift, and last twice as long ... assuming both start from a roll, have no traction issues, or at least with the same driver
The only logical explanation I have for your lack of logical thinking is female genitalia.
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
LMAO. I beat those all the time
you made yourself prove my point.
Thank you.
really
I was starting to get frustrated
I don't think that you are understanding what I am saying.
Volumetric efficiency is not "powercurve".
It is possible for a 4 cyl to have better VE than a 6 cyl. I am not familiar with specific Nissan engines VE to state conclusions without looking them up.
Torque curve is not "powercurve", as power is not the same as torque. Torque is a defined measurement of pound-foot (not foot-pound) .
Power is how much work can be performed in a specific time period.
or please explain to me why you believe that lsx will walk any turbo 4/6 cylinder with 100+whp??
or is it just because the lsx is badass lol
I am going to use actual numbers wo we understand each other.
If one motor (2.4/ starts building boost at 3k) makes 480whp 470wtq (built block stock head) and redlines at 7.5k
The other (2.0/ start buildng boost at 4k) makes 480 whp 390wtq (fully built on race gas) and redlines at 8k
Which one you believe has a better powerband?
Which one you believe will have more boost lag?
Which one would you chose to make 700whp?
No. Boostlag will only matter if you don't know how to drive. You can easily minimize boost lag with an auto running a custom converter or by powershifting a stick. For drag, you would generally run a built automatic.
Your scenarios are attempting to compare two engine by complete packages of car and driver. This is futile and rediculous. If you want to compare two motors you have to look at the VE of the engines.
You can also make a fat girl look skinny with a tummy tuck
lol
Which one will be more reliable at 700 whp?
You should go back to trying to get people to drop your name at the club rather than engaging in conversations concerning automobiles and internal combustions engines.
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
please get out. someone tell him he proved himself wrong with the lsx rb26 comment lol
In this scenario that you present, either motor could be used and in the same chassis, could do the same times. Just comparing maximum hp and tq figures mean nothing. You need to know the graph plot of the engine across the rpm range.
I'm not sure that you understand how horsepower and toque are measured an d how you utilize those measurement to plan usage of power output in a meaningful way.
I like Dragons.
the 2.4 makes is already making more power at 3k, 4k, 5k, 6k, 7k, and also starts spooling 1k earlier
how about now?
I believe you guys are just trolling me now. lets be real
God I wish sinfix still had his car.
That's easy. If the engine has enough block and component strength, and has an experienced and competent builder, with a tuner who understands how to tune for volumetric efficiency, then the motor should live without issue. In other words , both should be reliable as long as those conditions are met.
You can't just say that one motor is always better than another because it is bigger. I see 363ci motors easily outrun 440ci motors plenty, and last longer.
THAT IS NOT WHAT IM SAYING
the sr is an aluminum block (prone to warp)
ka24 is iron
so which one would you say has a better powerband?
less boostlag?
and which one would you chose to make 700whp.
please answer my 3? so I can get out this thread
So a 1000whp b16 is just as reliable as a 1000whp ls7 given they are both tuned correctly?
Still too many variables unanswered. You are simply looking for someone to say that "bigger is always better", rather than try to understand the truth.
lmfao. This is sadly hilarious.
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
THE KA24 has been proven to make more power with less so have the other 2 motors
I'm not saying bigger is better. In the 4 motors I have stated yes it is better
If the sr20 guys are happy at 2.0 why do they all go 2.1/2.2/2.3 when they sleeve?
If size wasn't a factor and if the turbo is the replacement for the displacement why not leave it 2.0 and run an extra psi or 2 to make up for it?
have a nice night guys
Aluminum blocks are used all the time in racing. They are less prone to hot spots and can be easily sleeved. Heat is the greatest enemy of engines and aluminum is better until you get to extremely high hp cars.
My problem here is that everything powerwise that I have stated has been proven.
It has been proven that a ka24 can make 500whp pump gas stock head
It has been proven a 500whp sr20 can't be seen w/o a built head
Also has been proven that a ka24 will make power down lower along with extra tq that the sr20 can't find
this closes my argument
do you see why I am arguing now?
Like Mazworx's 1000hp SR20 that is stock stroke and only .5mm over standard for the bore? Do you realize how little .5mm is as far as power is concerned?
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
LOL
There is a 1000whp KA on a stock block (not pistons/rods) and crank
go to ka-t.org and educated yourself
GTFO
Reply With Quote
