Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Problems, ideas and comments specific to engine swaps.
User avatar
Dave Patten
Supporter
Posts: 836
Joined: 20 Jun 2008 13:30
Location: Dunbarton, NH
Contact:

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by Dave Patten » 15 Jun 2012 06:41

S15DET wrote:Oooooo, no you didn't (head shake).

I too have drooled over the Powertec and H1 twin-busa.
Back in the 80's USAC Midget legend Mel Kenyon built a V8 Suzuki engine for his racecar. Like most successful, out of the box, racecar projects it too was banned.

http://melkenyon.tripod.com/suzuki-329x494.JPG

Always thought it would make a cool street engine though.
Dave Patten
http://www.FutoFab.com
Dunbarton, NH

User avatar
S15DET
Supporter
Posts: 2561
Joined: 03 Dec 2004 17:02
Location: Waxhaw, NC

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by S15DET » 15 Jun 2012 07:08

He is a legend and it proves there are few "new ideas".

510rob
Moderator
Posts: 4795
Joined: 09 Oct 2003 23:37
Location: Vancouver, BC
Contact:

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by 510rob » 15 Jun 2012 07:10

Too bad those silly clowns John Knepp and Don Devendorf couldn't get an SR20 back in the day and only had that shit-ass VG30 to work with. They must have had a lot of luck and few good raw castings to start with, or something like that. The SR20 would have made the T-810 chassis Electramotive GTP cars waaaay faster than the crappy VG30 they were "stuck" running, right? Hehehehe... ...both the SR and the VG are great motors, but who cares. People throw around HP numbers all day long with no clue as to what they really mean. If a race car with sticky road race slicks and a genuine 350HP and 300+ lbs/ft of torque can pave the tires at speed, then what the hell are you actually going to do with 500HP and 600 lbs/ft of torque? ...burn more fuel? wear out the cams by idling all day long? ...tell all your friends, tell the whole bunch, I just had a hippopotamus for lunch! "Yo, I just laid down 500HP at the wheels dude." "That is siiiiiiiiiiiiiiick!!!" Cue reality and lets go sit in a traffic jam on the freeway (irony of the language of "free"-way)...

We are all guilty of high HP ideas at times, but logic and budget usually quench the fancy ideas for most of us. However, I really like it when people make wild contraptions that are the machines we all dream about from time to time; Ron, you've got one of fresh-est-ly built ones. Julian, you've built a few too. Keith, 'nuff said. Byron, Aron, James, Denis, the list goes on... ...and after all, isn't that a big part of what this website is all about??? I have a big turbo on the shelf, with huge injectors and all sorts of other silly go waaaay too fast stuff, but perhaps someday I'll write about going to Bonneville. Now THAT would be fun... (I mean running a car there, not writing about going there!)

That begs the question; if I were to go to Bonneville, would I be better to take an SR20 or a VG30 (or VG33?)???

User avatar
vgwagon
Posts: 1589
Joined: 22 Jun 2004 22:42
Location: Burnaby, British Columbia

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by vgwagon » 15 Jun 2012 11:14

RonM wrote:If I were going to try and answer this thread question without starting a pissing match I'd say something to the effect of comparing apples and oranges. On that note, if we're talking about these motors for use in a 510 drag-goon vs a slalom sedan then we've just entered a whole new bowl of fruit. However seeing's how I just spent sick $ stuffing an s13 SR under my hood I'm prepared to take sides, let the testosterone fly and defend the venerable SR.

When I started my build I fantasized about an H1 V8 twin Hayabusa. 12,000 RPM redllne and 450 hp. naturally aspirated. :twisted: The $25,000 price tag proved too ill. My next fantasy power plant was a VG30DETT. I started researching and although I found nothing in the way of after market swap support for the 510 I was driven to get the big hp, thinking 6 is better than 4 by 50%. My research led me to David Rebello. He builds some seriously competitive Datsun/Nissan motors, two of which hold world records. I spoke to him about putting a VG in my Troy Earmish built chassis and he talked me out of it. I told him I wanted a street-able auto-X car with spooky power and was considering the VG30. Dave said that the aluminum block VG (the light one) does not hold up to sustained big hp., and the older iron block VG would ruin the weight balance. He went on to say that the VG's hp to $ ratio was not in the same league as the SR. "The stock SR block can handle 450 hp (the number I told him I was shooting for) all day and do it with a smile on it's face". The truth is, that VG torque gain is all but useless in a 2000lbs street car for anything other than a dyno score card. Hell I've seen an SR20 pull 800hp on a mustang dyno, but what's the point if you cant use it. This isn't pokemon where you flash a card to win.

In short Chunstone you've answered your own question " What would be good reasons for anyone to do an SR turbo swap? Lighter engine? Better weight distribution? Easier install? less expensive parts, etc...." There's a reason the SR is more popular than the VG in the tuner crowd, drifting, and on the drag strip, it's because The SR is better. :P Now let the pissing begin!
First off....the VG was never in production use, an aluminum block....I am surprised that someone with so much knowledge would give out such misinformation. The SR/VG/KA.....ect.....debate could go on forever.........who cares, every motor has its strengths and weaknesses. The VG will Handle a great deal of power on stock internals, Go over to Z31Performance and read for a while......see whats out there before just spewing BS. My VG30 with 400,000 km puts 191hp to the wheels, 208 ft/lbs of torque, headers and cam gears are the only real significant modifications, this on a stock ecu and stock tune. The torque gain is not useless. This HP to $ ratio for the VG in my estimation would be far more equal or better than the SR just based on displacement......Turbo charging a VG is no different that Turbocharging an SR, were talking 2.0 vs. 3.0, The VG's biggest weakness is port flow...To each there own.
Denis Gagné
AKA VGwagon

69 510 VG30e swapped
73 240z VG30et swapped
86 300zx na2t VG30et converted

User avatar
510-Trevor
Supporter
Posts: 1370
Joined: 03 Mar 2007 18:34
Location: Calgary, Alberta

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by 510-Trevor » 15 Jun 2012 11:46

510rob wrote:Too bad those silly clowns John Knepp and Don Devendorf couldn't get an SR20 back in the day and only had that shit-ass VG30 to work with. They must have had a lot of luck and few good raw castings to start with, or something like that. The SR20 would have made the T-810 chassis Electramotive GTP cars waaaay faster than the crappy VG30 they were "stuck" running, right? Hehehehe...
I know a guy that worked on the Electramotive GTU cars back in those days. Apparently they used special high flow "stock" heads cast in "Japan". They had much more HP than they let on. ("stock"=custom, "Japan"=NewYork)
1972 Yellow 4dr

User avatar
RonM
Supporter
Posts: 1750
Joined: 16 Aug 2010 20:42
Location: SF, East Bay, 510 area code

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by RonM » 15 Jun 2012 15:19

vgwagon wrote:0
First off....the VG was never in production use, an aluminum block....I am surprised that someone with so much knowledge would give out such misinformation. The SR/VG/KA.....ect.....debate could go on forever.........who cares, every motor has its strengths and weaknesses. The VG will Handle a great deal of power on stock internals, Go over to Z31Performance and read for a while......see whats out there before just spewing BS. My VG30 with 400,000 km puts 191hp to the wheels, 208 ft/lbs of torque, headers and cam gears are the only real significant modifications, this on a stock ecu and stock tune. The torque gain is not useless. This HP to $ ratio for the VG in my estimation would be far more equal or better than the SR just based on displacement......Turbo charging a VG is no different that Turbocharging an SR, were talking 2.0 vs. 3.0, The VG's biggest weakness is port flow...To each there own.
Well VGwagon, You've made some strong accusations here, but maybe it would be better if we kept to the subject rather than making accusations based on nothing more than assumptions.

You are right, the iron block VG was retired in 2004. Nissan introduced VQ aluminum block V-6 engine in 2000. Missing the Q was my mistake, not misinformation from David Rebello. I want to make this absolutely CLEAR, David Rebello is a class act all the way and he knows his shit. This conversation we had took place two years ago, and obviously the finer details escape me. David's suggestion was that the newer aluminum block is the only Nissan V6 motor light enough to have met my handling needs, and that this Aluminum motor does not hold up to the Big big. I hope this clears up any confusion.

Now, if we are going to enter a pissing match can I make one request? Lets keep to one subject of argument, otherwise we're fighting different battles; so to speak. In this thread topic the figure "500hp" was the standard for comparison of these two motors. Not 191hp. At 500hp however a 2000lb car is not going to gain anything from an additional 100 foot pounds of torque, but loosing the added weight off the front end it will. In order to get this kind of HP out of a VG we both know you'll spend significantly more money than an equivalent SR. Not only are performance parts more expensive for the VG, all the upgrade needs to be done on two banks of cylinders rether than one. Before accusing someone of "spewing BS" you'd better make sure you're on the same page, otherwise you're slandering someone needlessly.

Again, as I stated in my post there is the added variable of intended use, but if you have any opinions based simply on getting 500hp for their 510 and why someone might choose one or the other, I'm all ears.
Sometimes people loose touch with subjectivity, because they've got they're heads stuck too far up they're own,,, Reality.

User avatar
icehouse
Posts: 3479
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 17:06
Location: Everett Wa

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by icehouse » 15 Jun 2012 17:47

haha I wonder how many times I've posted in a THIS MOTOR VS. THAT MOTOR thread haha

I'm a numbers and math guy and have installed the above engines. I've always wonder how much weight is really added to the front with a VG. If any. Since it's a V engine it sits much further back than a SR. You can still stand in the engine bay with it installed. But then to add a third dimension is the CG lower with a VG? I know the SR valve cover is mighty close to the hood all said and done. In all reality the best motor is the one the person picks for there car. It doesn't really matter. Like rob said we just end up sitting in traffic most the time anyways haha :)
"People don't like it when shit doesn't match their rule of thumb." Sam

User avatar
vgwagon
Posts: 1589
Joined: 22 Jun 2004 22:42
Location: Burnaby, British Columbia

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by vgwagon » 15 Jun 2012 19:47

RonM wrote:
vgwagon wrote:0
First off....the VG was never in production use, an aluminum block....I am surprised that someone with so much knowledge would give out such misinformation. The SR/VG/KA.....ect.....debate could go on forever.........who cares, every motor has its strengths and weaknesses. The VG will Handle a great deal of power on stock internals, Go over to Z31Performance and read for a while......see whats out there before just spewing BS. My VG30 with 400,000 km puts 191hp to the wheels, 208 ft/lbs of torque, headers and cam gears are the only real significant modifications, this on a stock ecu and stock tune. The torque gain is not useless. This HP to $ ratio for the VG in my estimation would be far more equal or better than the SR just based on displacement......Turbo charging a VG is no different that Turbocharging an SR, were talking 2.0 vs. 3.0, The VG's biggest weakness is port flow...To each there own.
Well VGwagon, You've made some strong accusations here, but maybe it would be better if we kept to the subject rather than making accusations based on nothing more than assumptions.

You are right, the iron block VG was retired in 2004. Nissan introduced VQ aluminum block V-6 engine in 2000. Missing the Q was my mistake, not misinformation from David Rebello. I want to make this absolutely CLEAR, David Rebello is a class act all the way and he knows his shit. This conversation we had took place two years ago, and obviously the finer details escape me. David's suggestion was that the newer aluminum block is the only Nissan V6 motor light enough to have met my handling needs, and that this Aluminum motor does not hold up to the Big big. I hope this clears up any confusion.

Now, if we are going to enter a pissing match can I make one request? Lets keep to one subject of argument, otherwise we're fighting different battles; so to speak. In this thread topic the figure "500hp" was the standard for comparison of these two motors. Not 191hp. At 500hp however a 2000lb car is not going to gain anything from an additional 100 foot pounds of torque, but loosing the added weight off the front end it will. In order to get this kind of HP out of a VG we both know you'll spend significantly more money than an equivalent SR. Not only are performance parts more expensive for the VG, all the upgrade needs to be done on two banks of cylinders rether than one. Before accusing someone of "spewing BS" you'd better make sure you're on the same page, otherwise you're slandering someone needlessly.

Again, as I stated in my post there is the added variable of intended use, but if you have any opinions based simply on getting 500hp for their 510 and why someone might choose one or the other, I'm all ears.
What accusation did I make exactly?
Where did I make an assumption?


I said I was surprised that someone with such knowledge would say that, which in turn you confirmed he did not, where is the slander or accusation????
Read my post again. You think its cheaper to make 500hp on a SR than a VG? You must be blinded by the dollars you put into your SR swap, I have put money into my VG swap also, but I am not here to say one motor is better than the other. You should read up before making statements about what can make what power and for how much. Banks of cylinders don't matter, it's two extra cylinders....whoopty doo.....so you have to by two extra injectors.....where exactly is the extra cost beyond that?????

Missing the "Q" is a huge part of your statement, makes it look like you have absolutely no clue about what you are talking about and makes you sound like an SR20 fanboy, this is not an accusation by the way, just an opinion. Get your facts straight before posting
Denis Gagné
AKA VGwagon

69 510 VG30e swapped
73 240z VG30et swapped
86 300zx na2t VG30et converted

User avatar
two_68_510s
Supporter
Posts: 3862
Joined: 18 Apr 2010 11:20
Location: Ben Lomond California
Contact:

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by two_68_510s » 15 Jun 2012 19:59

Isn't it weird how brothers (in this case brothers in grime :lol: )always fight more! :lol:
Joel

2 '68 510 2 door sedans
'95 240SX


“We will either find a way, or make one.” – Hannibal

HRH
Posts: 12
Joined: 11 Jun 2012 12:13
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by HRH » 15 Jun 2012 20:14

icehouse wrote:haha I wonder how many times I've posted in a THIS MOTOR VS. THAT MOTOR thread haha

I'm a numbers and math guy and have installed the above engines. I've always wonder how much weight is really added to the front with a VG. If any. Since it's a V engine it sits much further back than a SR. You can still stand in the engine bay with it installed. But then to add a third dimension is the CG lower with a VG? I know the SR valve cover is mighty close to the hood all said and done. In all reality the best motor is the one the person picks for there car. It doesn't really matter. Like rob said we just end up sitting in traffic most the time anyways haha :)
I started a thread on Ratsun for that very issue of actual weights from different motors in 510s. It can be found here: http://community.ratsun.net/topic/19320 ... ht-thread/

Post number 22 on page 2 has information on VG30 510 weight, actual.

User avatar
RonM
Supporter
Posts: 1750
Joined: 16 Aug 2010 20:42
Location: SF, East Bay, 510 area code

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by RonM » 16 Jun 2012 03:31

OK vgwagon you nailed me, I am an SR fanboy as you are for the VG. Let's say we drop the weapons and stop bickering about who knows what so we can have a real and productive debate. I will freely admit my opinion is primarily based on a conversation I had with David almost two years ago, but if you know something different, please share. In good nature, If you outline what you think it would take to get a sustainable 500hp GV built. I'll do the same for the SR. I think this would be a more productive conversation for this topic, Yes? To make it simple lets say we have the ability to do all of the assembly work ourselves, but we have to pay for all the fabrication, machining, and parts. What say you good man?

For starters,

With both turbos the VG30DETT weighs 469.8 lbs

Equivalently dressed SR20DET 362 lbs
Sometimes people loose touch with subjectivity, because they've got they're heads stuck too far up they're own,,, Reality.

User avatar
vgwagon
Posts: 1589
Joined: 22 Jun 2004 22:42
Location: Burnaby, British Columbia

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by vgwagon » 16 Jun 2012 10:16

Sounds good RonM. "Insert handshake here"

I for one would never put a VG30DE into a 510.....so I guess I should clarify that I would use the much smaller top ended VG30E.

The VG needs the same things the SR does to achieve 500hp.....BIG turbo, more fuel and a good tune. the only difference between the two will be weight and two extra injectors for the VG and two extra pistons if you are going forged. There is a VG making over 500hp on the stock na pistons reliably over on Z31Performance. The guy's screen name is Rick88ss. 525 rwhp/437 rwtq on e85. Like I said before to each there own. The VG's torque curve will almost always be flatter than the SR at the same power levels.
Rules of displacement.
Denis Gagné
AKA VGwagon

69 510 VG30e swapped
73 240z VG30et swapped
86 300zx na2t VG30et converted

510rob
Moderator
Posts: 4795
Joined: 09 Oct 2003 23:37
Location: Vancouver, BC
Contact:

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by 510rob » 16 Jun 2012 16:44

Regardless of all other factors, the VG30 has 50% more displacement than an SR20. That is a LOT of ground that an SR20 has to make up to try and catch up with the capability of the VG30. For practical considerations, the heads become largely irrelevant (I mean sohc 2-valve VG heads vs dohc 4-valve SR head) when you have a turbo pumping air into both motors; yes 4-valve heads are better, but by how much in this discussion? ...not enough to get hung up about.

HP is a calculated and intangible notion that is based solely on the corporeal, measurable, quantifiable, observable values of torque at particular RPM crankshaft rotational velocity. That said, we can measure torque, but we can't measure HP; instead, we can calculate HP based on the torque and RPM values we can measure.

Typically (and with VERY FEW exceptions), the magnitude of the peak quantity of torque produced by a N/A motor will be roughly equal to that motor's displacement in cubic inches. For example, a 302 Ford is a V8 that produces approximately 300 lbs/ft of torque at the torque peak (roughly speaking). Similarly, a 300 Ford (inline-6) will also produce a peak torque magnitude of approximately 300 lbs/ft of torque; both are essentially 300 cubic inche engines, and both will produce about that amount of torque, 300 lbs/ft. If you jack up the compression, you'll see a slight increase in torque caused by the increased expansion ratio, but it isn't going to go up all that much. The only ways that you can significantly increase the magnitude of the torque curve (for a given displacement) are by the use of modifiers such as: charge stratification (turbos or superchargers), self-oxygenated chemical fuels (nitromethane), or oxygen-rich gasses (nitrous oxide).

A N/A 2.0L engine will produce about 122 lbs/ft peak torque.

a N/A 3.0L engine will produce about 183 lbs/ft peak torque.

Put a turbo on both engines, crank up the boost. Which one is better? Which one will make more HP? Both quickly become fuel-limited, but the VG30 is always going to have 50% more displacement than the SR20. That will equate to 50% more capability for a given fuel.

Electramotive/Nissan/John Knepp would have probably used either an FJ20 or one of those bastard LZ race heads if doing so would have made some sense to do so, but they used the VG30. Dan Gurney at AAR/Toyota used a 503E 2.1L inline-4 - he was running upwards of 50psi to keep up with Nissan, but who knows how much they were running! The Electramotive VG30 program was making 1000-1200HP depending on the state of tune. That is a lot!

I really appreciate the fact that some people do SR20s and some people do VG30s and yet some people build LZ22 hybrid motors, and some people even rock the L16 with a stock carb! :)

datzenmike
Supporter
Posts: 5572
Joined: 24 May 2006 12:40
Location: Van. Isle.

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by datzenmike » 16 Jun 2012 19:54

510rob wrote: I really appreciate the fact that some people do SR20s and some people do VG30s and yet some people build LZ22 hybrid motors, and some people even rock the L16 with a stock carb! :)
Well put. There is no right or wrong motor. Run what ya brung.
"Nissan 'shit the bed' when they made these, plain and simple." McShagger510 on flattop SUs

User avatar
RonM
Supporter
Posts: 1750
Joined: 16 Aug 2010 20:42
Location: SF, East Bay, 510 area code

Re: Over 500 HP with a VG30, why go with a SR?

Post by RonM » 16 Jun 2012 20:52

Rob, I totally agree with the "to each his own" sentiment. In fact I have come to the defense of someone who wanted to swap an L26 from the wrath of okayfine once for the same reason. And although it may not seem like it here, I'm sensitive to the idea this topic may ruffle a few feathers. I genuinely hope this is taken as all in fun.

I understand that displacement is why a 3.L motor can produce more N/A peak torque than an equivalent 2.L. Simple laws of physics (says the artist philosopher :D ). There are many differences between the SR and VG, and I'm sure both can produce much more than 500hp all things possible. I LOVE a good debate, and yes I have taken a side. However, if we don't stick to the parameters of the thread topic we're just talking about fruit again, aka apples and oranges aren't we? That being said I guess I was thinking more in terms of a real world 500hp construction of these two platforms and how that might work in a 510 rather than floating a bunch of unrelated figures and "gearsay".

Here's my shot at it.

Stock low milage s13 SR20DET red top complete long block with tranny
minimum of 170psi compression and 10% cold leak down. $1.100-1.700

Flipped X-member $150

Head work:
Simple port matching to intake and exhaust manifolds, Valve seats $500
ONE Tomei head gasket, $200 new stock reinforced Nissan head bolts, $110
Brian Crower Head Package - 272 lift Cams, Springs, Retainers, Valves $800

Block,
totally stock.

Externals:
Single Internal welbo 100 psi fuel pump. $150
ONE JWT Top Feed Fuel Rail $135
Injector Dynamics fed at 62 psi 1000cc $460
ONE ISIS Intake Manifold Gretty nockoff $180
ONE ISIS T3 Top Mount Turbo Manifold $200
ONE GT3582R 28 lbs boost $1,300
Mines reflashed E5 ECU w boost control $600
Optimized for e85

$6k give or take.

I'm pretty sure that with this setup you could get 500hp out of an SR20, and in the 400 plus torque range. Just where you'd see this PWR and TQ on a curve; god only knows. Undoubtedly the curve would not be as broad as a VG's, but in a 510 application would you really notice? Would the weight difference level the field, or even tip the scales in the SR's favor in some respects? In a straight line 0-60 my guess is that the SR would have an advantage. 0-100 again, 1/4 mile maybe even, top speed would go to the VG. Yea you are right this is totally based in conjecture, but I will press on. In a slalom and in auto-X I would think the front end weight would play a far more significant roll being that neither car could ever use more than half it's potential. Who knows, maybe the low end grunt of the VG would even the field once again. In this respect it all comes down to tuning, where the turbo comes into boost and how controllable it is.

Please be kind when you tare this apart dear gentlemen. :wink:
Sometimes people loose touch with subjectivity, because they've got they're heads stuck too far up they're own,,, Reality.

Post Reply