Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yes thats right. R32 GTS-4 had RB20 turbo engine, and R33 GTS-4 has the RB25 normally aspirated engine only.

I have been looking for an R33 GTS-4 manual for over a year, and cannot find one that is for sale, but they do exist. There are quite a few automatics around, if that is what you want.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/21242-r33-gts-4/#findComment-448763
Share on other sites

Yes the R34 does come with an RB25DET plus AWD, but it would not come cheap.

The best option is to get an R33 n/a GTS-4 and turbo it yourself, a bit of work, but not impossible.

Another way would be to fit an RB26DETT to an R33 GTS-4, now that would make a very nice sleeper, and at around half the cost of a GTR as well.

If you bought an auto GTS-4 for about $15K, a complete GTR front cut for about $10K, you would have absolutely everything you need, plus you could flog off all the unused bits and recover a few dollars.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/21242-r33-gts-4/#findComment-449299
Share on other sites

Well.. I'm in the US. Skylines are a tad bit scarce here.

These pictures are the engine swap I'm buying, which has come from japan. And I really cannot find out exactly what it came from. All I know is that it is an AWD R33 RB25DET automatic.

I gather it's either from the Stagea or some sort of GTSt-4. It doesn't really matter, but I have been looking for information on it for a while now. And everytime I mention this engine or show pictures of it to people here in the US (or on a US Nissan forum), they think it has been modified in some way. I'm trying to figure out the truth. I know there was alot of variations of skylines out there.. but I've found no real information on the exact models and editions for each year. It obviously looks stock and unmodified IMO.

If it is from the Stagea though.. it is definetely rare. Because what I'm gathering is that there was only one year that the stagea even had the RB25DET AWD, and that was 96. The others were called VQ25DET's..

Who knows. Thanks though.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/21242-r33-gts-4/#findComment-449553
Share on other sites

Very interesting EJ6. The RB25 block used in the AWD version is different to the "normal" RB25 block. The oil pan rails are quite different, and some of the holes are much larger to take the studs which secure the alloy sump and front diff.

So there is the RB25DE, and RB25DET block used on the R33 and R34 rear wheel drive cars, and then there is the RB26DETT, RB25DE, and RB25DET neo blocks as used in all the AWD versions.

Your R33 has definitely been modified in some way, and there are two possibilities. The original RB25DE may have been fully rebuilt with all the RB25DET parts, but using the original (AWD) bare block, this is possible, but highly unlikely.

The other possibility is that someone has dropped in an R34 Stagea RB25DET neo engine. This engine is different in many ways to the original RB25DET, and is rated for 205Kw, if I remember correctly. There are many detailed changes including variable valve timing on both cams, and the top of the engine looks totally different. It should have "neo straight six" prominently displayed. If it does, you are a very fortunate fellow.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/21242-r33-gts-4/#findComment-450464
Share on other sites

Warpspeed, thanks for your help with this..

I've also heard that the RB25DET stagea is a bit more powerfull. I hope to god this is it, because that would be one cool thing.

It doesn't look like a neo engine either does it?

Could it possibly be a R32 GTS-4 setup? I am being told this is R33. And it definetely LOOKS like R33.. because it doesn't look very old.

When I get the swap, is there a way of telling for sure or not? I'm familiar with honda's and they all have engine codes on the blocks. Does Nissan do this too in any way?

Thanks

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/21242-r33-gts-4/#findComment-450782
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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...