Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Good day fellas,

The time has come for me to take on a new project...I was recently GIVEN a blown rb20det by a mate i figured it would be a good candidate for a mild rb20 build up...as the title states...it will be a RB21/22...

First abit of background info...its going to go into my HCR32 which currently has a reasonably healthy rb20det in it...it also has a hks 2535 and every required support bolt in it needs...at the last dyno session it made 223rwkw at 17psi...

I have spent the better part of the day searching and reading up on all relevant threads with any infomation i might need and have learnt a fair deal...the plan here is not to build a bulletproof rb20hybrid engine to rival the rb25 and other bigger cousins...its is more of an experiment i want to do reasonably cheap and if it works out will leave me with a slightly beefier and stronger engine...being a mechanical engineer and a trained auto mechanic...i will try to do what i can by myself to keep costs down as well...

I will be looking to use later model 4A-GZE pistons as they are about the right size and are forged and not to mention cheap...this will be a bore out job only and i do not plan to stroke the engine at this stage...i will be re-using as much as i can from the old engine and only changing things that need to be changed...the same turbo setup will be used on the new engine too...

As such...i am looking for any advice an opinions from those who have taken a similar path or have done enough research regarding this topic to know what they're on about...

I do have a couple of questions to begin with...

1. I understand that there is some work needed to get the 4A-GZE pistons to fit and work correctly in a rb20 block...can someone tell me what exactly needs to be done?

2. Using late model 4A-GZE pistons...what CR would the engine end up having?

3. Where can i find a headgasket with the correct bore size for this build?

I'm pretty sure i'll have heaps more questions as this goes along but this will do for now...as mentioned...could anyone who has taken a similar path please post up all the info you can to help me along with this...

Lastly...please do not post up saying that its not worth it doing this and that i should go to a rb25/26/30 or whatever combo because that is not the plan at this stage...Cheers all...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/209174-rb2122-build-time/
Share on other sites

Here's a few to get you going, it was done in a bit of detail back in '05-'06 before RB25's became really cheap :)

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Rb...-Qu-t90293.html

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/RB...B23%2A++RB24%2A

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/24...l&hl=stroke

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/24...l&hl=stroke

Some of the info overlaps through the threads (as does happen) but each thread above is worth the read.

Hi Mate,

I am in the middle of building a rb2.4 with nothing left untouched....

If you do a search for rb24 you will find my thread..

I wouldnt use 4agze pistons... the desk hight needs lowering, and the pin is about 3mm higher up the piston than stock rb20 pistons. I uses in mine 83mm Custom ROSS pistons... about $1300 worth and there perfect.

If you have any questions shoot me a pm, I have spent the best part o the last year researching... sourcing and purchasing parts for mine from Tomei 272 cams to the lil nit and gritty Jun crank Collar

cheers

Cameron

ok, now evryone got me thinking... instead of porting out a rb20 head... wouldnt you be better off using a standard rb25 head... as someone said somewhere a ported 20 head will flow approx 80% of a std 25 head. Are a 25 head direct bolt on with rb20?? This may be a mod for me to think about in the not so distance future... only thing that would put me off is my plazmaman plenum for rb20... but thats ok i can cut and weld a rb25 flange onto my rb20 runners.

sorry to hijack yourthread mate :domokun:

RB25 head doesn't bolt on without a lot of dicking around, hence why most argue just get the RB25 cost vs gain

dammit, for a second there i thought i was onto a good $500 mod for my rb20det.

Ok...i have picked up the free engine and will start stripping it down shortly...after some research i have decided to give the 4A-GZE pistons a go once i find a place to do the necessary work...remember that i'm just doing this as an experiment so see what can be achieved...hence tomei 82mm pistons or other forged pistons are out of the question for now..

Does anyone have any recommendations for places to get 4A-GZE pistons from?

  • 2 months later...

Ok...quick update...the spare engine is about to be stripped down and checked...in the meantime...i already have a rb25 crank and a set of rb25 rods to be used as well...pistons will be standard forged 4agze pistons...if it all works i should end up with a 2.2L capacity from the larger bore and slightly longer stroke...

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...