Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Ok currently got my RB25DET out of the car, rebuild starting next week hopefully.

So far in parts ive got

Arias Forged Pistons

Cometic .74" thick Metal Head Gasket

New Bearings, Seals & Gaskets

Tomei IN&EX Poncams

Tomei Cam Gears

Iv also got to put on one the motor is run in

Garret GT30R 500hp internally wastegated turbo

Apexi PowerFC & Hand Controller

Nismo 555cc Injectors

Bosch 040 Fuel Pump

Now i wanted to know while im rebuilding the motor if i should get some SCAT rods and ARP studs, i am hoping for max 300rwkw and run daily on 200-250rwkw. Im wondering how strong the stock bottom end is on the RB25DET and if i need rods or can i get away with the stockers.

GTR Rods are what you want, with good rod bolts.

You dont need to fork out for big $$$ rods, no need.

$400 at the absolute worst, so they are very cheap, and extremely worthwhile, good for 300rwkw easily.

I HAVE ARIAS PISTONS & THE RINGS ARE SHOT AFTER ABOUT 25000 KLM THE RINGS ARE SHIT GET SOME TOTAL SEAL RINGS TNT TYPE INSTEAD. I HAD THE SAME SETUP AS YOUR ABOUT TO DO A I GOT APPROX 260RWKW @ 18 PSI GOOD LUCK

GTR Rods are what you want, with good rod bolts.

You dont need to fork out for big $$$ rods, no need.

$400 at the absolute worst, so they are very cheap, and extremely worthwhile, good for 300rwkw easily.

haha I picked up a set of GTR rods in excellent condition for $90.

What sort of power could I push them to?

Surely std rb25 rods will hold 300rwkws. Normally at that stage pistons are first to go unless the tune is spot on. Im in the process of putting my rb25 back together as well. ACL pistons though. Im also only gonna be around 250rwkws max 300. I have same headgasket and similar bolt ons. Im using std rods and bolts and if someone says to change to GTR ones im gonna kill someone cause those stupid farking spiral locks are a goddamn prick to put on and i really dont wanna do it again :laugh:

Edited by r33_racer

Do you wanna find out if they will hold it forever? :laugh:

Possibly not on the standard bolts... its not really proven over a long period

Its really just a case of...

Motor is apart, the rods are filthy cheap... why not change em for a couple hundred! Cheap insurance if ive ever seen it.

Yeah Id go the GTR rods with new ARP bolts. I had mine shot peened, resized and linished - but for all that you can buy new forged rods. So prob just use the GTR rods with new bolts.

ACL and there double spiral locks - what a pain in the arse they are.

I HAVE ARIAS PISTONS & THE RINGS ARE SHOT AFTER ABOUT 25000 KLM THE RINGS ARE SHIT GET SOME TOTAL SEAL RINGS TNT TYPE INSTEAD. I HAD THE SAME SETUP AS YOUR ABOUT TO DO A I GOT APPROX 260RWKW @ 18 PSI GOOD LUCK

Some one didnt let them bed in properly :(

30psi, 500rwhp on arias piston... they work!

GTR Rods are what you want, with good rod bolts.

You dont need to fork out for big $$$ rods, no need.

$400 at the absolute worst, so they are very cheap, and extremely worthwhile, good for 300rwkw easily.

you tell me? ur the one referring GTR Rods..

man ur quick on the replies, respect! :(

i HAVE read the first post, im just answering ur question to why i was talkin about the bottom end being good for 300rwkw..

now we can all go and stick our heads in a canape and sing kumbaya!

:S

man ur quick on the replies, respect! :(

i HAVE read the first post, im just answering ur question to why i was talkin about the bottom end being good for 300rwkw..

now we can all go and stick our heads in a canape and sing kumbaya!

:S

Dan, ill have a race for you if you ever come up to Darwin again, lol. On a safe tune what kind of power could i expect, this has already blown way out of budget so if im looking at 250 to 270rwkw then i prolly wont bother with rods. Also had timing belt replaced 300km before motor leaned out, so would the standard Nissan timing belt be ok.

GTR rods definately be a better decision because for the price you can get them it's a safer decision, it's what I'm getting! Sizing & balancing while it's all getting done at once too. Also a N1 oil pump instead of a standard one would be a decent upgrade as well.

I also had my timing belt replaced about 2000k's before mine popped, but I've been told a heavy duty belt would just be a safer option, also good while it's there & opened :(

Dan, ill have a race for you if you ever come up to Darwin again, lol. On a safe tune what kind of power could i expect, this has already blown way out of budget so if im looking at 250 to 270rwkw then i prolly wont bother with rods. Also had timing belt replaced 300km before motor leaned out, so would the standard Nissan timing belt be ok.

Haha damien your funny, brodie told me yours poppped, do not get hi tech to tune it lol. and my power goals are a bit more than your mate lol. got a whole new set up now lol. just buy a gates timing belt mate thre 110 bucks and good investment.

things to definatly get:

idler tensioner; $100

new bolts for the idler tensioner: $15 (very imporatant to replace)

get race bearings too

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...