SR20DE(N) in a K11

D

Dave Bull

Ex. Club Member
OK guys, this is the new project for me!

After a year of driving my Nissan Almera GTi with a stripped out interior, I have decided to get myself a K11 to run about in.

Thing is though I wanna put my engine outta the GTi into the K11.

Has the SR20DE swap been done before into the K11, and if so, who is the best person to ask to what is required?

Dunnoh...I just think my near 400 HP SR20DE(N) engine in a K11 wouldbe a laugh.

And for all you Nissan Technical nuts out there, the (N) is for nitrous, a little name myself and a few of the guys on the SR20 forum created for a nitrous assisted SR20!

Cheers

Dave
 
SR20DE has been done many times in a K11 in japan and a couple of times in the UK. If you think your capable of it go for it. Its already been proven that it fits!
 
a supercharger then?
i am 100% certain you wont get Na 300bhp from your sr20de without nos.
 
i dont think he will want to spend £15k making a 300bhp sr20 na engine and rebuilding all the time.?
 
lol superchargers dont seem to work on the SR very well as far as iv heard. as iv told Dave. its all about REVS! if a honda civic Type-R can get 300bhp N/A Y not an SR20?? and befre anyone says Vtec they should look at how it works!
 
300bhp is just been possible on the sr20de by the touring car spec parts. if you can do it without the expence and the need for rebuilds that would be a big achievement
 
V-tecs rev a lot higher than the sr20 can, I have read stuff about these tearng themselves apart at 8,500, this was why they were still a competitive touring car as the rev limit at the time was 8,500 so they didn't have to worry about the valvetrain going to the knackers
 
to be honest a civic type r is so highly tuned n/a wise extracting another hundred brake without a turbo or supercharger would be damn near impossible. please correct me if im wrong. ive read about the first person in the uk who supercharched ther type r and it came in at 250 at the tyres.
 
RE: RE: SR20DE(N) in a K11

Craig said:
V-tecs rev a lot higher than the sr20 can, I have read stuff about these tearng themselves apart at 8,500, this was why they were still a competitive touring car as the rev limit at the time was 8,500 so they didn't have to worry about the valvetrain going to the knackers
Click to expand...

The only reasson they rev so high is because of how strong the crank and rods are, nothing to do with the Vtec. a standard SR20 would rip itself apart high up the range. im not constrained by touring car rules hence i can touch my internals and go for alot more bnits than is allowed under FIA rules.

My engine is a roller rocker SR20DE lowport.

This is the list of the final spec i plan to use when eer i get it finished!

Starting from the bottom.

Enlarged baffled sump.
Magnetic drain plug
JWT enlarged oil pump
Oil cooler kit and remote fillter kit.
Tomei Stroker crank. ( possibly nitried coeted)
Cower rods with ARP rob bolts
Forged High comp pistons, will need machening to avaoid the valves.
0.6mm steel head gasget
ARP head studs
JWT cams
bronze phosphorus valve guides
titanium springsamd retainers
solid lash kill kit
Roller rocker blockers
Adjustable Cam sprokets
UD light weight pullys
Jenvy Throttle bodies
Emmerald M3DK ECU
adjustable FPR
enlarged fule rail and injectors
Hotshots header
Distributer less ignition

Plus loads of other bits i carnt be botherd to list. Thats the goal iv set myself and i expect to get close. given time.
 
as for Civic Type-R's pushing 300BHP n/a

Nemesis performance have just had theres dynode at 280bhp at the fly and theres still a few more things they can do to that engine to gett it running more

typer_pic09.jpg

typer_pic08.jpg
 
Raceworx said:
Craig said:
V-tecs rev a lot higher than the sr20 can, I have read stuff about these tearng themselves apart at 8,500, this was why they were still a competitive touring car as the rev limit at the time was 8,500 so they didn\'t have to worry about the valvetrain going to the knackers
Click to expand...

The only reasson they rev so high is because of how strong the crank and rods are, nothing to do with the Vtec.
Click to expand...

I was just saying that vtecs rev higher in standard trim than the sr20 :)
 
Raceworx is a waste to do this. You will be lucky to get anywhere near this power.

I want to highlight something else. A 4x4 pulsar GTIR has 24% transmissions losses, so does an Evo1,2 and 3 (these I know are factual). Infact 24-25% is pretty much the universal constant used for dyno runs on AWD cars. That dyno plot for that civic has 27 thats TWENTY SEVEN percent transmission loss. It should be nearer 15-18%. A FWD Nissan Micra etc are all around 15%. Correcting that wheel bhp to flywheel gives 250bhp from that Civic, which for a 2.0 NA is simply amazing - but it is far short of 300bhp. That Civic would need to have 260bhp or more at the wheels to actually have 300 @ fly, 40bhp more wheel bhp than it has now.
The thing is with NA power High RPMs cause huge amounts of wear. A 250bhp NA would wear much much faster than a 250BHP turbo engine. Finally Torque!!! Or lack of it! It is not possible to get an NA engine to have more than 70-80 lb/foot of torque per litre. Infact you would be doing very well to get close to that. However there are no such limitations with a turbo! 200lb/litre and more is possible (although high boost would be needed) this makes for a very exciting driving ;)
 
a load of 350z have just been on a dyno day. the average standard rwhp figure was 235bhp about 18% loss from the 276bhp nissan say is standard, although the dyno technician used 20% for losses calculation.
i dont know if transmission losses are less for rwd to fwd?. i would put the civic at a little under 260bhp anyway.
but anyway as discussed by the 350z crew the figures were different from there last rolling road. one used a % figure for loss, the other did a coast down and drag calculation. one used 4th gear the other 5th gear etc... best to just compare wheels outputs anyway.
but i am positive for your na project give it all you got. and buy up some spare sr20de aswell. i still got one near me in excelent condition, 150bhp 55k miler.
 
RWD tend to be slightly higer losses than FWD. Bascially because the rear diff has to alter the direction of power by 90 deg (diffs can get hot!) and there is a lot more moving mass in a 4wd system from the prop shafts etc. I would probably say 20% is a fair guess.

Coast down losses for dyno power are known to be very inaccurate. Anything from a binding brake to a tight clutch can mess up the results and create truly meaningless figures. That is why its so important to get a wheel BHP figure, and then use a constant for losses. It works out much closer to real life.
 
i cant get my head round why its a percentage that losses are made from engine to transmission, it doesnt make sence. lets say hypothetically for a minute. say you have a standard 350z with 276bhp at fly it loses 15% or about 41bhp to get to 235wbhp ( add 18% for loss to get back up to 276bhp). what if you take out the 350z engine and put a mega high out put estimated design 1000bhp engine in to the same transmission. if the transmisison only uses up 41bhp of power to get the wheels turning then the wheel output will be 959bhp if the egine was a success or if you do it with the % system the wheel output will need to be 850bhp to get the desired 1000bhp fly figure, is the actual recorded bhp figure loss from original engine meaningless? as the transmission has stayed the same.
 
Is that u Bull??? dont tell me uv got fed up abusing the almera already???

And if this is the almera im thinking of lads its nigh on 400hp with nos not to sure of his non nos power!
 
In response to Beachboys question, Ill go through this so everyone knows how its done, if this seems partonising at any point I apologise. Im sure it may help some.

First of all gear box losses are not fixed. Hence why they loose a % of power and not just X BHP.

Take your example with the following assumptions: Stock engine power = 276 bhp, transmisson losses 15% (bit low for RWD).

Ok so wheel BHP = 276*0.85= 234.6 bhp which is a loss of 41.4 BHP. - Both as you said.

Out of interest 41.4 bhp = 30871 watts of heat which is what all losses will result in (oh and some sound), this heat is generated by friction from the time the power leaves the engine to the time it gets to the wheels.

The correct way however to arrive back at the fly power is to add the transmission losses to the the wheel bhp (this is still 15% not 18%) so to work the other way do this (1/ % loss)*wheel bhp. i.e. (1/0.85)*234.6 remember to do the calculations in brackets first.

Now if you were to fit a 1000 bhp engine you have to recalculate the losses. So 0.85*1000 = 850 bhp @ wheels. With a transmission loss of 150bhp.

is the actual recorded bhp figure loss from original engine meaningless?
Click to expand...

If you change the power or indeed the engine yes the BHP loss is meaninless however the % loss is still perfectly valid.
 
...still not quite with it.
235bhp + 15% is 270bhp not 276bhp, so if the loss is 15% doesnt mean if you add 15% to whp you get the fly figure.

also still dont know why transmission losses are not a constant, unless i can guess from what you said as the power gets higher as it spins faster it will get more hotter and more noise and use more energy..
which makes me thinks nissans e4wd system is good as loss will be very low as there is no mechanical link to rear wheels only electric powered riving rear wheel motors. so when we eventually get comercial very high powered electric cars they will be very quick as not much of the core power will be lost by transmission..
am i right.
 
Look at the calculations on the other page. They work, try them with any value of loss and any power you wish. I am not adding 15%, I'm multiplying the power by the inverse of the losses.

A system power that looses 15% of its total power is simply
input power multiplied by 0.85.

In reverse to work out what a systems power is by its known losses is done as such: 1 divided by the loss all then multiplied by the input power.

In numbers:

1000bhp x 0.85 = 850 bhp, so 150 loss.

850bhp x (1/0.85) = 1000 bhp

No engine losses are constant. (Infact no mechnical losses ever have a fixed value) Look at it this way. You drive a car at say 10 mph, the car has a coefficent of drag say 0.65, you then drive at 100 mph the Cd is still 0.65 but your energy lost due to drag will be much much greater. Same as engine RPM. At 1000 RPM an engine may require X amount of power to idle, however at 6000 RPM this will be again many times more, but the friction constant remains the same.

What you then go onto say is correct. You place greater loads on gearboxes more energy is lost via bearings etc, through diffs and even through wheel bearings and CV joints. The % loss stays largly the same but the actual power loss will vary.

Onto elec assisted technology such as the e4wd. No mechanical link is a good thing, but they are by no means perfect, that however is a totally differnt subject!
 
There are more powerful N/A Civic Type-Rs than the Nemesis' car and that's without ITBs.
They'll be at GT Battle competing.
 

Similar threads

M
Sr20de
Replies
6
Views
2K
Swiper
Swiper
W
Sr20de in my k11
Replies
2
Views
913
Wills84
W
Y
doing a SR20DE swap
Replies
6
Views
2K
yuri1312
Y
W
sr20de k11 conversion
Replies
6
Views
2K
zanes
zanes
Walter
SR20DE Swap?
Replies
5
Views
2K
h701micra
h701micra
Back
Top