Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

(just re-read the first page) im just a little skeptical that the old shitter T04e would rack out 400rwhp… especially dropping to .9 bar

I had one of the largest variants in a .82A/R rear (and a few people i know had similar turbo specs years ago) and it was no more than 240rwkw at best with 13-14psi, and best mph of 112-113

I mean, if you have a fairly mighty MPH around the 120+, then fair enough.

Not trying to take the thread further off course, I just find 60rwkw a bit much to take for identical setups bar ECU. That could be one reason your motor is together :)

Anyways, when you see the RB26's fail with say, what, 350rwkw doing circuit work. RB25's go down the near enough same road.

As an example, you could make 350rwkw and run it daily as a street car, but fact of the matter is your never going to see much past 120km/h for longer than a second or two… And the motor is hardly going to see 350rwkw on a daily basis now is it?

People saying that’s the case are kidding themselves. Also remember motors running like this are under nowhere near the stress that a motor doing weekend track work would see with regular expeditions into the 200km/h+ zone and sitting well up in the RPM scale at the same time, for a long time.

I reckon you probably could have a motor crank out 350rwkw. But would it be reliable? Depends on the situation and most likely not forever.

Max power and reliable power are different.

If a motor can run 350rwkw for 5+ years…and by that I mean seeing 350rwkw daily on a factory bottom end, I'd be surprised.

I agree totally.

When people compare how long an engine has lasted they really need to take into account what the vehicle is used for.

I have busted 2 x RB25's on the track with 280RWKW @ 1bar. They both lasted for about a year before letting go.

I am sure (know for a fact) that they would have gone strong for lot longer if the car wasn't almost purely for trackwork. I have all the support mods and a very very safe (read power compromising) tune on low boost but the kind of stresses that they have to put up with on the track is just asking too much from a 15yr old factory engine.

  • 9 years later...
Pretty impressive power for an engine with no crank, no pistons and no rods.

With good enough turbo and supporting mods you dont need them. On a high powered engine the oem ones are the weak-link anyway so better get rid of them straight away

[emoji85]

4 minutes ago, Chris90 said:

Yes everything bolt on.. Fuel pump, injectors, garret turbo, intercooler, front facing plenum, exhaust, haltec system, 6 boost manifold, turbosmart eboost... Just the basic.. hahahaha 

wow $20K spent on bolt ons and keep an "un-opened" motor - is that just for bragging rights?

Neo motors are stronger than R33 RB25s "out of the box" so that's the way to go in this context.

As other's have said above, "it's all about the tune" to keep the motor safe (safe-ish) at those HP figures - and running E85 (E87? I don't know what that is?) as you've done is the way to go for ethanol's resistance to detonation.

Impressive horsepower - well done!

cheers

Mike

 

A different perspective is my recent experience, where even with minimal horsepower (~205 KW), a bad tune and tuner wrecked my bottom end.

It was never a good idea to slap a NEO head onto an R33 bottom end, but 2 workshops (the 1st workshop put the head on and dyno'd it, then another did further work and dyno'd it) never mentioned anything about not putting a NEO head on an R33 bottom end.

2 years later and the compression across the cylinders was all over the place and the bottom end was wrecked. Probably less due to tune than tuner - but they go together.

The cautionary tale is that these engines (any engine) can be damaged with poor tunes and tuners - even at modest horsepower.

@Chris90 and many others have shown that the standard RB25 can take significant horsepower when tuned well.

In Chris's case - he knows he's pushing the boundaries - well done - after all if one pops he just sources another!

cheers

Mike

one i did,  basically a standard budged build rb25,  i think the whole car owed the guy under 6 grand

standard intake and exhaust manifolds  

 

the car lived on limiter and it lasted a whole 2 months of disrespectful abuse before it broke a rod

the car still ran with the broken rod handing out the side too lol

  • Like 1

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...