Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i first met john years ago - mad inventor and almost impossible to pin down but what he does is first class. he made a trick cooling set up for my 440 cu in BB Chrysler but not with water jacket take-offs like i understand from Alex, the guy he works with, that they are doing now for the rb. i spoke to Alex recently and he mentioned they were going to do this soon.

some discussion of the issue in general is here:

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...8&hl=bennet

does what john /alex are doing seem similar to the jun set up discussed here?:

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...122687&st=0

i haven't seen their system, did you take pics etc? back to back testing would be great and it's the type of thing john would insist on, did you ask them for results?

on a seriouse note

the idea of removing the funny little coolant header/bleed log on a rb. mainly on a rb26

and replacing with direct waterlines is a VERY good idea. as this evans up the temp differance between the front and rear of the head

hmmm ok im building an rb25 atm and am going down this path ive also met mr bennet and alex through my uncle chris from beyond the limit motorsports[ very switched on people ]

and thanks for the links scooby intresting reading for i didnt entirely understand the whole theory behind this but obviously has to make a huge diff in reliability and general eficiency of the cooling system/motor package and also there oil system theorys sound just as good and would be worth while looking into aswell

hmmm ok im building an rb25 atm and am going down this path ive also met mr bennet and alex through my uncle chris from beyond the limit motorsports[ very switched on people ]

and thanks for the links scooby intresting reading for i didnt entirely understand the whole theory behind this but obviously has to make a huge diff in reliability and general eficiency of the cooling system/motor package and also there oil system theorys sound just as good and would be worth while looking into aswell

don't get carried away with spending money on this mod too quickly, a large school of thought suggests that this is not worthwhile for RBs until the power gets really serious. they are not the boiling prone monsters that a lot of old V8s were (don't know enough about the new ones to comment). there is little doubt a similar system on an old V8 would seriously improve it dramatically, as i found, but make JB prove to you that either power, efficiency or driveability are improved before you spend money on this for an RB. did they talk $ at all?

cheers

Sprint car builders have been doing this for ages, I think Smokey Yunick started doing it back in the 60's + 70's. But as to why it's a "new" thing has got me buggered.

Haha and good call on the commando line, the line "Let off some steam Bennet" really is applicable to this... as that's the main purpose of the bleeders.

yes the japanese companies even have car specific kits for it. ARC make a very nice GTR kit and it's well under $400 and of course comes with all the bits to make it a bolt on process.

Richard, the ARC kits look different to whats in the pics from exvitermini ... they seem to be really just a swirl pot and external header tank setup.. rather than pulling water from 3 places along the block ..

still trying to et my head around this and look at ways it can be done with the rb25 head...

main issue i have as to a reason to use a thing like this is due to the front facing plenum im using not retaining the radiator bleeder from the TB water feed, so i cant bleed the system 100% currently

my other option is to try and include something like the justjap item like below

d1specheadtank.jpg

but that wont even out the water temps from front to rear of the block...

by the looks of the ARC kit, neither do they : - well the ones on nengun dont anyway

This doesnt seem to be a complex modification as the only parts needed from what I can see are:

Extra Outlet on radiator

Braided Lines and Fittings

Reservoir mounted on strut

it's not complex but the problem is the cost can add right up once you take fitting into account.

Sprint car builders have been doing this for ages, I think Smokey Yunick started doing it back in the 60's + 70's. But as to why it's a "new" thing has got me buggered.

it's not really new but no one out here does it that much - the culture has generally been 'use a bigger radiator, take out the thermostat etc' because people can't see the boiling in the block and it's also hard to measure. they can see the radiator puking colant but steam pockets are hidden - that's why the good guys like Smokey are good, they know stuff. Chevy is just now releasing heads with coolant passages that have ports half way along.

Richard, the ARC kits look different to whats in the pics from exvitermini ... they seem to be really just a swirl pot and external header tank setup.. rather than pulling water from 3 places along the block ..

still trying to et my head around this and look at ways it can be done with the rb25 head...

my other option is to try and include something like the justjap item like below

d1specheadtank.jpg

but that wont even out the water temps from front to rear of the block...

by the looks of the ARC kit, neither do they : - well the ones on nengun dont anyway

exactly. there's kits and there's kits. the one on exvitermini, jun, etc are the whole enchilada. just getting a reservoir is not going to make much difference imho unless you needed to create a higher fill point for some reason. the water will cool as it comes to the front of the block anyway and the steam will condense if it travels. problem is large steam pockets occur at given points due to localised heat, hence the take offs you see with the jun type kits. the other issue of course is a good water pump. i reckon a good pump will solve most problems given that RBs have a high bleeder.

Edited by Scooby

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

    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...