Need some tips on building my n/a KA24DE
09-26-2009, 06:20 AM
#16
Jason is your engine up and running yet?
Last edited by BigVinnie; 09-26-2009 at 06:26 AM.
09-26-2009, 03:38 PM
#17
Not quite yet mang. I'm waiting on this ECU and TB to be shipped back to me, then we'll be popping these bad boys in the weekend after they arrive... i'm hoping for next weekend. Then off to the dyno shop!!!
Jramos was mentioning to me that a 64mm bore in the TB might be a bit excessive for a n/a application, and might in fact hamper performance, so i'm a little tentative about that. I'm hoping all these mods come together to allow this ka to breathe properly - and maybe get some decent #s with a good tune (thx u lc-1 wideband).
I have a few Q's about my IM core, i'll shoot you a text here in a little bit.
09-27-2009, 12:32 PM
#18
Hey Vinnie
Jramos was mentioning to me that a 64mm bore in the TB might be a bit excessive for a n/a application, and might in fact hamper performance, so i'm a little tentative about that. I'm hoping all these mods come together to allow this ka to breathe properly - and maybe get some decent #s with a good tune (thx u lc-1 wideband).
Jramos was mentioning to me that a 64mm bore in the TB might be a bit excessive for a n/a application, and might in fact hamper performance, so i'm a little tentative about that. I'm hoping all these mods come together to allow this ka to breathe properly - and maybe get some decent #s with a good tune (thx u lc-1 wideband).
Last I checked the F22c uses a 64mm TB and its only 2.2 liter. the upgrade for honda's F22c is 70mm in diameter.
Believe me 64mm is perfect for a 2.4 liter engine, I have the (CFM) velocity measured and calculated. You should gain more power in the top end, and george at MAX bore won't bore it if its unnecessary.
Honda H22a (7400RPM X 137.2 / 3456)= 293.77 CFM
Honda F22c (8200RPM X 131.57 / 3456)= 312.174 CFM
Nissan SR20det (7600RPM X 121.95 / 3456)= 268.177 CFM
Nissan KA24de (7200RPM X 145.79 / 3456)= 303.72 CFM
I'd say the KA is pretty on par using a 64mm TB.
Last edited by BigVinnie; 09-27-2009 at 02:47 PM.
09-27-2009, 02:52 PM
#20
Edited my post in the above post, look above your post..^^^^^^
I would also like to add what you want from an engine is almost near perfect in/out flow. At 64mm that equals 2.519" or the equivalent of a 2,3/4" exhaust. Most people use a 2,1/2" to 3" exhaust a larger TB will do nothing more but compliment the entire engine. This would allow smooth pulses for exhaust scavaging and intake velocity.
The main focus of a larger TB isn't necessarily velocity flow, that is only half the battle. The second part is it's opening which will allow more air molecules (air density) which is dependent on a few factors n=PV/(RT), this equation tells 2 things air temperature and atmospheric psi, which will give you air density. So if we were going to compare 2, 4 banger engines (both the same with the only differences of TB size), and put them side by side one which used a 60mmTB and the other using a 64mm TB. The same engine using the 64mm TB will consume more air density than the same engine using teh 60mm TB. Of course there are inherently some differences. With off the line throttle responce, and low end torque, versus high end HP. But the differences would be so small in loss of the low end under 3000RPM, that the significant gains are more beneficial.
Now the larger TB theory only works if you use a map based system, or use a MAF of equal or greater size to the TB.
In effect a larger TB does not work well with the stock G60, or G70 MAFS. Which apparently the G70 maf works well in combination with the 60mm TB.
I would also like to add what you want from an engine is almost near perfect in/out flow. At 64mm that equals 2.519" or the equivalent of a 2,3/4" exhaust. Most people use a 2,1/2" to 3" exhaust a larger TB will do nothing more but compliment the entire engine. This would allow smooth pulses for exhaust scavaging and intake velocity.
The main focus of a larger TB isn't necessarily velocity flow, that is only half the battle. The second part is it's opening which will allow more air molecules (air density) which is dependent on a few factors n=PV/(RT), this equation tells 2 things air temperature and atmospheric psi, which will give you air density. So if we were going to compare 2, 4 banger engines (both the same with the only differences of TB size), and put them side by side one which used a 60mmTB and the other using a 64mm TB. The same engine using the 64mm TB will consume more air density than the same engine using teh 60mm TB. Of course there are inherently some differences. With off the line throttle responce, and low end torque, versus high end HP. But the differences would be so small in loss of the low end under 3000RPM, that the significant gains are more beneficial.
Now the larger TB theory only works if you use a map based system, or use a MAF of equal or greater size to the TB.
In effect a larger TB does not work well with the stock G60, or G70 MAFS. Which apparently the G70 maf works well in combination with the 60mm TB.
Last edited by BigVinnie; 09-27-2009 at 06:44 PM.
09-27-2009, 07:02 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fairmont, West Virginia
Posts: 100
so in other words if you get your TB bored and still have a stock maf then you really aren't gaining much until u upgrade to a larger maf and larger exhaust so that way everything flows as smooth as possible and each upgrade compliments the others..... makes since to me...
Eric
Eric
09-27-2009, 08:36 PM
#23
09-27-2009, 09:24 PM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 1,684
09-27-2009, 10:08 PM
#25
here's my objection to having a bored out tb on a na ka, imo the ecu is not tuned to accommodate for the additional flow nor is the fuel delivery adequate. i don't have data to back up my claims but i believe a better approach for a na ka would be to increased plenum volume and run a stock tb. someone correct me if i'm wrong, but don't honda engines use a map sensor and have larger injectors? if so, then i don't believe that just becuase a larger tb work well on a honda engine it can do the same for a nissan engine simply becuase they are not tuned the same. basically it all come down to tuning.
btw, dave do you know what my strong point is? this one -->.
btw, dave do you know what my strong point is? this one -->.
Last edited by jramosthe1st!; 09-27-2009 at 10:12 PM.
09-27-2009, 11:05 PM
#26
here's my objection to having a bored out tb on a na ka, imo the ecu is not tuned to accommodate for the additional flow nor is the fuel delivery adequate. i don't have data to back up my claims but i believe a better approach for a na ka would be to increased plenum volume and run a stock tb. someone correct me if i'm wrong, but don't honda engines use a map sensor and have larger injectors? if so, then i don't believe that just becuase a larger tb work well on a honda engine it can do the same for a nissan engine simply becuase they are not tuned the same. basically it all come down to tuning.
.
.
ECU tune is required for TB upgrade anyway since the upgrade requires a N60 MAF as the minimum for this.
No need to upgrade TB if the MAF diameter is not equal or greater than.
When I port/hone/extrude my manifolds for 64mm I let the individual know that an ecu tune and a larger MAF than stock is REQUIRED. SAFC is the minimum requirement for this bolt on.
12-21-2009, 04:07 PM
#27
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Mukilteo,WA
Posts: 6
hey guys, just wanted to say thanks for all the input. especially vinnie, and ecstacytotale. the reason i started this thread was just to get more info/input on the setup i'm thinking of doing.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Ixolas
NA Motor
7
12-12-2004 05:28 PM
