Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

What an awesome thread! I thought that 10 page pdf was impressive but damn!

Im building an rb30/25 and have got the block almost ready to put into my 32 coupe. The parts used in the block are as folows:

-Rb30e block

-Factory crank (re balanced)

-Wiseco forged pistons (40thou oversized)

-Forged eagle rods

-N1 oil pump

-ACL race bearings (big ends and mains)

-ARP bolts

The block was honed bored decked and acid dipped and now is back in my possession.

Ive bolted up the mounts, sump, water pump and flywheel and it is about to go into the car. BUT only recently ive heard i should restrict the oil flow to the head using TOMEI gallery restrictors so the blocks oil isnt pumped all to the head.

Is this a necessary and recommended mod?

My next querie is will I need to replace the factory rb25de valve springs to cope with big boost? With the block ready to make mumbo i dont want the head to restrict me too much!

Any tips would be awesome

Cheers xsv 32

Um thanks but im from christchurch new zealand lol. Anyone know how to tell the difference between a r32 and r32 rb25de head??

the r32 doesnt have vct and has smaller ports afaik, the springs should be the same as any rb25 non neo (aftermarket wise)

Edited by R34GTFOUR

R32 RB25DE non VCT has different springs to R33 RB25 VCT - they are same as RB20 or RB26, equal length on both the ex and in so you can not use R33 ones.

the r32 doesnt have vct and has smaller ports afaik, the springs should be the same as any rb25 non neo (aftermarket wise)

Awesome. Im pretty sure its a r32 25de head which is perfect bar the weak springs...

Was just masking up the block to paint and discovered that the engine builder had already put oil gallery restricters in for free! SCORE. :)

Any suggestions on the best gasket to use? The block and head have only been surfaced and not skimmed so what thickness should i aim for to get around 8.5:1 - 9:1 compression.? Also the pistons are oversized about 1mm...

Based apon my thread named "Which RB engine combo?"

I'm looking at building a performance RB motor out of the bits and engines that I already own.

Here is the list;

RB30 engine (non turbo) complete

RB25DET complete (worn rings)

RB26DET rods and pistons (only)

Do I start with my RB25DET engine and work it or the RB30 and work it and say put the RB25DET head on it? Surely I dont have to use the RB25DET head on the RB30 to get 300plus rwkw? I know the RB26DET rods and pistons fit into the RB25DET but do they also fit into the RB30 crank and block as they are all the same bore size? Im not wanting to spend to much money but prepared to spend some money of course for extra performance bits. I'm wanting to get as much hp as possible and still use pump fuel and have boost under 20 psi.

Any other suggestions?

The engine will be going into a 1970 fibreglass car (total weight 750kg) that has no loom for these motors so I may consider a carburrettor version of the above or obtain the appropriate loom/computer.

________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

My latest thoughts

Ok...why cant I just use a standard rb30 head (maybe port the head a little) on my rb30 block? What benefit am I really going to get putting my rb25 vvt turbo head on to the rb30 block with all the head ache and modifications needed to do so?

Surely the rb30 head with some work done to it can do the job as well or better? The rb25 vvt turbo head is probably worth $700-800 at then I still have to change 2 cams in it costing probably $1500 plus in total. I only have to buy 1 cam for the rb30 head?

So...the rb26 turbo pistons fit on to the rb30 rods and can then be used into the rb30 block. What compression ratio will this give me using the rb30 head?

Edited by The Ant
Surely I dont have to use the RB25DET head on the RB30 to get 300plus rwkw?

The idea of the 3ltr is it spools a larger turbo quicker and makes more power 'under' the 300rwkw curve.

An rb20det can make 300rwkw but it will be as laggy as hell and have bugger all mid range.

I know the RB26DET rods and pistons fit into the RB25DET

The rods fit but the pistons will NOT unless you also run with the rb26dett crank.

The rb26 gains its additional 100cc by using a slightly longer stroke and pistons with a reduced pin height. Drop 'just' the rb26 rods and rb26 pistons in to an rb25det and the comp ratio will suck not to mention the piston sitting down the bore. So definitely not a wise move.

but do they also fit into the RB30 crank and block as they are all the same bore size?

No the rb30 has a longer stroke and rod length. So no. :blush:

Ok...why cant I just use a standard rb30 head (maybe port the head a little) on my rb30 block? What benefit am I really going to get putting my rb25 vvt turbo head on to the rb30 block with all the head ache and modifications needed to do so?

Surely the rb30 head with some work done to it can do the job as well or better? The rb25 vvt turbo head is probably worth $700-800 at then I still have to change 2 cams in it costing probably $1500 plus in total. I only have to buy 1 cam for the rb30 head?

You can but the rb30/25 will ALWAYS make the power easier and be much more fuel effient and friendly to drive.

Start working the sohc head with big cams to get near the stock flow level of the rb25det and fuel economy/driveability suffers.

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

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • 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
×
×
  • Create New...