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

Problems, ideas and comments specific to engine swaps.
User avatar
chunstone
Posts: 356
Joined: 04 Nov 2007 09:12
Location: Wenatchee, Washington

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

Post by chunstone » 19 Jun 2012 10:18

Maybe I'm wrong, but do not use the truck VG30, it had more torque. Thats what Jason at Canby said Spreadbury used in his 510. Spreadbury is using a SR turbo engine now. Correct me if i'm wrong. You will need the Z-31 engine.
About the frame rails, if the red wagon at Canby was putting out more than 600 ft lbs, that is the same torque that my Dodge cummins 1 ton truck puts down and the frame is boxed and huge! So is the tranny and rear end! So it would be a waste of $$ to go beyond the limits of what the car can realistically handle, body, drive train and driver judgment.
I had an L20 b in a two door and it was ton of fun driving that car, I just got caught up in the horsepower craze that clouded my judgement.
4 link VG30 wagon, Stage 2 cams PP heads headers.
170 hp-180 tq
Call Doug at UP Motors, Tacoma, "engine swap elite"

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 » 19 Jun 2012 15:22

datzenmike wrote:The KAZ22 would have a disappointing compression ratio I afraid.
That's only if I don't get high compression pistons. And I could use the dohc head. :) can't do it the normal way now, you know me!

DimeAttack
Supporter
Posts: 175
Joined: 02 Dec 2010 22:22
Location: Victoria BC

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

Post by DimeAttack » 27 Jun 2012 20:52

I'm going to chime in here on the Awesomeness of Denis wagon. The first time I hear it i nearly pooped myself! It was that good!!! :lol: I was also competing in the slalom, and i hadn't run a slalom in.... many, many years, so I was a bit nervous. I was second driver, right behind Denis in his wagon. He left the line, blink, now he is about 14 miles away!! what just happened!! and the sound, that wonderful, cacophony of the fantastic internal combustion sextet! wow, WOW! If you haven't hear it in person, you can't really describe it. Come to think of it, even if you have heard it in person, it is hard to describe!

That car has some real six appeal :wink:
Tallis

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 » 30 Jun 2012 20:34

chunstone wrote:Maybe I'm wrong, but do not use the truck VG30, it had more torque. Thats what Jason at Canby said Spreadbury used in his 510. Spreadbury is using a SR turbo engine now. Correct me if i'm wrong. You will need the Z-31 engine.
If you are not sure, do research before posting something.
All VG30e's are useable. The truck VG's have camshafts designed around torque....the crankshafts are different at the snout between certain years and some other minor differences.
You can use whatever VG you want (3.0 or 3.3) as long as you use the accessories from the motor or figure out a way to adapt whatever you have. Change camshafts to early Z31 cams or whatever you desire it all works and can be made to work.
Denis Gagné
AKA VGwagon

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

greatnorth510
Posts: 3
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 20:11

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

Post by greatnorth510 » 26 Nov 2013 07:25

Well I just came across this and it makes me laugh. I really like the Rebello quote, only problem is that the basic thing about motors and power is that there is no replacement for displacement Even the late L Series guru Dave Weber of Malvern Racing would tell you that. VG adds very little weight overall and sits further back due to a bit less overall length. put the battery in the trunk and your pretty much good to go for any issues for the extra 150Lbs. You can easily get 250hp & equal amount of Torque, from a a 3.3 VG punched out to 3.5L with the SOHC Heads with some cams, and port work done to the intake manifold, using a 500cfm carb, You can have the whole motor good to go for max 3,000 (about the cost of used SR without all the extras you will need to both install and bump up the HP), and install is pretty simple unlike the SR and much easier to keep running not to mention cost of install and time . The 3.5 VG above is a stump puller and as anyone that races knows HP looks good on paper Torque wins races. As far as the 500hp, even spending the time to get that out of and SR and put into a 510 is just a ridiculus waste of time and money. A good performance car is all about balance and useable power and a well set up VG 510 is pretty damn good combo in n/a form that is pretty hard to beat. If you want the ultimate in power to weight then we should be talking about the Rover/Buick 215 swap. Total cost of about $9,000 will get you about 400+hp and tons of Torque, and the motor will be significantly lighter than the VG or SR or any L Series combo.







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.

User avatar
okayfine
Supporter
Posts: 14144
Joined: 12 Nov 2007 23:02
Location: Newbury Park, CA

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

Post by okayfine » 26 Nov 2013 07:40

greatnorth510 wrote:only problem is that the basic thing about motors and power is that there is no replacement for displacement
The replacement for displacement is technology. Look at what manufacturers are doing with 2.0L turbo engines today. Or, most of the turbo variants that generally are replacing bigger/greater number of cylinder engines, but produce more power and get better fuel economy than the bigger engines. Even AMG is going this route in the near future.

If you're speaking specifically of engines commonly found in a 510, you need to state that.

Most of the rest of your post is subjective.
greatnorth510 wrote:VG adds very little weight overall...for the extra 150Lbs.
150lb in a 510 is not "very little weight" added. And so on.

The decision to go with a NA V6 versus a I4 turbo in a 510 have much more to do with personal preferences (I like turbos, or I like NA throttle response).
greatnorth510 wrote:the Rover/Buick 215 swap. Total cost of about $9,000 will get you about 400+hp and tons of Torque, and the motor will be significantly lighter than the VG or SR or any L Series combo.
If 150lb is "very little weight" to you, I'd love to know what "significantly lighter" means.
Because when you spend a silly amount of money on a silly, trivial thing that will help you not one jot, you are demonstrating that you have a soul and a heart and that you are the sort of person who has no time for Which? magazine. – Jeremy Clarkson

User avatar
McWicked
Supporter
Posts: 167
Joined: 19 May 2013 11:48
Location: California

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

Post by McWicked » 26 Nov 2013 09:53

greatnorth510 wrote:...HP looks good on paper Torque wins races.
This is where your post lost credibility with me.

-McWicked
Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company.

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 » 26 Nov 2013 13:51

I have another dimension to add to this argument...

Ask yourself, what is horsepower? How do you measure it? Where does it exist? What is its relationship to reality?

HP doesn't measurably exist. It is a calculated value that provides a normalized indication of average torque production per unit time.

On the other hand, torque is measurable.



there is very good engine theory on this webpage --> http://www.theoldone.com/archive/

User avatar
okayfine
Supporter
Posts: 14144
Joined: 12 Nov 2007 23:02
Location: Newbury Park, CA

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

Post by okayfine » 26 Nov 2013 16:53

Image

That's a factory engine. 2.0L. One turbo. Factory-fresh driveability. It'll do that all day long for 100K miles before it needs plugs. That's your replacement for displacement.
Because when you spend a silly amount of money on a silly, trivial thing that will help you not one jot, you are demonstrating that you have a soul and a heart and that you are the sort of person who has no time for Which? magazine. – Jeremy Clarkson

akara
Posts: 103
Joined: 19 Mar 2011 18:15
Location: San Diego, California
Contact:

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

Post by akara » 26 Nov 2013 19:38

SR20DET is better.
Why?
Because I have one!
No seriously, I have about 400whp and its completely useless in a 510. 500 would be even more useless.
Sometimes I feel like I should go back to a smaller T28 framed turbo, but I'm in it for the highway pulls!

Where the VG suffers with its heavy iron block it makes up with torque
RWD SR longblocks are harder to find and more expensive than the ubiquitious VG30E
BUT VG motors require new manifolds, new tunes, new wiring, oil pan clearance etc etc which bring the price back up on par with the SR20.
I chose the SR20DET for the only real legitimate reason, its in my personal comfort zone because my first car was a Nissan NX2000! I also wanted to reap the gas mileage benefits of having a lightweight car! I make 380-400whp and get 24mpg average.
Also, if I cant rev an engine to at least 7000, to me it's just boring!

User avatar
McWicked
Supporter
Posts: 167
Joined: 19 May 2013 11:48
Location: California

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

Post by McWicked » 26 Nov 2013 19:47

510rob wrote:I have another dimension to add to this argument...
HP is a measure of work performed.

Let's have a look at an electric motor. It can produce its maximum TQ at zero RPM. But how much useful work can be performed at that speed? None. Torque is a static force that has no practical value unless allowed to act through a distance, at which point it becomes power. Power makes things go.

-McWicked

BTW- Thanks for the TOO link. I used to read that site all the time back in the day. Hadn't thought about it in years.
Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company.

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 » 26 Nov 2013 20:08

Seems to me that @ 500 hp the tires act as fuses to protect the drivetrain.
"Nissan 'shit the bed' when they made these, plain and simple." McShagger510 on flattop SUs

User avatar
James
Posts: 2078
Joined: 26 Nov 2007 19:58
Location: Laguna Beach, Ca

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

Post by James » 27 Nov 2013 00:48

datzenmike wrote:Seems to me that @ 500 hp the tires act as fuses to protect the drivetrain.
That's funny!
Finished is better than perfect......

User avatar
bertvorgon
Supporter
Posts: 11066
Joined: 04 Aug 2003 20:45
Location: White Rock, B.C. Canada

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

Post by bertvorgon » 27 Nov 2013 05:45

When we built my car, and it's subsequent upgrades, it was always kept in mind to just be at the edge of traction, with the available power.

Why...a car becomes kinda useless if you cannot use all that you have IMHO ( other than doing the all out top end blast). In my case as most of you know, it was Solo and hill climb use. If you had to back pedal on the throttle, you were NOT accelerating, which was a WASTE of time. Then, there is the safety factor of real world street and highway driving, on nice twisty roads. At mid to corner exit, it is FAST to be able to get full throttle, without the worry of the car suddenly breaking traction, and either having to get out of the throttle, or, call a tow truck to remove the car from the ditch.

Having a USABLE power band is where it is at, with a suspension that you can really use, and, tires that can at least handle most of that power transfer.

Years ago I went for a ride in a last gen Toyota Supra, dyno'd at 440 RWHP, blah, blah. The fellow gets on the throttle, we go I swear a block before this thing even starts to wake up, then, it fights for traction, even with the monster rear boots on the thing...the car was beyond useless other than the Mulsanne straight charge.

As Mike says, a "blown" fuse stops everything, and a 510 with 250 - 350 Hp is a way better choice for usable power, in both a safe and competitive aspect.
"Racing makes heroin addiction look like a vague wish for something salty" - Peter Egan

Keith Law
1973 2Door Slalom/hill climb/road race / canyon carver /Giant Killer 510
1968 Vintage 3HP Mini Bike
1971 Vintage 13' BOLER trailer

torqued
Posts: 18
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 14:02
Location: New Zealand

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

Post by torqued » 27 Nov 2013 12:09

You people are starting to make me feel bad for having a VG in my car. I am starting to think like i should apologize for it:(

Post Reply