200 reliable ponies at the wheels?

Scarpa · 10-20-2003, 04:48 PM

OK I'm asking this in the Autox/Roadrace forum because I want opinions from people who turn.

If wanted to setup my NX to have 200whp (thinking fun StreetMod and trackday car) with minimal hassle and good reliability would I go Turbo or SR20VE?

It seems both have about a $2000 buy-in, but I want to know which will be less maintenance, and which will handle California heat better.

Any input is greatly appreciated.

ser_racer · 10-20-2003, 06:32 PM

I haven't driven a Nissan Turbo or VE powered car, so I cannot say how the power comes on in either engine.

Personally I think I would rather have a 200hp NA engine, since it's a bit less weight, theoretically more even power output and less stuff to maintain.

But that's just me, and like I said I haven't driven either, so I can't say for sure.

Driven97 · 10-20-2003, 07:57 PM

My roomate has a Avenir powered Classic, running stock boost, 3" exhaust. We plan on running it in SM in all local SCCA events next year, the Type R at all the CenDivs, and my car in STS at all other events.

The turbo car has a *lot* of power. Maybe even a bit too much for Auto X. It's tough to keep the boost up. We haven't taken it to the track yet, but it would probably be a lot better there. I'm thinking we are going to have some cooling problems at the track, though. Honestly, the car is so much fun, I'd almost go turbo just based on that.

I think to be moderately competetive in SM, the VE is the only way to go. The power delivery is going to be much smoother and more predictable, and more consistant. Of course, I've never driven one, but I'm guesing it would be like the Type R, just more torque.

Plus, the VE is going to run waaaay cooler on the track, with the better water pump, and the lack of hot compressed air being forced into it.

So, I honestly think the smarter thing to do is get the VE. But if it were me, I'd got DET, just because it's so much stinking fun.

Scarpa · 10-20-2003, 08:17 PM

Hehehe well I do have plenty of experience with turbo cars and autox.. the only problem being its only with AWD cars. Hence my target HP of 200whp, I figure anything more and I won't have the traction to use it. I did get to drive a Mazdaspeed Protege once (for a single run) and was very impressed with it.

It sounds like the VE is the better deal though, because of the better torque response and generally cooler running engine. It just seems that with so much more people going DET though that it might be a wash price-wise. Either way this project wouldn't start until the end of next season, or when my current motor dies, whichever comes first.

autoxer7 · 10-20-2003, 08:18 PM

I've haven't had to do anything to my VE other than change the oil since I installed it at the beginning of the year... that's approx 30 autocrosses with absolutely no problems. I have had a weird timing problem (that I also had with my DE and is probably related to the distributor) so I haven't run it at a HPDE, yet.

I've also driven a BB DET equipped B13 and by comparision the VE is much easier to drive. I just can't stand turbo lag especially when you're on and off the throttle so quickly in autox.

If you want to run the VE on the track an upgraded radiator and oil cooler are probably on order. In just regular street driving my oil temps are running about 210 degrees F or about 30 degrees more than my DE... due to the piston oil squirters. I believe Steve Foltz has a write up in the VE section on his oil cooler install.

Right now 190 whp is what you should expect with a stock SR20VE and SR16VE cams. To get 200 whp without touching the motor you're probably either going to need the N1 cams (with upgraded valve springs and retainers) or a modified intake manifold.

Steve

JimmyNX2000 · 10-20-2003, 09:38 PM

Bwahahaha. and here comes the bit of JDM taste. Tomei 280* cams solid lifter type, convert to Tomei solid lifter valvetrain, Tomei Springs, Rocker Arm stoppers. Tomei Reytec Standalone system pre programmed for the setup, and have fun revving the piss out of it and making 200 whp. Fin. oh, under 2G also. and youl want cam gears. oh, i garuntee youl have one of the highest revving SR20DEs here on the forum with an actual fuel map to go with it.

SERprise In WV · 10-20-2003, 11:11 PM

Paul--
After one full season of running my turbo Classic in SM, I can say your assumptions are probably correct. The trick with a turbo (T28, at most) B13 in SM is that you can NOT drive the car like a high-revving 4 cylinder.

You must drive it like it has a V8 in it for best results.

This means using 2nd gear on most courses instead of 1st gear, keeping the RPMs in the 4,000-5,000 range. That's where the turbo makes tons of torque and where it does the most damage.

A VE-equipped B13 -like you said- would be eerily similar to an ITR, in terms of how you drive it and how it performs. Rev the crap out of of it.

IMHO...my B13 is now easier to drive fast with the turbo on it. It really doesn't matter what gear you're in as much as when the car was NA. You just mash the gas and go.

200whp is *perfect* for our cars. Any more and you just abuse the Kumhos (or Hoosiers) with no mercy. I'm toying with the idea of a VE for our white NX next year, too.

AntonioG · 10-21-2003, 03:00 AM

Go VE Paul - there are already too many damn turbo SE-Rs in NorCal.

Andreas Miko · 10-21-2003, 06:16 AM

I would go VE. The total cost of VE will be $2000 for motor, Fujitsubo header $620, JWT comp $570, MSD window switch and pills $100. Thats all you need.

If you want to get a sure 200 WHP then get an electric water pump, SR16VE cams, bore out the TB to 64mm from RC enginering, use a 95-98 Maxima MAF, and have a CAI made.

I said to use a Maxima MAF because it is 3 in and is the same size as a VE but most VE engines do not come with MAFs and JWT has the programing for the Maxima MAF. Also the Maxima MAF can be had at any junkyard for $75-$100. If you get a VE MAF and it goes bad you could be up a river with no padle.

98sr20ve · 10-21-2003, 08:03 AM

My VE has 150ft lbs of torque at 5000rpm or so. You do not need to rev the piss out of it. To be honest I did not enjoy racing my car in SM. I have a 6th placed national SM car locally also and my car has no chance being 500lbs overweight. As far as a track car you would need to think of the car as a package. Transmission included. I run my ve in 90F weather with the stock radiator, removed weather stripping on the back of hood by the window, ducting to the radiator, water wetter and a BIG OIL COOLER. At this stage my water temps have not gone past about 220F in the upper radiator hose, Mike K says that this gives me about 15F more headroom compared to the temp being measured in the stock location. My oil temps get pretty high if I rev to 8K for 30 mins straight. I am experimenting with ducting and stuff to solve this further. I have never seen over 245F on the oil measured in the sump. Currently my car has 189 whp with the IHE and sr16cams. This is running the car richer then needed and I have run it leaner even at the track with no issues. I just have not re adjusted the fuel setting and didn't notice till after the dyno that the fuel pressure had gone up. I hope to hit 195whp+ soon with some minor changes and also gain some midrange tq. We will see. Other then my 95K TPS dying on my car I have done nothing to it sence the engine went in. Not a single issue. I honestly think you can accomplish the same thing with a turbo if you do everything right. I would be more concerned about the transmission with the turbo and the greater tq. But that is the price of power. Tough choice. Good luck.

Edit: Let me just add that I have had several instructors comment on my car being fast and relatively easy to drive fast. The power delivery is smooth and this helps a great deal even at the track. I have a quaife and still need to manage wheelspin at the higher track speeds.

JimmyNX2000 · 10-21-2003, 04:52 PM

Thats alot of money peeps. Why wouldnt the setup i mentioned be feasable? the bonus of it is, you could stay in 2nd gear longer sinnce you would be revving alot higher. therefore, at least for me, i wouldnt have to shift into 3rd and then downshift real quick back into 2nd to go into the hairpin at the lawrenceville course. you would probably have insane top end, and lose a little torque, but i bet from 4 grand up you would be insane, and thats where i spend most of my time autocrossing anyway. but going VE is expensive compared to a basic T25, BB, or the NA route i proposed.

Scarpa · 10-21-2003, 05:55 PM

Well the main thing is my current motor has over 210,000 miles on it. So I'm going to start with a (relatively) fresh motor anyway. And honestly, looking at the list of parts you put up I doubt a motor + parts + labor is gonna add up under 2G. I can swap a motor, but I'm not inclined to even change cams. I don't really want something one-off or that I have to tinker with.

From the feedback so far, and my experiences with turbos and autox, I think it's almost a wash. I can definitely see how the car would be driven differently given the drivetrain though.

My question now is, how much torque is a DET making at 2500, 5000 and 6500rpm? How much for a VE? Gotta run right now but I'll update in a bit with my reasons for asking.

SERprise In WV · 10-21-2003, 06:07 PM

Paul--

Here is what a T28/370 injector combo at *factory 3-bar fuel pressure* does at 9psi of boost:

That was about 20-30whp ago, by the way.

And now you know why 4,000-5,500rpm is the sweet spot in a turbo car.

98sr20ve · 10-21-2003, 08:33 PM

It fell off at top due to the heat in the room.

aknapp · 10-22-2003, 11:18 AM

KEWL! Dueling Dyno charts...gotta love it!

Scarpa, I've got the same dilemma as you. I'm leaning towards the VE.

Thanx for opening this question up. It's great to hear some real world experiences, both VE'd and turbo'd.

SHAWNATGERBROCK · 10-22-2003, 01:30 PM

The 11:1 ,S4 cams, boltons setup is pretty good also , a friend has that in a 200SX SE-R , its very quick and has a good powerband , and he noted on his last trip got 28+ MPG !! And its DEQ legal !!

Scarpa · 10-22-2003, 01:47 PM

Thanks for the charts guys.

I had some comments in mind last night after staring at those charts and imagining myself tearing around an autox course, but when I started to write them out it sounded inane and redundant. Ahh what the hell, I'll say it anyway.

As I said, I've already got experience with turbo cars and autox, having driven a WRX locally quite a bit. I've also sampled an STi which was enlightening as well.

Basically I drive the turbo cars in more of a "point and shoot" style. Part of this is the extra 600lbs. the AWD cars are packing. The other part is you want the car to be pretty much done turning before you hit boost or you're behind the rest of the course. And in the STi I got a taste of what Greg was talking about regarding the "sweet spot", the car went much faster if you short shifted third because the torque fell off well before redline.

In the NX, it's more of a speed maintenance thing. I brake much less and carry higher speeds through corners. I also wind the hell out of it, no short shifting (or any shifting for that matter).

I'm trying really hard to imagine the weight of my NX with the power of the WRX. I think it would drive pretty similar to the WRX. Since I'd be going faster at the end of straights I'd be braking a lot more on corner entry. Since I'd be severely traction limited under boost I'd be more concerned with pointing the right way on exit, which would probably mean I'd go through corners a little slower than I do now.

With a VE I think I'd drive it the same way as I do now, just faster. I honestly think the VE would be easier to drive, but the DET would be more fun.

It's all tangential to the discussion though really, I just wanted to know which is less maintenance.

But thanks everyone for the insights.

Jim #98NX · 10-31-2003, 01:34 PM

I know you're talking autox, but from a road race perspective, I might be inclined to go with the VE just because of maintenance issues. I've been watching Jeff N run his turbo Classic in the SE-R Cup and there have been a lot of growing pains. Granted you're talking 200 whp, not 280 whp in his car, but I think a turbo creates more points of failure and I think the turbo wouldn't be as efficient on hot days as the VE.

Any disparity of turbo lag would probably be made up for by thoughtful driving style and probably a little more power, but I do think the VE would be easier to drive and I think that might be important no matter what your skill level. I got to watch the Honda vs. Nissan Club shootout and of all the high powered turbo cars (even the Disco Potato skillfully piloted by Dave Coleman) the top Nissan time of the day was laid down by relative road race rookie Shaggy in the VE NX.

NeedMore$4SE-R · 11-11-2003, 10:46 AM

"The 11:1 ,S4 cams, boltons setup is pretty good also , a friend has that in a 200SX SE-R , its very quick and has a good powerband ,"-SHAWNATGERBROCK

Does he ( or anyone with this setup) have a dyno chart to compare to the one's above. I am looking for about 200 Reliable hp, to be done in the spring. I am leaning toward the T25 JGY setup.