Thread: My SR20VE/32v Build...Pictures and Part Numbers

so the last thing i done before the tune was get an engineering place to make me up a small metal intake to replace the plastic one i had made.

[URL=""][/URL]

trucked the car down to melbourne (500kms) for the tune.

[URL=""][/URL]

when i got there Trent was 3hrs in, and had it pretty well all sorted. best run was 146kw. i thought, well lets squeeze a few more out of it. cam gears.

[URL=""][/URL]

advancing the intake made it go backwards.

[URL=""][/URL]

so 3hrs later, no improvement.

[URL=""][/URL]


tried a multiple of cam switching points, the lower the switch the worse it got. ended up back up at 6100rpm.

so the final graph

[URL=""][/URL]

Trent tells me that he uses the SAE J1349 (2004) standard, and his dyno is 3-5kw harder than most at my power level.

[URL=""][/URL]

so i'm 5kw short of the figure i would of liked, and thats life i guess. its got no more power to give in its current setup. trent showed me a graph for intake manifold restriction, and there's none..anywhere. showed john kerr the tune, and he's 2 thumbs up. its not lacking compression either.

[URL=""][/URL]

the high switch over point and the negative increase with the cam gears have me really puzzled. i'm thinking now that the cams might need to grow some. its flowing everything they have to give. texted jamie marsh, he thinks 184c's will work better. atm i might just suck it up and see how i feel with it how it is. for those who like sound, you might wanna turn the video up. in the soundproof box, it makes a hell of a noise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x1k6-qm7Jk&feature=youtu.be

Got to be plenty quick on the road no?

So that's power at the wheels? About 200whp....

so i've decided to bite the bullet and purchase some v3 184c kelfords, and as some may have done, decided to do some comparisons to my current n1's. what i found has kinda surprised me. 184c vrs n1's are a hard comparison because they are measured differently, and today i finally figured it out.

firstly nissan (at least for ve's) measure their lift as cam lift at the lobe x rocker ratio. no deduction for lash.anywhere. duration i still have not completely confirmed, but i'm gunna hazard a guess its at 0.016'' or 0.04mm.

kelford deduct their lash from the cam lobe lift ,and then multiply at 1.6 rocker ratio. they measure their duration at 0.1mm

could it be that they both have it wrong (at least in the real world)?

[URL=""][/URL]

[URL=""][/URL]

[URL=""][/URL]

[URL=""][/URL]

as you can see, kelford deduct the lash from the cam lobe lift, before they multiply by a 1.6 rocker ratio. the rocker ratio for ve is actually 4 different ratio's . nissan confirm this with their n1 cam lifts. example below.

intake low cam.
5.287 lift x 1.62 rocker ratio= 8.4mm
intake hi cam
7.312 lift X 1.65 rocker ratio= 12.06mm
exhaust low cam
5.2 x 1.549 rocker ratio= 8.05mm
exhaust hi cam
7.032 x 1.595 rocker ratio= 11.80mm

so (i figure) the real lifts (depending on the motor's real lash) will be more like this. excuse my doctors handwriting.

[URL=""][/URL]

and kelfords (using their lash and the right rocker ratios) are more like this

intake low
6.375 lift (6.575-0.2mm lash) x 1.62 rocker ratio =10.32mm N1 LIFT=8.29MM

intake high
7.8125 lift (8.815- 0.2mm lash) x 1.65 rocker ratio = 12.89mm N1 LIFT 11.78MM

exhaust low
5.187 lift (5.587 -0.4mm lash) x 1.549 rocker ratio = 8.03mm N1 LIFT 7.48MM

exhaust high
7.375mm ( 7.775 -0.4mm lash) x 1.595 rocker ratio = 11.76mm N1 LIFT 11.21MM


for duration, i email kelford and asked for their duration at 0.04mm. whilst the kelfords seem longer (314,312), their duration is measured at 0.1mm not 0.4mm. their reply was "The cams will be 274°/273°, when measured at .016”/.40mm at the valve with lash set." so the n1 duration is a lot longer at the same lift. that said, there are other factor's here to consider, such as lobe ramp angles and centrelines. the kelfords have a tighter centreline,and a quotes from snickers (2009)...

"Generally most manufacturers of VVL cams will use a shorter duration and more lift profile to open and close the valve faster at lower RPMs to achieve a higher cylinder fill. Open the intake valve right around the end of the exhaust valve closing for low overlap, pop that valve open fast and close it fast right after TDC so you do not get any fresh air/fuel charge reversion back up the intake port"

and jamie marsh on cam comparison "184c>all"

worrying quote by "killer crossover (2010) about retainer to valve stem seal clearance though...''One more thing I like to point out for those considering running 12.5 mm and higher cams, be aware there will be stock retainer to valve stem seal interference. I've measured it and it's .480"-.490"/12.1-12.4 mm."

so i pm'd him and he has said that he had cut the bottom of the retainers to fit these cams. if anyone else has done this, please chime in. also if anyone has different take on all this, let me know.

You're a nerd and I enjoy it.

Awesome thread man!

Your numbers are going to be lower than most with the cat in place. Very few people on here even run one. Shame on you people killing the environment one start up at a time.

no cat convertor in aus is like 5k fine if the police catch you. it is a 100cell one but. not that much restriction there.

More lift.

[URL=""][/URL]

interesting they mark the intake cam.

[URL=""][/URL]

double checked all my adds, and their right. 184c intake hicam lift is 12.89mm, 1.1mm more than n1's

[URL=""][/URL]

[URL=""][/URL]

opinion is still divided about potential valve stem seal to retainer clearance. aftermarket retainers were said to increase this clearance. good enough excuse to buy some i guess, though i will be asking my bottom end builders to measure this when the cams go in and the re-shim is done. some comparison photo's. rough measures indicate 1mm more clearance over standard retainers

[URL=""][/URL]
[URL=""][/URL]

[URL=""][/URL]
[URL=""][/URL]

[URL=""][/URL]

@sss4me the kelford cam have more lift and less duration that is advertise?

there's nothing wrong with their measures at all, but the rocker arm ratio's they use are only 1.6 . there are 4 different rocker arm ratio's for the sr20ve, and both the intake ones are more than this (1.62 low lobe and 1.65 high lobe). added to that, they measure their duration at 0.1mm and 1 mm. nissan measure at 0.4mm.

a simple comparison which you can see above ^ the the hi cam lobe total height comparison (39.31 vrs 40.01). the kelford is 0.7mm more before the rocker arm ratio makes it more.

@sss4me you already sold the 4.4 FD of the stock 16ve gearbox? im looking for one.
thanks.