Other Engine Conversions - non V-8 Discussion of non-rotary engines, exc V-8's, in a car originally powered by a Rotary Engine.

KA24DE in a rx7

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-26-06, 12:29 AM
  #1  
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
671_rx7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: guam-ton
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
KA24DE in a rx7

well wazzup fellas im just wondering if any of you guys here did a KA swap into a rx7?if its ok with you guys can i see some pics of the swap? i know that the motor is going to be off 1 1/2 inch to the passenger side and you have to cut the crossmember thats basically i know about this swap..so if anyone has any other info on this swap please fill free to post your comments thankz alot jimz!
Old 06-26-06, 12:33 AM
  #2  
Alcohol Fueled!

iTrader: (2)
 
J-Rat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hood River oregon
Posts: 11,093
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
please sell your car now..
Old 06-26-06, 12:50 AM
  #3  
Passing life by

 
iceblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Scotland, USA
Posts: 4,028
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by J-Rat
please sell your car now..
Old 06-30-06, 05:11 AM
  #4  
Full Member

 
Timpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: japan
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
don't do it...

KA24 is way too heavy, approx 130lbs heavier than 5.7L V8 LS1. no joke.
I heard people usally lose 130lb when they swap an LS1 into their 240SX.
Old 07-03-06, 12:13 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
driftking777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: south dakota
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
^^^yup hes right, you'll gain alittle weight. but dont alot of V8 swappers that went iron block talk about how there handling was either effected in a good way, or didnt change it at all?

Anywho...dont go KA...its stupid
Old 07-03-06, 01:37 PM
  #6  
Rotary Enthusiast

iTrader: (4)
 
DriftDreamzSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ventura
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
haha, ka's rule, ive been trying to blow mine up for 3 years and she keeps running strong.
Old 07-05-06, 10:23 AM
  #7  
Respecognize!

 
Whizbang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Anchor Bay, CA
Posts: 4,106
Received 71 Likes on 42 Posts
for the moeny i would opt for the 4.0L toyota V8. which i might do in a spare FB i have for the hell of it.
Old 07-08-06, 01:36 PM
  #8  
Old [Sch|F]ool

 
peejay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Posts: 12,512
Received 417 Likes on 297 Posts
Originally Posted by DriftDreamzSS
haha, ka's rule, ive been trying to blow mine up for 3 years and she keeps running strong.

That's because they are too weak to hurt themselves.
Old 07-08-06, 06:03 PM
  #9  
Passing life by

 
iceblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Scotland, USA
Posts: 4,028
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by DriftDreamzSS
haha, ka's rule, ive been trying to blow mine up for 3 years and she keeps running strong.
n00b, silence!
Old 07-09-06, 09:01 AM
  #10  
moon ******

 
Nihilanthic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
http://www.ka-t.org/

Use a button recently, idiots?

Old 07-12-06, 09:15 AM
  #11  
Grand Poobah of Torque

 
dopefishlives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Clermont, Florida
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The KA is a great motor -- just all the SR faboi's who scream "OMG, who'd want a truck motor?!"
LT*/LS*/Ford Mod./Etc, are all offered in trucks as well.

Truth of the matter is, a KA with the stock SR turbo, SR injectors and SR fuel pump will generate more HP than the SR at the same boost levels. Three differant guys have shown dyno's of their KA24DE-T's built from the SR parts bin and their WHP is sitting at 200-220 while the WHP of the SR is closer to 170-180. The KA internals: block, crank, rods, and pistons have been safely capable of 400rwhp, beyond that point, upgraded rods and pistons are recommended. The stock SR bottom-end is usually out of the safety margins beyond 350rwhp.

That said, I think a KA-powered RX-7 would be a poor idea. I personally think that piston swaps should be kept to piston cars but I wont get into the 'ethics' of that here. What I will mention is that for the same time and effort a LS1 or other potential motor would more readily fit and offer better initial gains. Honestly I'd look at 3-rotor clips or a Cosmo 13B-RE and some nice port work.
Old 07-14-06, 09:29 PM
  #12  
Stop Surfing @ Work

iTrader: (9)
 
exhaustnoteV2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: OC
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
How about we mention that a stock KA24DE has about 140-155 flywheel hp. Not very exciting. I had a KA in my 240 and I've had a few SRs.

The amount of money, effort and time it'll take to get it to work isn't worth it in the end. You're spending money (and a lot of it) to lose power.
Old 07-15-06, 02:44 PM
  #13  
moon ******

 
Nihilanthic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Who the **** is going to use a STOCK KA24?

Did you just miss the post from dopefish, and my own post linking to a website to several KA24s over 700 hp at the wheels before his??

http://www.ka-t.org/ <- Maybe you'll notice it now?

And in the future, READ THE THREAD BEFORE POSTING PLIX
Old 07-15-06, 02:58 PM
  #14  
Junior Member

 
Flipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I personally would keep the rotary in the car it came from. With that being said I have owned a couple 240's and have lots of experience with many different motors and the KA has a LOT of potential.
Old 07-15-06, 06:14 PM
  #15  
Passing life by

 
iceblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Scotland, USA
Posts: 4,028
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Nihilanthic
Who the **** is going to use a STOCK KA24?

Did you just miss the post from dopefish, and my own post linking to a website to several KA24s over 700 hp at the wheels before his??

http://www.ka-t.org/ <- Maybe you'll notice it now?

And in the future, READ THE THREAD BEFORE POSTING PLIX
Oh nice in that case maybe we should start posting the 1000whp 13bs and they dont even require swaping.

now take your truck motor POS and blow yourself.
Old 07-16-06, 12:53 AM
  #16  
Stop Surfing @ Work

iTrader: (9)
 
exhaustnoteV2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: OC
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Nihilanthic
Who the **** is going to use a STOCK KA24?

Did you just miss the post from dopefish, and my own post linking to a website to several KA24s over 700 hp at the wheels before his??

http://www.ka-t.org/ <- Maybe you'll notice it now?

And in the future, READ THE THREAD BEFORE POSTING PLIX
Originally Posted by Dopefishlives
Truth of the matter is, a KA with the stock SR turbo, SR injectors and SR fuel pump will generate more HP than the SR at the same boost levels. Three differant guys have shown dyno's of their KA24DE-T's built from the SR parts bin and their WHP is sitting at 200-220 while the WHP of the SR is closer to 170-180...
Originally Posted by 671_rx7
well wazzup fellas im just wondering if any of you guys here did a KA swap into a rx7?if its ok with you guys can i see some pics of the swap? i know that the motor is going to be off 1 1/2 inch to the passenger side and you have to cut the crossmember thats basically i know about this swap..so if anyone has any other info on this swap please fill free to post your comments thankz alot jimz!
You'll notice he never mentions a turbo in his original post. Also, the title of the thread is, "KA24DE in a rx7", not "KA24DET in a rx7".

Dopefish, I'd hope the KA makes more power than the SR. the KA is a 2.4L while the SR is a 2.0.

Nihilanthic, is it necesary to be so rude? You KA guys always have such a Napoleon complex...

Last edited by exhaustnoteV2; 07-16-06 at 01:03 AM.
Old 07-16-06, 11:35 AM
  #17  
Rallye RX7

iTrader: (11)
 
fidelity101's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: MI/CHI
Posts: 2,403
Received 92 Likes on 55 Posts
Originally Posted by peejay
That's because they are too weak to hurt themselves.
1000 crank hp and 9.7 in the 1/4 aint weak.
Old 07-16-06, 12:16 PM
  #18  
moon ******

 
Nihilanthic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by iceblue
Oh nice in that case maybe we should start posting the 1000whp 13bs and they dont even require swaping.

now take your truck motor POS and blow yourself.
Stock 1000whp 13b? Where?

How much would you spend on getting a 13b to that much power? Or, more relevantly, how much would you invest to get a 13b to the same power as a KA24?

I can tell you now that you wont have the same MPG for a street car (and lets not kid ourselves, they ARE street cars) or as much torque, and if you dont know why thats your problem, not mine.

So yes, please do post with a cumulative cost to do it how much it would cost.

That said, its arguably a better idea to do it in a S13 if you can find one cheap, but the ricer-flation has driven up the price. Plus, all the SR20DET-bandwagon guys tend to give away KAs, and FCs with trashed engines are hardly rare, so you do the math.

But anyway, saying irrelevant, stupid **** like 'truck motor' just makes you look more like a stupid ricer fad-chasing dumbfuck than you actually are, especially when "REPU" and the SEARCH BUTTON could make you have to eat your own logic.
Old 07-16-06, 12:24 PM
  #19  
moon ******

 
Nihilanthic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by exhaustnoteV2
You'll notice he never mentions a turbo in his original post. Also, the title of the thread is, "KA24DE in a rx7", not "KA24DET in a rx7".

Dopefish, I'd hope the KA makes more power than the SR. the KA is a 2.4L while the SR is a 2.0.

Nihilanthic, is it necesary to be so rude? You KA guys always have such a Napoleon complex...
Im not a KA guy. Im a "LIMA" guy, and that motor happens to have a few things in common with the KA (similar displacement, SOHC like some KAs, a not well known turbo mill...), except it started life in the pinto, so I guess Im some random *** swapping a motor in Mazda's holy rotary chariot

I really dont like ricer idiots who come in, dont read the thread, and then spew their typical nonsense. The "truck motor" arguement is especially foolish. What is a 'truck motor'?

Its an epithet that speaks volumes of his perspective and what he actually knows vs what he THINKS he knows. So yeah, Im gonna be rude at someone who cant scroll down and read before opening his textual mouth.
Old 07-16-06, 12:33 PM
  #20  
boost > *

 
adictd2b00st's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: buffalo, ny
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the problem with the KA tho is it will never be a high reving motor. the stroke is too long. it will make a boatload of torque if turbo'd tho. depends what you want to do with the car i guess, personally i'd look to another motor, but that being said there are worse choices than a KA too
Old 07-16-06, 12:43 PM
  #21  
moon ******

 
Nihilanthic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by adictd2b00st
the problem with the KA tho is it will never be a high reving motor. the stroke is too long. it will make a boatload of torque if turbo'd tho. depends what you want to do with the car i guess, personally i'd look to another motor, but that being said there are worse choices than a KA too
For one, thats incorrect. 96.0 millimeters = 3.77952756 inches <- thats NOT too much to rev with, with forged rods... but the real thing is you dont NEED to rev very high if you can make the power at "low" rpms. I can name a ton of v8s with 4" strokes that can rev as high as you want to build them to run, but the real honest to god truth is thats not exceptionally long and theres no good reason to focus on rpms as a measure of performance.

Its all about power to weight. Revs are a means, not an end, unless youre stuck with short tires, short gears, and youre making so much power you top out too early, and its more expensive to change gearing than to rev up... with turbo motors anyway. Now if you have a ginormious turbo then you need rpms to spool it, and a few more than that to actually have a useable powerband, but thats not such a necessity with 2.4 liters displacement and good headflow unless youre going to ridiculous lengths... yet, again, thats only for race conditions, and you can just get some real strong rods and go for all the revs you want.

Being around rotaries and short gearing might make you think revs are 'good' or a necessity, but therye just another means to the same end.

Ignoring VE, a good way to tell how much power a engine can make is to just multiply the displacement by the rpms it can rev out to. Just for a quick example, comparing a 302 (a 5 liter v8) that revs to 8K vs a 402 (about 6.6) liters that revs to 6K rpms, they both end up about the same in terms of how much power they can move assuming the same VE and are equally unrestricted. Both have the same bore, just one is a 4" stroke. The 402 will be easier to drive, have a much milder and better for mpg cam, have more torque and make the same power the 302 does at lower rpms, and granted you can properly gear it, it will generally outperform the 302 assuming the two motors are in cars of equal weight. The difference in stroke on the crank will have a negligeable effect on weight, btw.

Doing the same sort of math, 2.4*6500 = 15600. Now, 15600/2 = 7800rpms.

Now, which one woudl you rather play with, a 7800rpm 2 liter or a 6500 rpm 2.4? Sure, the SR20 would 'scream' and have the tach needle fly all over the place, but it wont be any faster than a KA24 of the same power, and torque will be to the KA's advantage.
Old 07-16-06, 12:49 PM
  #22  
Stop Surfing @ Work

iTrader: (9)
 
exhaustnoteV2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: OC
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Nihilanthic
For one, thats incorrect. 96.0 millimeters = 3.77952756 inches <- thats NOT too much to rev with, with forged rods... but the real thing is you dont NEED to rev very high if you can make the power at "low" rpms. I can name a ton of v8s with 4" strokes that can rev as high as you want to build them to run, but the real honest to god truth is thats not exceptionally long and theres no good reason to focus on rpms as a measure of performance.

Its all about power to weight. Revs are a means, not an end, unless youre stuck with short tires, short gears, and youre making so much power you top out too early, and its more expensive to change gearing than to rev up... with turbo motors anyway. Now if you have a ginormious turbo then you need rpms to spool it, and a few more than that to actually have a useable powerband, but thats not such a necessity with 2.4 liters displacement and good headflow unless youre going to ridiculous lengths... yet, again, thats only for race conditions, and you can just get some real strong rods and go for all the revs you want.

Being around rotaries and short gearing might make you think revs are 'good' or a necessity, but therye just another means to the same end.

Ignoring VE, a good way to tell how much power a engine can make is to just multiply the displacement by the rpms it can rev out to. Just for a quick example, comparing a 302 (a 5 liter v8) that revs to 8K vs a 402 (about 6.6) liters that revs to 6K rpms, they both end up about the same in terms of how much power they can move assuming the same VE and are equally unrestricted. Both have the same bore, just one is a 4" stroke. The 402 will be easier to drive, have a much milder and better for mpg cam, have more torque and make the same power the 302 does at lower rpms, and granted you can properly gear it, it will generally outperform the 302 assuming the two motors are in cars of equal weight. The difference in stroke on the crank will have a negligeable effect on weight, btw.

Doing the same sort of math, 2.4*6500 = 15600. Now, 15600/2 = 7800rpms.

Now, which one woudl you rather play with, a 7800rpm 2 liter or a 6500 rpm 2.4? Sure, the SR20 would 'scream' and have the tach needle fly all over the place, but it wont be any faster than a KA24 of the same power, and torque will be to the KA's advantage.
Let me translate the above statement for everyone, "blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah; blah! Blah, blah blah? Blah, blah blah!"

Nissan put the KA in the 240 to save costs and forgo having to get the SR20DET past emissions...Keep your KA and enjoy--it still sucks.
Old 07-16-06, 12:53 PM
  #23  
moon ******

 
Nihilanthic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Right, knee jerk emotionally like a baby and ignore the facts.

Youre just pissed off that your assumptions dont match with the facts and cant face them, so you reject them, and then waste everyones bandwidth to go 'bla bla bla'.

Just tell me, how the **** is a smaller motor that cant pass emissions better than a bigger one that can and that can out perform it pound for pound?

Well, wait, this IS a rotary forum...
Old 07-16-06, 01:19 PM
  #24  
boost > *

 
adictd2b00st's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: buffalo, ny
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
go on any nissan forum and ask them why the KA can't rev. BECAUSE THE STROKE IS TOO LONG. go on KA-T.org, the biggest supporters of the KA, and they'll also tell you the same thing. oh wait i forgot tho, you know everything.
Old 07-16-06, 01:49 PM
  #25  
moon ******

 
Nihilanthic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Im fairly sure the stock cam's duration and timing, and the valvetrain, has a lot more to do with the revability than the stroke. Also, the fact that theyre making a **** of a lot of power below 7K rpms means THEY DONT NEED TO. Stop looking through rotary clolored glasses at everything, and maybe you might want to try to understand.

I laid it out rather clearly that the KA can do the same at 6500 rpms, what a SR needs 7800 to do. And any idiot (well, dunno about you) knows the longer the rev range is, the less of the total rev range can be volumetrically efficient. So a shorter rev range, more of it useful (higher VE), the same power, and more torque. Thats BETTER.

Stop getting so hung up on RPMS. Its fine. If you have a need to rev that high and want to spend the money on it, youre more than welcome to get some long, forged connecting rods and the right pistons and set it up to rev higher, and then get cams and valve springs that actually work at higher rpms, and take a chunk out of your low end for the sake of watching a stupid needle shoot farther to the right.

A KA is no different than any other motor, the right parts and enough money and it can do what you want. Unless, of course, the KA has a ridiculously short rod to stroke ratio, but I doubt thats the case.

EDIT: I just did a ******* google search.

For the KA24(D)E, that rod ratio is: 6.496 / 3.780 ~= 1.72
For the SR20DET, that rod ratio is: 5.366 / 3.386 ~= 1.58

Pucker up and kiss my ***, idiot. The limit to revving a KA is the cam profile, and thats easily changed. If youre worried about piston speed, get some good pistons and some good forged rods, balance the assembly, and then slap yourself for wasting money on revving a motor high that doesnt have to.

Last edited by Nihilanthic; 07-16-06 at 02:00 PM. Reason: Rod Stroke Ratios.


Quick Reply: KA24DE in a rx7



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:19 PM.