Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

sup guys. ive been getting some confusing comments about the rb25det engines.

i have a s1.5 r33, basically a s2, but have a s1 frnt bar.

i have a s2 engine etc.

just wondering if this engine DOES have vvt?

and if so how can i identify it.

i pointed out the bulge from the cam cover, and aparantly that is the angle sensor, so how can i prove whether or not i have vvt?

and would any of u have any pics??

cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/186098-which-engines-have-vvt/
Share on other sites

it doesnt have VVT, VVT is found on the honda b16 (aka vtec) and also on the evo lancer (mivec).

the skyline (R33 and R34) have nvcs which is variable cam timing

the right solenoid (looking from the engine bay) is part of the nvcs system and it operates from the stock ecu and kick off point is around 4500rpm

so below 4500rpm its active to increase torque and midrange and then it kicks itself off to let normal cam timing take care of things

http://nissanskyline.6te.net/NVCS.htm

NVCS is the acronym for Nissan Variable cam system, it is found in the RB25DE, RB25DET and the RB25DET NEO. NVCS is not to be confused with Hondas V-TECH system which alters lift and duration high in the rev range to give higher peak power. Nissans system uses cam phasing to increase low to mid end engine torque.

Optimal valve opening and closure position for a given duration is different for every RPM and load combination, NCVS gives the engine the ability to take these factors into consideration and alters the timing accordingly. This is done using an electronic solenoid which adjusts the rotation of the cam by a maximum of 20 degrees, the solenoid is controlled by the engines ECU.

The RB25DE and RB25DET found in the R33 Nissan skyline only use the NVCS system on the intake Cam. The R34 Nissan Skyline is equipped with the NEO version of this engine and both intake and exhaust cams use the NVCS system. The RB20DET and RB26DETT do not use NVCS.

Torque curve of a VG30DETT with NVCS off and on notice the low to mid torque increase with the system turned on.

it's early saturday forgive me; but arent' the valves controlled by the cams and their lobes?

so by altering the camshaft, you are altering how the valves work.

i understand that the systems are different VVT vs. NVCS, but how?

  • 3 weeks later...

This is technically incorrect Paul :P

The R34 doesn't have the NVCS on the exhaust wheel.

The difference with the NEO is that it actuates the NVCS slightly differently. There was talk that it was infinitely variable, but I have had this disputed by a couple of tuners.

I don't know the exact way that it works, but it's only on the Inlet side.

NVCS is not to be confused with Hondas V-TECH system which alters lift and duration high in the rev range to give higher peak power. Nissans system uses cam phasing to increase low to mid end engine torque.

Yeh i notice on my RB25 the good mid-range torque, and then it drops off considerably after 6000rpm. Guess it has it's bonuses compared with VVT and the high-range power abilities of the Honda system.

Would be good if NVCS worked throughout the entire rev range though...

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...