Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Cheers for the speedy reply, always on the ball :rofl:

So if going down the power porting route for the turbo, it would be better to get both sides done? (GT35R .86 exh)

Would there be much benefit in power porting the standard 25 inlet manifold, i'm referring to the bottom half. Would this affect the low down torque?

Power porting the compressor and turbine covers is not something I have ever considered. I have done cast iron exhaust manifolds, works very well. I have not experienced any restriction in an RB25DET inlet manifold or throttle body up to 525 bhp so I doubt that it would be worth the cost. Over that, an RB26 top end with inlet manifold is a cheaper proposition when you add it all up. If you are intending to use the GT35R to its potential, then that would be my suggestion.

Hope that helps:cheers:

Im curious, is it hard to covert the 4wd box to rwd?.

What's involved?.

The 4wd box would be stronger in a 2wd set up?

Well I havn't had it running in the car yet.. and it will still require a bit of a sledge hammer tap to fit the box into the S13 tunnel :rofl:

It's not the best thing to do but I thought I would try it because I had a broken transfer case sitting there...

I basically removed everything from the output shaft and left the speedo drive there.. then cut the side of the case off and welded it all up. It's not pretty, but I think it should work ok.

I believe you can use a Z32 nose cone.. but I'm not sure what they do about the shifter when they do this.

This box would now be similar to a RB25DET box.. but GTR boxes are a lot cheaper and easier to find than an RB25DET box..

Gilly,

 

The RB's are interference motors. They WILL break valves if you snap a belt or skip several teeth.

 

Bl4ck32 previously snapped an idler bolt which snapped valves off, got pics.. Very nasty :)

I made the ever so clever mistake of having my timing belt off while bringing the motor round to 0 deg, lol.

And i can tell you my motor is not interference. As i was able to spin the crank freely whilst bringing it around to 0 which i actually did twice because i had missed 0 by a long shot the first spin.

So i would assume with my engine, (8.5 c/r, standard deck and head, JE pistons) is non-interference.

I made the ever so clever mistake of having my timing belt off while bringing the motor round to 0 deg, lol.  

And i can tell you my motor is not interference. As i was able to spin the crank freely whilst bringing it around to 0 which i actually did twice because i had missed 0 by a long shot the first spin.

So i would assume with my engine, (8.5 c/r, standard deck and head, JE pistons) is non-interference.

hrmm maybe you dont know the difference between an interference engine and a non interference engine.

Did you bring your flame proof suit :flamed:

lol raist60,

Is it possible for the lifters to bleed down while not operating hence allowing you to turn the motor over by hand and not cause any damage?

WDRacing said a while back the rb20t motor is not an interference motor as he has rebuilt his multiple times and the valves do not come in to contact with the pistons when spinning the motor over by hand.

BUT.. When Bl4ck32 RB20DET snapped a tensioner bolt his pistons smashed in to the valves.

My conclusion, when the motor is spinning over oil pressure pumps up the hydraulic lifters, this gives the valves more lift which will allow them to smash in to the pistons.

Piccy... This pot was the only one to actually break off but others had obviously been tapped as they were wonky. :)

Are they the standard pistons in that motor above?

I will be running the NA pistons on my setup, they have the valve cut outs, so hopefully it will be non-interference.

Yes they are the standard RB20 turbo pistons.

They have the valve cut outs and the valves still smacked in to the pistons!! :rofl:

Hi Cubes;

Do we know why Mr Tensioner Bolt decided to quit?

Cheers

It had only recently had its 100,000km cam belt done.

It is suspected to have been over torqued.

Shaun @ Boostworx has heard of them going before so it appears to be at least known.

I replaced the tensioner studs when building my rb30 just to be on the safe side. :rofl:

yer...guy i bought car from had 100,000 service done. 106,000 idler bolt snapped off clean at the block. idler bearing had heat discolouration, and there was rubber dust inside lower belt cover.

I went through it all when building my new motor as i didnt wanna have it happen again....but a properly tightened std bolt is the safest bet :rofl:

yer...guy i bought car from had 100,000 service done. 106,000 idler bolt snapped off clean at the block. idler bearing had heat discolouration, and there was rubber dust inside lower belt cover.

 

I went through it all when building my new motor as i didnt wanna have it happen again....but a properly tightened std bolt is the safest bet :(

Just what you needed I bet. Good pickup on the dust.

Bearing seizure caused by overtorqueing then?

I made the ever so clever mistake of having my timing belt off while bringing the motor round to 0 deg, lol.  

And i can tell you my motor is not interference. As i was able to spin the crank freely whilst bringing it around to 0 which i actually did twice because i had missed 0 by a long shot the first spin.

So i would assume with my engine, (8.5 c/r, standard deck and head, JE pistons) is non-interference.

You may have simply been lucky, the valves may not have been open sufficiently. So when you rotated the crankshaft. the valves where not protruding and didn't get hit. To test interference you really should put the crank at TDC and rotate the camshafts.:)

I made the ever so clever mistake of having my timing belt off while bringing the motor round to 0 deg, lol.  

And i can tell you my motor is not interference. As i was able to spin the crank freely whilst bringing it around to 0 which i actually did twice because i had missed 0 by a long shot the first spin.

So i would assume with my engine, (8.5 c/r, standard deck and head, JE pistons) is non-interference.

I also done the above test, but i also done what SK suggested.....spin the cams with a piston at TDC......no interference. This is using standard RB30E pistons.

You may have simply been lucky, the valves may not have been open sufficiently.  So when you rotated the crankshaft. the valves where not protruding and didn't get hit.  To test interference you really should put the crank at TDC and rotate the camshafts.:)

Nah after I had a heart attack after realising and running around like a psycho swearing and cursing that id "broken my engine" I got my shit together and had a look where the cams where in their revolutions and there was an exhaust tappet sitting right under the peak of a lobe. lol it couldnt have been more open.

Luck is something I dont get...

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

    • LOL.... a good amount of people (not all) on that continent seem to know everything and like to measure things in bananas, football fields, statue of liberties instead of the metric system lol.
    • I assume the modules are similar enough, so if you've had no issues I don't see why I would. I have tried to find a wiring diagram for the FPCM / fuel pump circuit, but I can't find it anywhere. Otherwise, I would just do some wire cutting and joining at the FPCM and give the 12 V supplied to the FPCM directly to the pump instead. If you know anyone that could help with wiring diagrams, I'd be very happy  
    • If it dies, then bypass. The task isn't difficult. I have one running on a standard R32 FPCM. That's after nearly 20 years of it running an 040, which pull substantially more current than the Walbro. They're not the same module, but I'd hope it indicates that the R33 one should be man enough for the job. I think people kill them when putting proper sized pumps on them, not these little toy pumps we're talking about here.
    • Silicone spray won't hurt anything. And if it does, that's an opportunity to put some solid steel spherical bushings in, so you can really learn what suspension noise sounds like, If you're going to try it, just spray one bush at a time, so you can work out which one is actually noisy. My best guess is that if the noise started only since putting the coilovers in, then it is just noise being transmitted up through the top mounts of the struts, and not necessarily "new" noise from bushes. But it's almost impossible to know.
    • Are you saying the 34 is SUV height, and not that we're talking about an SUV here? (because if we're talking about an SUV, you don't fix them. You just replace them when something breaks. Not worth establishing sufficient emotional connection with an SUV to warrant doing any work on one). I wouldn't jack my car up on a short little loop of 10mm steel rod poking out through a hole in the bumper bar, front or rear end. I realise that we're probably not talking about that type of loop at the front, being the one under/behind the bar on a Skyline.... but even for that one, trying to jack up on what amounts to a thin piece of steel, designed purely for withstanding a horizontal tension force, not a vertical compressive force (and so would be prone to buckling/crushing) and, my most particular bitch about it - located RIGHT AT THE EXTREME FRONT OF THE CAR, applying a load up through the radiator support panel, etc, with almost the entire mass of the car cantilevered between there and the rear wheels? Nope. Not doing that. Not on the regular. That structure out there in front of the front crossmember is not designed to carry load in the vertical direction. Not really designed to carry any load at all, really. The chassis rail that the tow point is connected to would be fine loaded in tension, as per towing. Not intended to carry the mass of the whole car, especially loaded all on one rail, with twisting and all sorts of shitty load distribution going on. No, I will happily drive up on some pieces of wood, thanks. That can only happen on driven wheels, and they are at the other end of the car, and this problem does not exist at that end of the car. And even then, I have been known to drive up on at least 1x piece of 2x8 each side at the rear, simply to reduce the amount of jack pumping necessary to get the car up high enough for the jack stands. What really really shits me about Skylines is the lack of decent places for chassis stands at either end of the car. You'd think they'd be designed into the crossmembers.
×
×
  • Create New...