Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just a few things i was hoping some of you might be able to help me on. My rb20 in my silvia is only getting roughly 330klms out of a tank. The tank size is 55L. This was with relatively easy driving etc. Also, the cars idle rises and falls dramatically sometimes at idle. Does anybody have any ideas what i should be looking for as to fixing this problem? All the rb has done to it is a k & n air filter which came off the old engine that was in it. Thanks for your help.

Jase

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/20762-rb20-probs/
Share on other sites

Check the idle control valve, or whatever its called, on the back of the plenum. Pull it off and hit it with carby cleaner. They tend to clog up a bit and cause a fluctuating idle.

That economy is pretty bad, I get min 400kms per tank local driving with filter, exhaust, intercooler, boost controller and i don't really drive slow. Up to 530km on longer distance driving.

This is generally taking 53-55L when i fill it up. RB20T aswell.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/20762-rb20-probs/#findComment-437744
Share on other sites

I would almost bet my left whatever that its your oxygen sensor. I had the same problem with my car, disconnect it and see if it idles better. When i got a new one, the idle was perfect and a big difference in fuel economy (I had to disconnect the faulty one till i found the new one)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/20762-rb20-probs/#findComment-438853
Share on other sites

I think the problem has been solved. My ignition timing so was retarded it wasn't funny. Now it seems to be very conservative on the petrol and is going heaps harder!! Still have the occasional up and down idle tho so i will take that valve off and give it a clean. For all your rb20det people, i peaked power at 7200rpm, does this sound normal??? The dyno i was on was a bit out of whack too cuz i only got 73kw's at the wheels!!! hehe.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/20762-rb20-probs/#findComment-439254
Share on other sites

Yeah, I had the same problem after my conversion. While doing the conversion, in an effort to work out why I wasn't getting ignition, I mucked around with the crank angle sensor and when I finally got it going, it was retarded so on idle, it would nearly cut out then rise then nearly cut out again, one of the first things I checked was the CAS and this solved the problem.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/20762-rb20-probs/#findComment-447281
Share on other sites

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...