Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

I was wanting some thoughts on a power target for my RB20DET project.

Say you were given the task of putting together an RB20 engine/gearbox package for a 1200kg car, What sort of sensible rWkW would you aim for and how would you do it?

This sounds a bit open ended so consider the following limitations:

* The car will be an every day driver, it has to be good to drive in traffic and reliable. If its a pig to drive its useless.

* I don't expect any wider than about 205 rubber will ever get put on the back

* There is a 99.999% chance that it will never get run down the 1/4 mile or raced in any way

* I want to run stock internals

As for budget, I don't really have anything in mind at the moment 'cos I am trying to get some ideas. I expect the limitations above will stop things getting too out of hand cost wise but you never know.

Comments suggesting that I get an RB25/30 won't be appreciated.....

Well you can have a large turbo that comes on boost at 4500rpm and I'd still consider that traffic drivable because the torque of the 2l six will punt you around quite well without boost. It also eliminates some of the traction issues a smaller turbo has due to it hitting boost at only 2500rpm.

I'd say 260-280HP at the motor would otherwise be an excellent power level for a daily driver with your sort of needs. Forget the rear wheel figures, they are not worth troubling yourself over as no-one manufactures any part rated in rwkw or rwhp its always rated at the motor.

ive owned an RB20 with a big turbo which spools at 4500rpm and its not traffic friendly at all. in fact after 6 months of driving it i got so sick of it im now in the process of chanigng it. so speaking from experience and not just theory, it isnt a good idea.

there is a point in calculating hp at the wheels because thats the amount of power that is getting to the ground. 260 flywheel hp will only see 200 at the wheels which is fairly pathetic for a modified car.

Hi Browny, my suggestions follow;

*aim for approx 200 rwkw (around 340 bhp)

*hi flow standard turbo

*3" exhaust, turbo back (inc hi flow cat)

*adj cam pulleys

*R32/33 GTR standard intercooler

*aluminium pipework

*dyno tune and re chip std computer

*pod in a box

Should cost around $5K to $6K depending on how much you do yourself and pick up second hand.

Hope that helps

Originally posted by adam 32

there is a point in calculating hp at the wheels because thats the amount of power that is getting to the ground. 260 flywheel hp will only see 200 at the wheels which is fairly pathetic for a modified car.

Rear wheel readings are helpfull for 'tuning' on the spot. Only that particular dyno operator will be able to make sense of the figures, performance comparison wise, between cars they have previously tuned.And not between thier dyno and the bloke on the other side of the country/world.

They are not standardised form one dyno to another (need I mention myaree dyno?).

260HP or so at the motor is quite alot for a light car like the R32. It would see a nice mid 13 1/4 on street tyres. Just shows you how much bulldust people swallow and how much crapping on there is about dyno figures, particularly peak rearwheel power.

Cool a few replies....

A couple of things:

Its not skyline :) - the significance of this is that the engine will be getting a pod and a 3" exhaust (the air box wont fit and I need a new exhaust anyway)

Meggala - I have read your site, several times

Sydneykid - I am doing all the work myself. Fair bit of work in this project. Pretty sure a GTR 'cooler wont fit. ATM I have a VR4 cooler 'cos its about the biggest I reckon I can get in the front without going custom made.

As for the rwkw vs fwkw thing. I know its dyno dependant but I only specified rwkw to try and keep all the replies referenced to the same point.

Browny,

Problem is the same point isn't the same point mate when you talk about rwkw/hp.

Ahhh...1200kgs.

Well 260hp will probably be plenty then. What is it a little datsun 1600 or something?

Leave the engine pretty stock and just up the boost a bit.

My target is about 250ish rwhp. Im hoping to achieve this from:

3 inch exhaust from turbo back with dump.

R33 standard turbo (slightly larger than the stock RB20 one and allows you to put 14 pound through it with less stress than when its on the 2.5 litre. Theres also plenty of R33 owners trying to sell them off after upgrading.)

Nice front mount... possibly an ARE. You could also consider options such as GTR coolers or Supra cores. You could go japanese brand but most seem to be HUGE and flow mega-hp.

Adjustable cam gear.

14psi of boost

Remap ECU.

Dyno tune

Ive hit 220 rwhp as it is on 14psi with a stock dump, stock turbo and stock intercooler and massive fuelling issues (relating to aftermarket ECU more than supply). So im thinking the above mods should hopefully get me around the 250 mark... maybe im being unrealistic.

Red17

PS: One of the generals finest? The piazza? :P

My RB20 makes 234rwkw on the stock injectors with a stock engine ( cams, cam gears, manifolds ect). So 220-230 is easy with all the mods mentioned previously.

Now to make the power im using a to4e turbo, this is a old design and not ball bearing but cheap. i make full boost by 4500rpm and while this is a lot higher than stock or 33 turbo it is by no means a pig to drive. You can drive around all day (i do 400kms a week) and keep up and beat traffic changing at 3000rpm and when you want to go you just put your foot down and hang on. Just a point that a car with a big turbo will still be a good daily driver, it may not be the best for drift or a thrash in the street but if you drive hard it dosent matter.

If your never going to race it or dont have a power figure in mind and you are running 205 tyres, stick with a stock type turbo (r33, vg30) and do a good job of the rest and make about 200, this is a easy reliable power up without the hassles of going the next step.

dyno tune and re chip std computer

Who in Sydney does this, and does it well???

SAS have quoted me about $1000, which suggests it definitely wont be cheaper, perhaps another say $100 on top. That is for tuning, removing the speed limiter, boost cut, fuel cut etc, and leaving the redline as per factory.

Considering they would have base settings from numerous different cars, i find this a little $$$$. Say 5 hours work, (i hope not 5 hour of dyno runs) that equates to $200 an hour. Even allowing for some dyno costs it is still expensive.

At this price id rather fork out the $2500 for installed and tuned Autronic. Or find someone other then a rotor shop that has a clue with Wold ECUs

If you are only going to have 205 wide tyres than i suggest you keep the power down to below 180rwkw. I have 196 rwkw and when i put 205s on the back there is a huge amount of wheel spin in 2nd gear when boost hits. Great fun but i dont think this is how you want your car to drive all the time. You would have even more wheel spin as your car is about 100kg's lighter.

Tim.

Meggala,

Yeah ive read your site a few times and was set on the VG30 turbo until you stated it seemed to shift the power alot further up the rev range. Which is exactly what i DONT want to do considering the RB20's lack of bottom end get up and go.

So the R33 turbo is probably a nice comprimise considering the target ive set out for. Just need to find one thats not been molested by its previous owner. :D

Red17

My preference atm is to stick with OEM parts 'cos they are generally more readily available 2nd hand (albeit used)

Can anyone add anything to Meggalas web site discussion of the RB25 vs the VG30?

What is the potential of the RB25 turbo on an RB20?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...