Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Gday,

im having my RB26 engine assembled at the moment, and im at the point of purchasing a head gasket. The engine builder recommended puchasing a 1.5mm gasket that will give me a compression ratio of about 8.5:1. I was, however, hoping to go a bit higher in order to maintain off boost drivability, but as im no engine builder, i should probably take his advice.

Im just wondering what comp ratios people have in their built RB26's and what i should aim for.

My engine has forged pistons, prepped rods, all the usual oil control stuff and a gt35/40 turbo with a 1.06 turbine housing. The car is a street car.

The reason why im wondering is that previously the engine was built with a 1.0mm head gasket that gave me 9.0:1 compression, but boost was uncontrollable with a smaller turbine housing (0.86 i think). This resulted in detonation and head gasket failure on the dyno. I then went and bought the bigger turbine housing, but im now wondering if it'll be unresponsive off boost with the lower comp ratio.

Thanks for any advice,

Shaun.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/182956-rb26-compression-ratio/
Share on other sites

I didnt build my motor but my comp ratio is about 8.9: 1 running twin HKS GTR RS's with a 2.8 litre stroker. No pinging problems at all.. Highest i see on the power fc is about 14, bottom end is great. Wouldnt have it any other way.

No offense intended, but if the engine builder is recommending a thick headgasket to get an appropriate comp ratio, he shouldnt be building rb26's. I wouldnt have any problem running the higher comp ratio(8.8-9:1) as long as you give it nice tight piston to head clearance to improve combustion efficiency and reduce detonation.

A 1mm head gasket should give 8.5:1 CR as that is stock. I would repeat that if I was you.

I had much discussion and head scratching about CR in my RB25 and ended up with 8.75:1 but if you are building an engine I can't see why you would use the headgasket to determine the CR. Use the pistons, block and head machining so you maintain proper quench and squish zones.

I love the off boost response (not too much different from the 9:1 standard on RB25) and wouldn't wouldn't want to go much lower due to piggish response or much higher due to harder to tune and got to keep a closer eye on things.

all depends on what your "high boost" setting will be.

i had a 1.5mm one in my dr30 (rb26) it made 328rwkw on 1.2 bar. going 1mm oversise and using a 1.5mm gasket will give standard comp.

using a standard gasket thickness with a overbore will raise it.

Yeah, its 20 thou over size and i had to have the head machined to within an inch of its life due to damage sustained in the last failure. Hence, gasket thickness is the thing that will vary my comp ratio this time.

Is standard RB26 comp ratio 8.5:1 is it? I thought it was higher for some reason.

Shaun.

With you combination of parts there is always this significant point to think about .

Nissan designed that engine to have parallel turbochargers because it is a convienent way the group the front and rear cylinders and take advantage of the pulse effect - this is the way to have high exhaust gas flow and acceptable turbine response . Also having two integral wastegates means they have plenty of bypass area and the whole shooting match is compact - along the line of the engine for ease of packaging in a Skyline .

When you go to a normally single scroll single turbocharger your tossing all the exhaust putts back into one area so you lose the multi passage effect and this will cost you turbine response . Its your call but if it were me I'd stick to either known parallel twins or a properly set up twin scroll single turbocharger .

Given a choice I'd go a little higher than the factory 8.5:1 CR and juggle this with the specific turbo characteristics and the dynamic or effective compression ratio with better than standard camshafts .

The things that will have the most say about how it drives just round the burbs will be turbine response/exhaust restriction/effective CR - and a tuner that knows their stuff ..

Your call .

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 since I've posted here. Looking for some advice on what I can remove to further identify the cause of my issues.  I can move the passenger seat forward and back but the knob used to adjust the seat angle is pretty much free spinning, there's very little resistance.  Removing the side cover I can see that the chain is intact but the shaft for the adjustment spins without the gear attached to it moving.  What's my next step for disassembly here? Is this a common fault? Just being a little cautious as I didn't want to start removing bolts for a spring to fly out or something equally as stupid.  Cheers
    • Those above shitboxes, mediocre and above usually have a turbo strapped to them, hence the slightly higher octane is required.  
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...