SR16VE NEO VVL information!

[Adeen]

turbo better with a rather bigger hole burning through ur pocket...

bro deacon,
maybe it's their way of saying NA sux...hehehe....

 

[deacon]

Sigh if only they knew the pleasure of fine tuning rather than brute force.

 

[Adeen]

ya la....NA rulez....
maybe i'm a 'hipokrit' though, since i changed from an NA to supercharge...
trying different things...

still like how the NA roars...

 

[cmng]

Turbo vs NA
Some people tought NA good..
after convert engine.. regret.. not up to expectation after spend such amout of $$

turbo and NA conversion is about similiar price

 

[deacon]

Well i consider people who do that as uninformed people.

 

[Adeen]

yup...true...
maybe got some turbo and na conversion with similar price...
but u will be spending more to maintain a turbo than to maintain an NA...
no doubt about it..

 

[cmng]

yup...true...
maybe got some turbo and na conversion with similar price...
but u will be spending more to maintain a turbo than to maintain an NA...
no doubt about it..

err i think you are wrong here

Maintaining SR16VE/20VE will be more expensive than SR20DET

and for your info
SR20DET fuel consumption is better than SR20VE + manual gearbox

 

[Adeen]

u've experienced those engines urself...?

since my friend have been using alot of turbo engines....and lastly he changed to vtec becoz turbo maintenance to expensive...

 

[kwfei28]

hei cmng has both experience of turbo ansd na. Previously he has an SR20det with amazing hp and now NA. Please do not challenge him.

 

[deacon]

err i think you are wrong here

Maintaining SR16VE/20VE will be more expensive than SR20DET

and for your info
SR20DET fuel consumption is better than SR20VE + manual gearbox

I fail to see how a stock SR16VE could be more expensive to maintain than a SR20DET motor. Are you talking in terms of availability of parts or modifying or what? Stock for stock and everyday normal driving i would always choose the 1.6 NA engine over the high powered turbo SR20DET engine.

Please do shed some light on how you arrived at your conclusion. Fuel consumption figures and what not to prove your point very interesting.

 

[cmng]

Well
this comparison on Nissan SR FWD/AWD... not other car manufacturer

calclulate this way

SR20DET water pump.. RM150
SR20/16VE water pump Rm300, you can use back DE water pump but underperform

SR16/20VE Overhaul kit. RM 800
SR20DE/DET overhaul kit RM 500
GTIR Overhaul kit RM 700

SR16VE Engine kosong RM 2000
SR20VE Engine kosong RM 1500
SR20DET engine kosong RM1000 GTIR Rm1500

Engine oil..both it same.. nothing extra
Turbo car only have extra thing which is turbo
The rest same

SR20VE with SR16VE LSD gearbox.. i think most of the owner only manage RM300 to 350km full tank about RM90 petrol

SR16VE manual stock standard only can go up to Rm70 for 300km
i personally own this and rarely go up above 3500 rpm

My previous SR20DET GTiR
Full Tank based on current petrol is RM90 can go up to 400- 450km
daily drive boosting 0.7 bar
with occasional boosting up to 1 bar
and 3" inlet Exhaust Piping and Super loud Blitz Nur Exhaust

Modifying on SR16VE/20VE ?
You will spend more $$ on this compared to turbo

 

[deacon]

Here's where i think there are some variation in your figures:

Turbo engines require more oil changes over the course of the engine's life.

Turbo engines also require turbo maintenance which could result in a replacement turbo.

No one buys a SR16VE kosong just for fun unless you plan to mod - so i think that can be left out. But in defense of the price that engine is pretty rare.

Fuel consumption for a SR16VE is 8.1L/100km.
http://www.nissan-lucino.info/specs/1997_sep/specs_vz-r/
Fuel consumption for a SR20DET is 12.7/100km.
http://www.autospeed.com/A_2051/title_Response/article.html

While i do believe that modding NA is more expensive due to price versus gains in terms of power. But when comparing stock and everyday driving i believe i've proven that the SR20DET doesn't stack up to the SR16VE

 

[cmng]

Actually turbo and NA maintenance is same
it just some itchy hand want to gain more power without consider other factor

why turbo need to change oil more frequent than NA ?
i change my oil every 5000km on my DET
So do my VE

turbo engine require turbo replacement
the car is designed to run at 0.7 bar boost
some itchy hand want to try it at 1 bar.. hench need replacement since turbo blown
Some turbo car have stock intercooler.. it good enough
but some itchy hand want to put bigger IC.. hench spend more $$

some turbo car have stock manifold.. so the story go on

same like NA.. it designed to run 8k rpm.. some itchy hand want to try it to 9k rpm
hench need engine kosong once it blown

Fuel consumption ?
Friend ..did you own the car to comfirm the fuel consumption?
manufacturer detail is never accurate

I currently driving SR16VE stock standard 300km per Rm70

My Ex car SR20DET GTiR get 400 to 450km on RM90 petrol

A friend owning SR20VE + SR16VE gearbox get 300 to 350 km for RM90 buck

A friend owning a 4WD SR20DET getting 400km for RM 90 full tank
4WD !! not FWD


This is nissan NA vs Nissan Turbo.. not mitsu honda comparison

if you play nissan long time. you know turbo fuel consumption is much better than NA

$$ vs bhp
turbo have the higher ratio

but if you cal maintenance..
i do said both it same.. it up how the owner take care of the engine

if you said fuel consumption
SR20DET FWD will better than SR20VE and SR16VE

 

[deacon]

turbo engine require turbo replacement
the car is designed to run at 0.7 bar boost
some itchy hand want to try it at 1 bar.. hench need replacement since turbo blown
Some turbo car have stock intercooler.. it good enough
but some itchy hand want to put bigger IC.. hench spend more $$

Actually contrary to popular belief you do not have to boost higher because due to age even at stock levels cracks will develop in the housing and will need to be replaced.

same like NA.. it designed to run 8k rpm.. some itchy hand want to try it to 9k rpm
hench need engine kosong once it blown

That's up to the driver. An intelligent driver will shift at peak RPM performance not necessarily at the limiter. I attribute that to stupidity. Most dyno sheets will prove that even stroked B16Bs gain peak at 8200rpm.

Fuel consumption ?
Friend ..did you own the car to comfirm the fuel consumption?
manufacturer detail is never accurate

There was a recent study done in the US that proves fuel consumption figures. But sad to say no one drives that innocently. At the end of the day the claims are true and have been substantiated.

The previous owner of my car used to get 450km on a full tank. I could only achieve 370km a full tank even before mod.

if you said fuel consumption
SR20DET FWD will better than SR20VE and SR16VE

I find that incredibly difficult to believe as you yourself admit to stepping on the has often. By no means are you, i or your friends, a good benchmark for fuel consumption. Which is we rely on manufacturer claims (which are proven fact thru testing otherwise they wouldn't be able to publish those claims.)

 

[Adeen]

i dunno about nissan since never even used one...
maybe it's turbo's are easy to maintain...
but my fren just converted a ca18det into a 120y...a month later, blown engine...hehehe....crazy bugger...

the high maintenance turbo engine is maybe the mitsu, mazda make...??

 

[cmng]

manufactured claim is based on everything stock standard and based on the country and based on the particular come out as manufacturer
Assuming you upgraded to rim size, tyre type, exhaust , air filter
will this fuel consumption remain same ?

Japan manufactured claim on BHP and Fuel consumption
can it used on malaysia ?
did you consider Fuel used? tyre used ? Weather condition ?

Remember.. this is converted engine on different car..

SR20DET fuel consumption is based on 4WD and it large car like BlueBird. Altima Avenir Wagon
but when you converted to lighter car and FWD.. and different gear ratio
the fuel consumption is way different.
shorter gear ratio or longer gear ratio play a role on this


Did you own both SR16VE, SR20DET FWD and drive both before ?

Why never believe certain turbo car have better fuel consumption than NA ?
Why thinking turbo car harder to maintain ?
Why thinking big cc car consume more petrol ?

Own one. . drive it..
you will change your mindset since not every turbo car have high maintenance

by the way. this applicable on nissan based on my experience.. no idea on honda and mitsu

 

[cmng]

One mindset when converted engine
a lot people when convert engine. just convert
without considering few factor
Engine mileage
Engine condition

Not matter NA or turbo..
change all the neccesary thing before you swap over to your car chassis .

 

[Adeen]

true....true...
heard from a mech i know, turbo'd cars are easy to maintain if it is stock standard....
since i've never owned one, cannot comment on it...
just hear from frens that have owned one..(which drive mitsu,mazda make turbo cars)
had a friend driving that pulsar with sr20det...
he said maintenance is normal oni...
maybe in the future will try turbo'd cars...

 

[deacon]

sorry if i had to compare my mivec 1.8 to a 1.8 gsr the conclusion would be my car has beeter consumption.

bring facts to backup your logic if not i've got the proof and you don't. i rest my case.

 

[cmng]

Well friend
in fact i mention nissan SR DET vs VE.. not mitsu vs mitsu

in your mitsu. maybe yes
but in nissan .. it reversed
Turbo will better and easier to maintain and better fuel consumption compared to NA

Never believe it ?
i have the proof
since i own both car and drive both car
:)