Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

yes RB24DET

Tomei pistons, GTR crank, rods etc...

hence with the way rb20's and rb25's flow gasses differently, i'm after some sort of assistance in trying to figure out best setup for my car. also assumin my 20 based engine will rev more, also after opinions, that is why i would like peoples opinions on my questions.

thanks for the links, i have spent time reading them, and in mafia's thread he is relating to RB25... but i will have another look at them

thanks

-Matt

Edited by huddy
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If you stroke out the bottom end and leave the head untouched it will make its peak power earlier in the rpm and nose over earlier. in other words rev less.

Your going to have to get the head breathing better with a set of cams.

Stock ECU that dip is normal, its the rich/retard kicking in most of the time... plus average mapping i would suspect.

PowerFC/Tune = gone.

I have to say that I've seen that mid range dip more than a few times. Ignoring any stock ECU that's going into rich+retard, it's more with unopened engines but uprated turbo specs and with a new ECU. I see that Lithium has a Link setup.

Which area of mapping should be used first to attack the problem? ie fuel or ignition? If it is fuel (and assuming that the AFR in that area is a "nice" repeatable value, should it be leaned off?

i too have seen that dip in plenty of RB25 dyno's... and thats with aftermarket ECU's, stock bottom ends and supporting gear with decent turbo's... any idea what the cause is there??

Huddy: the prob with making 300 rwkw with your set us is you have the bottom end support to do it... but the head is still an rb20 head... it just wont flow the air to support the big numbers... no matter what turbo you run.

I have to say that I've seen that mid range dip more than a few times. Ignoring any stock ECU that's going into rich+retard, it's more with unopened engines but uprated turbo specs and with a new ECU. I see that Lithium has a Link setup.

Which area of mapping should be used first to attack the problem? ie fuel or ignition? If it is fuel (and assuming that the AFR in that area is a "nice" repeatable value, should it be leaned off?

The fuelling on mine was nice and consistant, and the timing is all fairly sensible though we / he didn't play with the VCT point. The tuner is a very accomplished tuner, he tunes some NZ GTR who went over to Australia last year and turned a few heads.

i too have seen that dip in plenty of RB25 dyno's... and thats with aftermarket ECU's, stock bottom ends and supporting gear with decent turbo's... any idea what the cause is there??

Huddy: the prob with making 300 rwkw with your set us is you have the bottom end support to do it... but the head is still an rb20 head... it just wont flow the air to support the big numbers... no matter what turbo you run.

time to buy Blinkies head then

Mach Go Go style 405rwkw on low boost

rb20 head

http://www.geocities.jp/akfw1_rbx32/free/car.html

rb20 head 3lt bottomend 600ps hmmm list it as a 25 head in specs?

http://www.eonet.ne.jp/~7thmeister/2003914zen.htm

2.2lt rb20 272 cams 500 ps http://www.dragster.st/dragster/mizo/mizo.html

Edited by 1400r
I have to say that I've seen that mid range dip more than a few times. Ignoring any stock ECU that's going into rich+retard, it's more with unopened engines but uprated turbo specs and with a new ECU. I see that Lithium has a Link setup.

Which area of mapping should be used first to attack the problem? ie fuel or ignition? If it is fuel (and assuming that the AFR in that area is a "nice" repeatable value, should it be leaned off?

Dunno, i didnt tune the car, i leave that to my tuner/builder.

But there must be something people arent looking at/changing as no car i know of that gets tuned has a problem and a few RB25s have been done there.

I dont think its bottom end related as that largely has no effect IMO.

I guess it comes down to what the budget will stand, and whether you can feel a difference on-road.

VCT change point on a mechanically standard engine can have marked impact, but usually in a negative way if you alter it a long way from standard. But + or - a couple hundred rpm might be worth a try.

I've seen using an adjustable cam gear also work well in terms of smoothing the torque curve - but no actual increase in my case. Just minimised the peaks/troughs so it was evident the engine was running in a happy mechanical zone.

With that slightly saw-tooth appearance, I'd think that the ignition map might be worth a look. If it was mapped to the best output without knock, some columns will take less timing, meaning that as you advance through the rpm range the map is not moving smoothly through a curve. Can give the up/down appearance I'd commented on.

None of this is a smart-arse commentary, just looking to see how the end result came about and whether it's possible to improve with comparatively little effort or $$. I like to know the how/why rather than just leave it to a tuner.

The fuelling on mine was nice and consistant, and the timing is all fairly sensible though we / he didn't play with the VCT point.

Shit hey, i had just ordered the GT3082r with the .63 the day before i posted my question. Now i read u guys reckon it'll be crap and i've got it! I hope your all wrong lol. I'll post the dyno results when i get it all fixed up.

I have to say that I've seen that mid range dip more than a few times. Ignoring any stock ECU that's going into rich+retard, it's more with unopened engines but uprated turbo specs and with a new ECU. I see that Lithium has a Link setup.

woudlnt this have something to do with the Profiles on the cams?

Edited by silverbulletR33

I'd say probably, yes.

He should be in a position to work with what he's got though. I posted a few ideas on #51.

Changing to non-standard cams may well just move the characteristic (I won't call it a problem) around and upwards. The saw tooth torque curve I would think is the bigger issue to address. And there are things that can be done that cost more in the way of time than anything else.

Again though - Lithium has got a generally good result. I'd just like to see something done to make it "happy".

woudlnt this have something to do with the Profiles on the cams?
Changing to non-standard cams may well just move the characteristic (I won't call it a problem) around and upwards. The saw tooth torque curve I would think is the bigger issue to address. And there are things that can be done that cost more in the way of time than anything else.

Again though - Lithium has got a generally good result. I'd just like to see something done to make it "happy".

Yeah me too. For what its worth, you really can't feel any of it on the road. All passengers etc perceive it as just building up and having strong power all the way through, the only "weakness" is that the thing doesn't go straight to 15psi and hold it. If it did that it'd be so much more solid, nonetheless there are definitely gains to be had by removing that slight dip.

The plan is next year to go to a built motor etc and then give it some boost and revs, this tune was just to get it safe and fun to drive - not to hunt every last hp :thumbsup: For what its worth, I gave it a run on a rolling road dyno for fun and the dip wasn't anywhere near as extreme.

  • 2 weeks later...

did you guys get custom lines made up to suit? just got my 3076r... :)

LITHIUM

-i cant see pics of your dump, can you please post up, mine phsically looks the same as yours with the antisurge front, and same stye rear exhaust housing.

-how did it go for standard intercooler piping to the top of the turbo? (well maybe not standard, as mine had previously been modded for the hks turbo...)

-was there any difference noticably with the change in manifold? (even noise??)

cheers

-Matt

Edited by huddy

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

    • There's plenty of OEM steering arms that are bolted on. Not in the same fashion/orientation as that one, to be sure, but still. Examples of what I'm thinking of would use holes like the ones that have the downward facing studs on the GTR uprights (down the bottom end, under the driveshaft opening, near the lower balljoint) and bolt a steering arm on using only 2 bolts that would be somewhat similarly in shear as these you're complainig about. I reckon old Holdens did that, and I've never seen a broken one of those.
    • Let's be honest, most of the people designing parts like the above, aren't engineers. Sometimes they come from disciplines that gives them more qualitative feel for design than quantitive, however, plenty of them have just picked up a license to Fusion and started making things. And that's the honest part about the majority of these guys making parts like that, they don't have huge R&D teams and heaps of time or experience working out the numbers on it. Shit, most smaller teams that do have real engineers still roll with "yeah, it should be okay, and does the job, let's make them and just see"...   The smaller guys like KiwiCNC, aren't the likes of Bosch etc with proper engineering procedures, and oversights, and sign off. As such, it's why they can produce a product to market a lot quicker, but it always comes back to, question it all.   I'm still not a fan of that bolt on piece. Why not just machine it all in one go? With the right design it's possible. The only reason I can see is if they want different heights/length for the tie rod to bolt to. And if they have the cncs themselves,they can easily offer that exact feature, and just machine it all in one go. 
    • The roof is wrapped
    • This is how I last did this when I had a master cylinder fail and introduce air. Bleed before first stage, go oh shit through first stage, bleed at end of first stage, go oh shit through second stage, bleed at end of second stage, go oh shit through third stage, bleed at end of third stage, go oh shit through fourth stage, bleed at lunch, go oh shit through fifth stage, bleed at end of fifth stage, go oh shit through sixth stage....you get the idea. It did come good in the end. My Topdon scan tool can bleed the HY51 and V37, but it doesn't have a consult connector and I don't have an R34 to check that on. I think finding a tool in an Australian workshop other than Nissan that can bleed an R34 will be like rocking horse poo. No way will a generic ODB tool do it.
    • Hmm. Perhaps not the same engineers. The OE Nissan engineers did not forsee a future with spacers pushing the tie rod force application further away from the steering arm and creating that torque. The failures are happening since the advent of those things, and some 30 years after they designed the uprights. So latent casting deficiencies, 30+ yrs of wear and tear, + unexpected usage could quite easily = unforeseen failure. Meanwhile, the engineers who are designing the billet CNC or fabricated uprights are also designing, for the same parts makers, the correction tie rod ends. And they are designing and building these with motorsport (or, at the very least, the meth addled antics of drifters) in mind. So I would hope (in fact, I would expect) that their design work included the offset of that steering force. Doesn't mean that it is not totally valid to ask the question of them, before committing $$.
×
×
  • Create New...