Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

If anyone has link to dyno graph of legend01, link me please. (couldn't find it)

This is the entire thread

Post with pics and dyno graph

I love to shove that post just above in every single pod filter and forward facing plenum thread I can.

Roy's 260rwkw RB20 is a $600 wreckers engine with all his goodies bolted to it.

see video of roy's car in my sig

This is the entire thread

Post with pics and dyno graph

I love to shove that post just above in every single pod filter and forward facing plenum thread I can.

Roy's 260rwkw RB20 is a $600 wreckers engine with all his goodies bolted to it.

see video of roy's car in my sig

Best RB20 engine bay I've ever seen. Bar none.

Little sceptical, inlet temp is rather high 42degC, would prefer the sensor left off car altogether or reading more similar reading to ambient, as it increases hp figures by a fair wack that sensor and people play funny buggers with it all the time, not directly auggesting it in this case, but...

Look at effys car, unpluged it and got like 150hp extra. (thats the extreme side, having it completely disconnected)

Edited by RB30-POWER

Inlet temps are high as had been on the dyno for an hour and a half and being a new motor at that time 1800klms was its first tune and a warm day for that time of year ,a week latter it made 250rwkw by 4200 rpm at uas dyno day but had issues with leaning out (problem was found to be non venting fuel cap so watch for that one boys)it has made more power that that but I dont have a dyno graph of it so make no claims .

Tuner has tried convincing me to go with a bigger turbo and an after market plenum it could well exceed the 350rwkw mark but since I have bought a gtr now im no longer going to be playing with this engine it will be up for sale soon

cheers Peter

Zenitani built an RB24 (RB26 crank and 83 mm pistons) that had 550 bhp using, if I remember rightly, a HKS GT32 and a set of HKS cams. That's was some years ago though. Realistically there is no reason why you couldn't get an RB24 to 800 or so bhp, it's all about how much money you want to spend on it. That's building it and maintaining it.

A stroker RB26 crank would fit, so you could also get one to 2.6 litres if you realy wanted, hence 1,000 bhp is not a rediculous target. Why you would want to, that is the real question. When you could build an RB26/27/28/30/31 for a much lower cost per bhp.

Cheers

Gary

Inlet temps are high as had been on the dyno for an hour and a half and being a new motor at that time 1800klms was its first tune and a warm day for that time of year ,a week latter it made 250rwkw by 4200 rpm at uas dyno day but had issues with leaning out (problem was found to be non venting fuel cap so watch for that one boys)it has made more power that that but I dont have a dyno graph of it so make no claims .

Tuner has tried convincing me to go with a bigger turbo and an after market plenum it could well exceed the 350rwkw mark but since I have bought a gtr now im no longer going to be playing with this engine it will be up for sale soon

cheers Peter

Pics of GTR?

RB20's can make power?? :thumbsup:

some people think so... just like how some people can think an R33 can be made to look good... the whole polishing a turd theory n all that.

You could get over 300rwkw, you just need some well through out head mods to get it breathing a hell of a lot better so that you'd have a car you could actually drive.

There are a few cars in the 240-280rwkw mark no problem.

Im sure you could put a larger turbo and a bit more boost for the numbers

The heads obviously don't flow anywhere near as well as a RB25, so a big outlay there would get you over 300rwkw as RB20 bottom ends seem to take a fair beating in stock form no problem :(

I dont know if this makes sense, but the way i loo9k at it is i take an individual cylinders displacement then i look at the total valve area for that cylinder. The SR20 is said to be able to make big power, yet the RB20 has more valve area per cylinder displacement, courtesy of it being a 6 cylinder.

There is a mob in Japan that are from the South Island and name if Red Performance or something. They have a 10second MR2 and a 9 second GTSt running a Testarossa Stroked RB20 to 2.4L.

But to me, a stock RB20 can be pretty drivable and reliable witha good turbo at between 240-260rwkws. People have made 280rwkws or so with std engines and GT30Rs etc. I find it hard to justify spending $10,000 more to make more power when bang for buck...you will still have a stupidly quick car with 260rwkws that in grand scheme of things doesnt owe you much money and still gets perfect traction.

In the new year im going to drag my car a few times as i have flat spotted semis with plenty of life in them and a spare RB25 gearbox. The car has no traction problems courtesy of the fact it isnt making stupid torque figures so is relatively easy to drive.

My further 2c, so many disappointing RB20s around as being about the cheapest Skyline around there are plenty of examples not having the money spent on them that other models do. Or usually there is a bog hole in the mods list, often injectors, properly tuned ECU, something that hurts the overall performance.

Legend01 still holds the mantle for smartest and best modded RB20 around. LOL if someone wants prepared RB26 rods and an RB25 crank them i doubt i will be using them anymore...i was going to do this myself....but like i was saying, 260rwkws out of a std motor. Well its hard to justify chasing more when it costs more $$$$

some people think so... just like how some people can think an R33 can be made to look good... the whole polishing a turd theory n all that.

lol! We can put your car side by side next to mine and see which one looks like it came straight off the factory floor and which one looks like its 30 years old.

PS: it aint going to be mine!

I'm living in Malaysia and because of the insane road tax pricing for cars above 2.0cc (RM479 for 2.0, RM789 for 2.5cc, RM1000++ for 2.6cc per year) we usually just use RB20det because of the almost affordable road tax, therefore there's lots of RB20det with more than 500hp at the rear wheels, most of them go for the T88 or GT3037 or T04S turbo with standalone ECU with tons of aftermarket parts, achieving high HP is very easy but the problem is, u don't get good response from the turbo (turbo lag), the HP starts climbing after 4500rpm (because the biggest problem with RB20det is the lack of torque), therefore it's just for a moment of fun between 5000rpm until redline. I'll prefer good response with a smaller ball-bearing turbo producing just over 300rwhp (turbo spool from 2500rpm onwards), it's more drivable and more fun when your tail starts to slide. plus the FC isn't so bad. One of my mechanics (who drives a Cefiro A31 with RB20det) has more than 700rwhp using 1000cc injectors and power FC, spent almost RM100,000 on mods alone..........but the car can't be driven everyday because it'll destroy the tires whenever he starts driving........

Sorry i couldn't provide any dyno charts or any proof for this, but anyone who's into RB engines know this is a fact in Malaysia.

and funky... Don't go making 33 jokes when in your own profile you have an s14... :)

lol I also secretly don't own up to having once owned an R33 GTSt... albeit for a couple of months.

some people are good with dishing out the jabs, but bad at taking some hits back. people who bag out RB20's usually fall into this category. :)

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

    • My first car was a HG. I'm very familiar with them. A mild cam upgrade is a good idea. The 186 is a very flexible engine - meaning it has good torque from down low. You can give up a little torque down low for quite a lot more excitement in the mid range, and a bit more up top - but they are not exactly a rev monster. You need to upgrade valve springs at the minimum. For a bigger cam, you'd want to make sure it wasn't still running the original fibre cam gear. That would be unlikely, given that most of them shat themselves in the 70s and 80s, but still within the realms of possibility. Metal cam gear required. Carbies are a huge issue. The classic upgrade was always a Holley 350, which works, but is usually pretty bad for fuel consumption. The 186S had a 2 barrel Stromberg on it that was very similar to the one on the 253, and is a reasonable thing if you can find one, and find someone to help you get it set up (which is the same issue with setting up a 350 to work nice). The more classic upgrade was twin sidedraught CD type carbs, or triples of same, or triple Webers. The XU-1 triple Webers being the best example. You can still buy all this stuff new, I think, but it's a lot of coin to drop. And then the people able to set them up are getting fewer and further in between. There's still some, but it used to be everyone's** dad and uncle could do it. **Not everyone's! But a lot. All in all, I wouldn't get too carried away with the engine. Anything you do to it without a full rebuild for power and revs will only make it slightly faster. I am all in favour of a complete teardown rebuild, with nice rods and pistons, 10 or 1.5:1 compression, and a clean port job with at least a big enough cam to run 98 with that compression, if not bigger. And if I did that to a dirty old red motor, I'd want to inject it too, which I'd struggle to fight against the devil on my shoulder that would argue for ITBs and trumpets. But the bills would start to mount up, and it will still never make stupid power. OK, a few people still know how to build absolutely mental red motors, courtesy of the work that went into HQ racing and modern knowledge being applied. But even a 300HP red motor is no match for an RB20 with a TD06. So you have to decide what it's worth to you. I'd just put a set of 6>2>1 extractors, a 2.5" exhaust and an electronic ignition conversion/dizzy on it and just run the old girl like the fairly slow old girl that she really is.
    • Thank you so much for the comments.  This is very interesting and gives me some great ideas to think about. Keen to keep it simple and relatively classic looking. That said, i am not too worried about staying 100% period correct.  A little extra performance and relatively good (or improved) economy is just what i am looking for. Ill be keeping any parts i swap out so if i get nostalgic i can always swap it all back in.  Right now just trying to get some good ideas from people in the know (I still have a lot to learn in this space). Thank you again!  
    • Wrt the engine, you're very much limited by 'production quality' as to how much extra power you can extract from them (I'm talking i6 red-motor) -- a lot here depends on how 'authentic' or 'period correct' you want the modifications to be... ...I'm too old... <grin>...the first true performance engine Holden made, was in the HD/HR models ~ this was the 'X2' performance pack...it came with twin downdraft strombergs on an otherwise unimproved intake manifold, with a two piece exhaust manifold (reckoned to be as good as extractors)... ....these engines were built upon the '179HP' cylinder block, which included extra webbing in the casting to make it stronger and less susceptible to block distortion... The next performance i6 came out with the HK Monaro (also found it's way into the LJ GTR Torana ... the car I wish I hadn't sold)...it had pretty much the same manifold setup, but was built against the '186S' block...this block retained all the extra webbing of the 179HP block, but added a forged steel crankshaft (instead of the stock cast crankshaft), because it was possible to snap the crank... ...apart from the inherent weaknesses in the stock (cast crank) blocks, the next limiting factor is the cylinder head porting & combustion chamber design, and the actual valve sizes. Back in the day, you could buy a 'yella terra' cylinder head (from stage 1 to stage 5 gradients), and this was the way to get serious power out of them -- with the extra breathing of these heads, you could fit a triple SU or DCOE Weber setup... ...obviously, these mods were a waste of time on a stock cylinder head/camshaft grind. My housemate rebuilt the i6 in his VH dunnydore about 6 months back -- this is a 186S block with the 12port 2850 blue motor head and intake/exhaust manifolds, with a dual throat Weber off an XF Falcon mounted on an adapter plate ; it's not a bad makeup...got more torque & fuel economy just light-footing it about on the first throat, but stand on it and it makes more giddy-up than the standard 2850 blue motor that it replaced. Personal note: I'd just fit an RB30 and be done it it 😃  
    • Thanks for sharing. That's a great video! My buddy is doing the same thing on his build (S chassis struts and towers). He's building an S14 with billet RB30 shooting for 2000whp... a race car with a TH400 just like this video. For a road car I just couldn't go this route as the strut has to be almost vertical and the caster is not going to pivot correctly (let alone camber gain). You think the R32 frontend is bad, wait till you put a MacPherson strut on without modeling it all in Solidworks to check geometry. I'm not saying it's a bad way to do it but I'd be really curious to see how it affects the geometry.
    • Hey Christof and welcome!  Sounds like an awesome project! I'm not sure many of the regular users on here would know much about the HK but I could be wrong.  Looking forward to updates.
×
×
  • Create New...