Ok, I've been wondering recently, with 2.4 liters in the KA vs 2.0 in the SR, wouldnt a turbo'd KA have more potential than the SR20DET for power because of the bigger displacement?

It seems like it doesnt, because everyone wants to swap to the sr20det. I dont hear much about a 240 with a ka24det. Why is that? Can someone explain to me why the turbo SR would be better than a turbo KA? Weight?

 

actually, the KA is only 4 lbs heavier than the SR (although the SR already has all the turbo/piping/intercooler). the weight difference is insignificant. in my opinion, i prefer a turbo KA. after all, there is no replacement for displacement. plus, you don't know where your SR has been. the japanese don't keep their cars long because of taxes. if you had a car that you were only going to keep for 10 years, you wouldn't be afraid to beat it up. have you ever seen a clutch from a silvia front clip? the price is going to be near equal for a SR swap or a turbo kit for the KA. i guess in the end it just comes down to your opinion and this is mine.

 

the KA's potential-
http://www.executivecleancar.com/240/

 

Then why is there so much more talk about swapping engines rather than turboing the KA?

Thanks for the response by the way.

I was thinking that one day when I get enough money to make my car faster, I would lean towards boosting the existing engine rather than swapping it, although it would be wonderful to get rid of the darn auto.

 

after experience with a forced induction civic SI (detonated alot)...I had a vision that told me..."for best reliability, boost an engine that was made to be boosted" ....thats just my opinion..if you boost a KA with a kit, you are already limited to ~6psi before you have to do internal work....with the SR all I changed was my headgasket (to a Metal HG) and I can probably boost the SR in the mid 20's psi (assuming avail. fuel and turbo efficiency)....its just my cup of tea, I guess (as well as hundreds of others who have an SR)...the KA just needed so much work to it to have it boost high PSI, IMO...


-Rick

 

add the weight of the turbo components to the KA and it's an easy 50lbs or so depending on your setup.

well, most SRs are around the 30k mile range where the cars are usually tossed since the tax on them goes up after so many miles. No matter how bad you beat on it, it's still low mileage.
IMO the KA can be done cheaper than the SR. If you're talking about an installed SR, tack on a good $1000 or so in just labor. If you're doing the install yourself, there's no way you can compare to a turbo KA, since you can do your own build up for a lot cheaper than any kit out there, and even get some forged pistons/ rods to boot.

 

yeah aceinhole, it might be 50 lbs lighter, but that's not enough to affect performace (at least not enough that you can feel it). plus, the KA is 400 cc bigger.

 

lol. don't have to tell me about the merits of my KA (which was made on a Wednesday [freak engine]). i'm just stating that the weight difference is NOT 4lbs when comparing the engines fairly.

 

obviously my preference is the KA-T