VVL anyone?

SR_Micra_Boy

Ex. Club Member
One of the guys has just received this to go in his almera gti. 190bhp on tap, nice high rev range for not-a-lot over 1k... :devil:

605602_24_full.jpg


605602_25_full.jpg


605602_23_full.jpg


canny list of available engines here

http://www.japanmoottorituonti.fi/?view=moottorit
 
its the jap version, basically a high rev range and they have had the nuts tuned out of them by nissan before they even leave the shelf!

Variable valve timing and all that
 
variabl valve timing never seems to work as good as its made out, especially in toyota's. I dont have any first hand experiance of a nissan unit, but expect the car t obe not as fast as you think with it in. You will have lost a lot of your low/mid range torque which is what is most usefull about the almera GTi in the first place
 
Variable valve timing doesn't work well? Why then, has nearly every single major manufacturer started using it on their more expensive engines? Millions of dollars of research have gone into it, and will continue to. Totally continuous timing, duration and lift is almost the holy grail of engine design, allowing the maximum efficiency at any given RPM.

Without any doubt, a well implemented VVT system will improve low-end torque whilst also improving peak power. Most importantly to the manufacturers, it improves efficiency and emissions.

Nissan's VVL is to all intents and purposes, a copy of of Honda's VTEC system, allowing the variation of both lift and timing. It's one of the more flexible and interesting implementations of VVT. Take for example, these two engines:

SR20DE 140.0 hp @ 6400 rpm 132.0 ft-lb @ 4800 rpm
SR20VE 187.4 hp @ 7000 rpm 144.6 ft-lb @ 6000 rpm

The one with variable valve timing is better in many ways - more power, more torque, and revs higher. I can't find a dyno plot for unmodified engines, but from the ones I have seen, the VE engines have a much flatter torque curve, bar a small dip in the middle when the cams swap over.

The only disadvantages are that you cannot swap cams easily or cheaply, so you are stuck with the performance of stock cams, and that the driving style with these engines is markedly different to normal engines.
 
Have not got any experience with VVL but the Honda VTEC engines that I have driven do lack torque. That is the only fault I have with them, other than that they are extremely good engines. Very interested in this VVL, have not heard of it either.
 
there was what seemed like a big massive 1000posts+ thread on a forum some where going on about which is better nissan v honda n they spoke about the vvl there, it was linked in either this or the old forums i cant remember now...

toyota's have cars which imo r more of an every day drivers car...the torque is in the low end n is where it is needed in normal every day driving, to get outta a junction quickly etc...i personally dont like the feel of a toyota engine, feels dead after 4,000rpm or 4,500rpm ish cant remember exactly. what i love is an engine where when u got it at redline its screaming its ass off at u n is at its limits :D

true tho hondas do lack torque but driven properly is still a great performance car to compete with anything else in its class, u can a driving style so u never go out of the vtec, which means the power is right where u want it. in a sense its quite similar to having a very big turbo low rpm u got nothing but once its going its all there...untill u fall outta the power band :D (on the track its unlikely u fall outta it much)

i would love to have a high rev-ving engine...something like 11,000rpm would b nice :D
 
torque isnt about the maximum figure - its about where it is, 144lb/ft @6k is useless to anyone in day to day use
 
It might not all be about the maximum figure, but you can assume that an engine for a normal road car with peak torque at high RPM will also have reasonable torque at low RPM, otherwise it wouldn't be driveable by a normal person.

I think you miss the point with VVT - there are two sets of cams - one gives you torque at low RPM, the other gives torque at high RPM. This is the best of both worlds.

Just to prove a point, we'll take the venerable SR20DE and compare it to the SR20VE. There are many differences between the two, apart from the VVT, but nonetheless, the major change in characteristics are due to the cams:

effect.gif


The bottom graph is the one we want. There is more torque on the VVT engine all over the place. And the redline is even higher, allowing the engine to deliver higher peak power. And the curve is flatter, allowing the driver to be less precise in revs and gear choice when coming out of corners.

Where does the driver lose out?
 
Infact looking at that graph you get a serious amount of extra low end torque. Thats quite impressive.
 
all i can say is in that case nissan actually have actually made a system that works. the Honda Vtec's are a waste of time on the road unless your prepared to screw it in every gear - it even got beat on the race track by a golf TDI. The toyota VVTiL's are even worse. They arent as quick as the late 70's designed 3S-FE engine and the variable lift packs up before 20k, and usually procede to blow themselves up.
 
lol I know where your coming from Howard.Anyone want a 3s-FE? :p

I couldn't put up with the Civic's VVT engine (horrible horrible come on 1500rpm idle?) and Andy's not too impressed with his 1.6Toyota lump is he?
 
Slim said:
the Honda Vtec's are a waste of time on the road unless your prepared to screw it in every gear - it even got beat on the race track by a golf TDI.

Admittedly, the Honda VTEC engines seem to have a bigger difference between the two cams as compared to Nissan VVL engines. It can make the Honda engine's feel weak below the swap over, but they still have ample torque, as much as many engines without the special cams.

Is the VW TDi beating a VTEC engined car more than anecdotal? If it isn't, did the drivers have any idea what they were doing? In most situations the Civic si will cane a Golf TDi... unless you are racing on a go kart track.

41259331.jpg


It shows the torque delivered to the wheels, given changing gear at optimum points. It's not a perfect model, but below 80mph, it's not bad at showing the acceleration of a car. It takes into account gear ratios, rim size and tire size. Only below 30km/h does the Golf have any advantage.

The higher power of the Civic means that it can have a much higher gear ratio in first, so it delivers similar torque to the wheels, whilst also providing it for a longer period of time. Providing it corners as well as the Golf (which it should do, having lower profile, wider tires on bigger rims), it will beat it.

And the reliability thing.... sounds like another bit of anecdotal evidence. JD Power ratings, as well as other ratings show that Honda's with VTEC engines are as reliable and dependable as BMW 5 Series, Golf IVs, Mercedes C-class, and so on. Which is pretty reliable.
 
im not doubting the reliability of the honda vtec at all. i said the toyota's blow up, not honda's.

The golf did beat it on the track, and that wsnt even the fastest one. Theres a seat out now a TDi one with a book 0-60 time of 6.7 seconds and better in-gear times than a porshe GT3.

on the road, id rather have a golf TDi that a civic typre r any day, because the power they have is totally usefull.

Also, i was racing a Type R on the way to work one, obviously he beat me, and on the straight he walked all over me, but on the hills he wasnt going very far. thats a lack of torque.
 
Slim said:
The golf did beat it on the track, and that wsnt even the fastest one. Theres a seat out now a TDi one with a book 0-60 time of 6.7 seconds and better in-gear times than a porshe GT3.

You probably mean the Ibiza Cupra TDi - 160PS @ 3750rpm and 244ftlb @ 1900rpm. 0-100km/h of 7.6 seconds. That's compared to the Civic Si with 160HP @ 6500rpm and 132ftlb @ 5000rpm. It has a 0-100kmh of 7.2 seconds. That's faster.

You reckon it has better in gear times than the GT3? That's got 381bhp @ 7400rpm, and a massive 280ftlb @ 5000rpm, and redlines at 8400rpm. Couple that with a close ratio 6 speed box compared to the 5 speed in the Seat... and it would wee (I had to replace that) all over it at any speed in any gear.


Slim said:
Also, i was racing a Type R on the way to work one, obviously he beat me, and on the straight he walked all over me, but on the hills he wasnt going very far. thats a lack of torque.

Was this in a Micra? The most any of the stock engines make is 75ftlb... and the lowest the Type R does at any reasonable revs is 90ftlb, and it revs higher so the ratios are higher and so is the wheel torque...
 
I once came across a Civic SI (Type S) 160bhp. I quite liked it. Wasnt as quick as the old ST was though. Weight I guess played a part.
 
i have heard of the VVL engine being good, i don't have first hand experience on this particular engine, but from the graphs etc above it seems to be a devil:devil:

The Hondas V-Tech engines are good but the Torque doesn't seem to be there fwn
Typical example is my friends Civic V-tech(B16a1) it produced 155BHP with only 109ftlbs of Torque.(same Torque as my K10 Turbo,with a cracked Head)
This seems to be the case with all Civics, they have power like but no Torque
before the 5500rpm they are sluggish
they have a naughty sound once the v-tech kicks in:)
the best thing about these cars is..
there loads of stuff you can buy for them(tuning wise)

one other car in the 1.6 VV Engine league is a very rare..

Mitsubishi Colt Mirage Cyborg:)
Producing 170BHP from the 1.6 N/A block
Don't know about the Torque but i think it'll be a swift little car:p

I'd love to see all these three cars in action:)


Umar
 
As pete says, i was in my toyota, and its not a 4A-FE either, its a 4A-F

Also, the golf TDI on the track did race a civic Type R, not Si.

These things arent that fast at all.

porcshe GT3's massive 28 lb/ft @5000?? thats crap. I'd sooner take 244 @1900 anyday.
 
RE: RE: VVL anyone?

MA12:) said:
Andrew no Howard will probably have been in a 4A-FE (1.6) Carina Saloon.

Ok, I stand corrected on that one. Nonetheless, that badboy produces 90 HP @ 6000 rpm and 95 ft-lbs @ 3600 rpm.... so it produces a peak torque lower in value than the lowest torque in the Civic si. The Toyota also has less power so cannot produce the torque over such a wide RPM range. In a race, with both cars driven correctly, the Civic si will win. And it was a type-R he was racing which is significantly more powerful.
 
There are 2 versions of the VVL, they are both based on the SR20 block with re-worked heads and nissans variable valve timing. the 1.6 has a different crank/stroke and a higher RPM limit and fueling to suit, the 2.0 only came in automatic versions. the 1.6 comes from the sunny/almera N1. there are a distinkt lack of tunning bits for them. basically once you get the engine youll be hard pushed to get it running more power without spending alot of cash. i was looking at putting ont in my micra.

To do it you need the 2.0VVL engine an SR20 fly Gbox and wiring loom. micra temp sensor. fujiboso header. and a greedy switching unit for the cam changeover solenoids plus all the bits to make an SR fit a micra. i spoke to a guy in the uk who has one in a primera he liked it but it cost him a fair bit.

If tourgue is what you want if the VVL fits then so will an SR20 and if it foes then an SR20T fitts and there are so many aftermarket bits for these engines. whilst it would be amazing to have VVL its expencive and lacks any futur tunning possibilities.
 
RE: RE: VVL anyone?

Slim said:
Also, the golf TDI on the track did race a civic Type R, not Si.

Where? When? Which cars? How badly was it beaten? People argue over this race a lot in forums and newsgroups but I have not seen any evidence of the actual race occuring. There is so much "I heard from a friend..." information about cars flying about on the internet, and you've got to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Slim said:
porcshe GT3's massive 28 lb/ft @5000?? thats crap. I'd sooner take 244 @1900 anyday.

It's 280ftlb @ 5000rpm. It isn't crap - it's about average for a highly tuned road engine (between 75ftlbs/litre and 80ftlbs/litre for something that is very driveable). I'll admit that the power/torque of thePorsche 911 GT3 shows that is has lower torque at lower RPM, but so do all engines for cars designed for going fast. It's better to have it like this than have a flat torque curve with lower torque - if you want to win races.

I think you are missing the major difference between diesels and high revving powerful petrol engines. It's gearing. Look at these two simplified examples:

  • Diesel - 197ftlb of torque between 1200 and 4800rpm, where the torque vanishes. That gives a peak power of 180BHP.
  • Petrol - 115ftlb of torque between 1200 and 8200rpm, where the torque vanishes. Again, peak power of 180BHP.

Ok, not ideal - the redline is where peak power occurs. But the torque figures are about right if you average across the RPM range.

Imagine you had both engines connected directly to the wheels of a car. The diesel produces more torque, so it will accelerate faster. However, it will also hit the redline sooner, and stop accelerating. The petrol engine can keep on accelerating, albeit with a lower torque.

So now, let's gear the petrol engine so that it produces the same amount of torque at the wheels as the diesel. That means the torque is multiplied by 1.71, and the RPM divided by 1.71. Now let's look at the numbers - the petrol engine is producing 195ftlb of torque, and the maximum output RPM is 4800. Hang on, isn't that exactly the same as the diesel engine?

That's why producing torque at high RPM (power) is an advantage - it allows you to take advantage of gearing. A high revving petrol engine will have higher numerical ratios than a diesel, multiplying torque but reducing speed. Most of the time, they will settle at a halfway house, allowing a reasonable amount of torque to be produced for a reasonable amount of time.

Notice that the two engines above have the same power, and when geared correctly, will perform the same. Power is often the best indicator of overall performance throughout the gears.

Back to the real world.... diesels are easier to drive and better for towing. The peak torque is low down in the RPM range, which gives a form of automatic speed control. If the speed drops, the torque increases, accelerating the car without driver intervention. It's also less effort to pull away - it's nigh on impossible to stall a diesel. Ease of driving, however equates to a boring drive, one that doesn't require skill. The noise is horrible as well, that Seat TDi sounds horrible until you give it loads of revs when the huge turbo drowns out the clattering. And find me a car that looks as good as a GT3 and is powered by a diesel...
 
this is all getting very strange,

For a start, who are you. secondly, it is very easy to stall a diesel if you dont know what your doing. Thirdly - you get a very exciting drive in a diesel if you know what your doing, you CAN easy take on the petrol equivilant of the same power and have it for breakfast. Fourthly, I DID see the race with a Glof TDi and Civic Type R on TV, i believe itwas 5th gear or top gear. The golf didnt win by much, but the point was it suprised ahell of a lot of people. The civic was faster round the corners, but coming out of the corners, it couldnt get anywhere near the golf for acceleration.

As for the sound. Diesels do sound different. However, i wouldnt say its horrible. Have you ever heard a ford endura or CVH engine? now that IS horrible.

Also - performace petrols have been developed since the engine started - Diesels have only began being developed in the last 15 years. Take the humble VW 1.9 diesel. Started life out as a basic engine with only 70bhp ish, and now produces upto 170bhp from the factory, anbd can be chiped to over 190. Now tell lme that isnt a good development? Just think what will happen in another 10 years
 
RE: RE: VVL anyone?

1. I'm Andrew, that guy off the internet.

2. It's really really hard to stall a diesel compared to a petrol. I've been in diesels (Peugeot 106 1.5L) that you can't even stall with the handbrake on in 3rd. Even a loaded Mercedes Sprinter, which is a big van, is almost impossible to stall if you've even got a touch of accelerator.

3. With regards to the fun, maybe it is possible, that's a matter of opinion. But, there is no way that an engine with a low torque peak can beat one with a high torque peak, if they have the same power. Gears have to overlap, otherwise you wouldn't be able to change up gear. This means you lose a bit of the RPM range of the engine and if you are driving hard, it is the lower half. If the torque peak is there, you never get to use it.

This is a bit made up because I am at the wrong computer:
41356721.jpg


I've added the vague torque figures from the two cars in the gears. I missed the last one for the Golf because it's so flat. See how you are missing the peak with the Golf? But with the Civic, when you shift, you are just coming into the power band.

To a certain extent, you could decrease the ratios on the Golf, and take more advantage of the peak. But the points at which you'd have to change gear would become pretty tight, and you wouldn't be able to shift down easily.

4. Still can't find anything about it, I'll take your word for it. It was otherwise on a go-kart track or the drivers weren't matched or the Civic was broken.

5. Again, it's opinion. I really don't like the clattering of diesels... which it's impossible to get rid of with high compression and iron blocks. And there are plenty of petrol engines that sound terrible as well. But there aren't any diesels that sound as good as a flat 6 running at 8400rpm.

6. In another 10 years, lean burn direct injection petrol engines with fully variable valve timing, variable manifolds, variable compression, and continuously variable transmission will allow us to get insane amounts of power from tiny amounts of fuel. Improved materials will result in higher mechanical and thermal efficiency. At the same time, emissions will drop to almost nothing. Petrol engines have always had the innovation, with diesel playing catch up. At the moment, there are several things that are going to be possible that simply aren't physically possible with diesel. There just isn't the same amount of money being poured in.

Andrew
Car theorem master.
 
hiya people, im the lad whos done the sr20ve swap in my almera gti.
right as a daily driver its fantastic, bags more torque than the DE and more fuel effieciant to boot. the switching points for the cams aswell are easily changed with a GReddy Multi Switching System, like a Vtec controller. As for power WOW! awsome performance! its great. As for the price £1000, it was far cheaper installing the VE than tuning my DE which cost me over £2000 and it still didnt have the same power output. any questions email me at [email protected]

cheers

AL
 
Back
Top