Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i've got a pretty heavy one in there now, so i'll keep that in there til it dies then i'm not too sure what i'm going to go for, still want driveability though!

I'll use the rb25 runners and the the rb20 plenum then, that sounds the most practical and easiest.

I'm sorry guys but I can't seem to work out how to search just in this thread. Nor can I seem to download the thread as a whole to search on my computer. And When I go to print view it only shows about 100 posts.

Anyway. I have a couple of questions.

Has anyone done this with a NEO RB25 head yet? Is it possible?

Do I have to remove the strut brace in my GTT to fit this?

It looks like I need a rebuild and I'm keen for some more torque.

EDIT

I found the search this thread button sorry guys. It seems the R34 RB25 head is pretty much the same. Has anyone actually used it though?

Abo Bob,

The Auto would work really well with the auto I think. I had planned on it. UNTIL I changed plans and plan to not use the car as a daily driver once I finish uni, more so a bit of a fun car. Its not worth selling it.

With regards to spool and response.. You would have roughly the same spool/response with the RB30 and a XR6 Turbo as the RB25 with a GCG VG30 highflow setup.

GCG VG30 comes on hard around the 3800rpm mark with the RB25, The XR6 turbo comes on hard around 3800rpm with the rb30, but obviously with more torque and acceleration off boost. The XR6 turbo apparently makes a solid 10psi a shade over 3000rpm. 10psi from that huffer is still a reasonable amount of airflow = power. :D

Linear = traction. :P

Its 100% the way I'm going now. I'm sticking the vg30 turbo on for a few months then at the end of the year will hopefully find a well priced xr6 turbo and bolt it on.

Hope my spool estimates are correct. :)

Edited by Cubes

Stock rods with constant track use would make me nervous at 300rwkw+.

No worse than the rb25. If anything better as the rb30 rod has a better r/s ratio, more leverage (piston weight won't hurt the rods as much) and as there is more leverage there is less rod side load.

The rod fly's up and down the bore straighter. If that makes sense.

Edited by Cubes

Got it.

What about piston speed? That would be increased wouldn't it?

Do you guys use ordinary cast pistons rather than forgies to keep the piston weight down?

Is there any weakness that is shown up by piston speeds that are too high?

I think I know what I'm asking but I might be wrong.

Forgy's sitting on top of a rb25 or 26 rod is worse than one sitting on a rb30 rod.

Piston speed isn't really an issue. Its all about the rod to stroke ratio. :)

The RB30 rod length is 152.7mm

The stroke is 85mm.

Thats a rod to stroke ratio of 1.79. Rather nice. :)

The RB26 rod to stroke ratio is 1.65 from memory.

The mechanical stress is less with the longer rod length. There are two reasons for these results.

The primary reason for these results is that the profile of the instantaneous velocity of the piston changes with rod length.

The longer rod allows the piston to come to a stop at the top of the bore and accelerate away much more slowly than a short rod engine.

This slower motion translates into a lower instantaneous velocity and hence lower stresses on the piston.

Another strong effect on mechanical stress levels is the angle of the connecting rod with the bore centerline during the engine cycle.

The smaller the centerline angle, the less the side loading on the cylinder wall.

The longer rod will have less centerline angle for the same crank angle than the shorter rod and therefore has lower side loadings.

Visualise it. :)

http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/tech/0104scc_ssbbpart7/EDIT: Here's a nice little link to help.[/url]

At the end of the day the rod to stroke ratio doesn't make 'that' much of a difference to integrity, more so the lesser friction.

Balancing the motor to 2grams or less will also help it hold together better at high rpm.

I've been told usual street performance balance is 4grams, factory 12grams and race 2grams. Mine was apparently done to 2grams.

Unsure if thats overall 2grams or individual as even the smallest nut had been touched. :)

Edited by Cubes

i have a grampa 1 owner 97k engine and it is unfortunatly a S1 block and it doesnt have the oil drain but worst of all it doesnt have the alternative twin cam idler area on the front of the block

I know if you dont have the machined face you can smooth it over with some devcon type of thing (I have the MOROSO epoxy used for building up intake ports etc just for this purpose) but I was thinking of this idea

you know how you drill and tap a new position for the tensioner above the water pump whats stopping you from drilling and tapping a new hole on the other side like my pic

and my engine guy balances my engines to .01 of a gram (ChrisMiltonED)

post-22812-1126884122.jpg

Edited by DYNOBUSTER

The belt wouldnt be going the way you showed i think. The one below the white one you placed is the std location for the bearing pulley.

If you did that you would end up with the belt running as shown below in my dodgy pic :D

BTW - thats a photo of my motor just after assembly. And while Milton does know his stuff, im glad i chose elsewhere to get my motor done....

ps- for the price a series 2 motor can be picked up for, it will save a lot of hassles in the long run. Jeezus, its like $100 for a short motor...why do people bother using a motor you have to drill and tap, or modify??? :blink:

post-3692-1126919262.jpg

Why not reverse the location of the tensioners?

Right side up high above the water pump, the left down low?

Interestering you mention Chris Milton Engine Developments, thats who we had do our head.

His price for the bottom end was too expensive for what I wanted.

I was only after a fairly stockish rebuild + a set of forged pistons, crank and rods machined for equal clearances, block crank and rod crack test and a nice heinz balance.

From memory the balance was around $400, thinking back now I'm also pretty sure Andrew sent the bits to Miltons for the balance.

Not too many ppls have heinz balancers.

Edited by Cubes
The belt wouldnt be going the way you showed i think. The one below the white one you placed is the std location for the bearing pulley.

If you did that you would end up with the belt running as shown below in my dodgy pic :P

BTW - thats a photo of my motor just after assembly. And while Milton does know his stuff, im glad i chose elsewhere to get my motor done....

ps- for the price a series 2 motor can be picked up for, it will save a lot of hassles in the long run. Jeezus, its like $100 for a short motor...why do people bother using a motor you have to drill and tap, or modify??? ;)

ahhh ok :P

are you serious

and even if you have a S2 block to save you having to get a cam belt made of un-obtainium you have to drill and tap it above the water pump

and if thats a pic of your engine them you have had to drill and tap a thread for the tensioner so sadly you had to dill and tap and modify YOUR block

why the f**k did you bother <_<

and i have a quote to balance the full engine ie flywheel crank piston/rods and harmonic balancer for $180

this is what I have

$55 acid clean

$140 oversize bore

$186 balance

$100 face head and block

$40 micro finish crank

$252 shot peen rods

$108 resize rods (required after shot peening)

$130 ARP rod bolts

$1125 for Arias forged pistons (with moly rings, pins and locks)

$49 ACL race big end bearings

$89 ACL race main bearings

$66 for the cambelt

$240 for a pair of new belt tensioners

so $2580 for the bottom end

thats on the whole bottom end this is what its cost me so far

I was tempted to run a set of eagle H beam rods and I might on the next one I do but I figured the stock rods would be good enough for what I want to do with the engine

Edited by DYNOBUSTER
ahhh ok :P

are you serious

and even if you have a S2 block to save you having to get a cam belt made of un-obtainium you have to drill and tap it above the water pump

and if thats a pic of your engine them you have had to drill and tap a thread for the tensioner so sadly you had to dill and tap and modify YOUR block

why the f**k did you bother  <_<

For starters, any rb30det is going to require another tensioner drill and tapped above the water pump (or the other method). I was referring to drilling and tapping new oil and water lines for the turbo, not the tensioner. Sorry for the confusion, just dont get too upset if you read it wrong. ;)

$66 for the cambelt

$240 for a pair of new belt tensioners

Cambelt is only $30 odd, and you can use 2 x rb30 tensioners @ $80 (ie $160 for the pair)

But why should i waste my time if you are going to take offence if i typed it wrong, or you read it wrong....get off it mate, we're here to help everyone. Im no keyboard warrior, ask if you get confused, cos it aint hard....

Our bottom end complete not including bolting the head on set us back $3500 including Wiseco forged.

But then again we did have the crank and rods machined for equal clearances, or what is known as blueprinting those items.

Even still, you consider no forged pistons in your build, ~1400 for a rebuild seems a little too cheap. My bet is you will go to pick up the motor and you will be faced with a bigger bill. Just like Bl4ck32 was when he picked up his head. :(

I remember I received a quote from Miltons, listed what I wanted done and the price was up around 6-7k. ;)

Edited by Cubes

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...