Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I will be having my engine rebuilt with all the goodies and i have a question on CR.

What would be the average amount of material shaved off both the head and the block. 4 thou off each??

When the head and block gets shaved,so as the gasket can seal correctly,will my CR rise alot?

I have ordered CP pistons at 9.0:1 CR (stock RB25 CR) and a 1.2mm Cometic headgasket (stock thickness)

CHEERS

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/209294-compression-ratios/
Share on other sites

well, you have no choice but to get them done just enough so they are flat.

So just do that and then do a mock build and measure it? Depends how good you want it to be.

You could end up with 9.1:1 maybe, but thats a good thing I say.

was interesting to read old mate post the other day, that he had to remove the head again to fit a thicker gasket after a rebuild on rb25 because the engine was detonating and not able to make the power it was previously. was well over 500hp or so from memory, thread is on here somewhere.

depends on what power you want and what fuel you plan to use i suppose.

but the average build/engine will not have a problem at all with such a little increase in cr.

run it around 9.2-9.3.

the results will all come from whoever you choose to tune it but.

sammy will only take off what needs to be taken.

Id say dont deck the block unless it needs to be. You need to have this engine put together and measured correctly. It needs to have the squish bands etc all measured as well and piston to valve clearances set properly.

Several mock up assemblies will be needed to get it all correct.

Edited by Risking
run it around 9.2-9.3.

the results will all come from whoever you choose to tune it but.

sammy will only take off what needs to be taken.

Id say dont deck the block unless it needs to be. You need to have this engine put together and measured correctly. It needs to have the squish bands etc all measured as well and piston to valve clearances set properly.

Several mock up assemblies will be needed to get it all correct.

Want to make a couple of extra dollars Brad?? :D With the amount of goodies going into this motor i want it done correctly.

if sammy is machining it all up there is no problem with me showing you how to do it.

Better you learn whats involved rather than paying someone to wack together an engine.

Next time I meet up with you tell me exactly whats being done and will go from there.

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

    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
×
×
  • Create New...