Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

My RB feels to be more than somewhat lacking around 4000rpm. See attached chart.

It has the following

Garrett 28-60's 707160-5 turbos.

HKS dumps.

Tomei Poncams.

Unadjusted cam gears.

Power FC with Z32 AFM's.

Stock internals with good compression.

Some other random parts which probably aren't very important

Basically my question is this:

How can I get some more torque from 4000rpm to about 5000rpm?

post-5134-1211267799_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/220066-rb26-midrange/
Share on other sites

its all in the timing and tuning, get some adjustable cam gears....assuming you mean non adjustable cam gears not non adjusted adjustable cam gears. ...(not cheap ones the screws rattle loose),......does that make sense????????????????????

and then go back for a full tune( assuming its a aftermarket ecu/piggyback?)

if not you'll be better off with one of those too.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/220066-rb26-midrange/#findComment-3881074
Share on other sites

richard,

just did some dyno time last night and i have the same gear as you but forge internals now.

I have a bit of porting done to the head and manifolds but shouldnt be a million miles away.

with the 260 x 9.15 cams we made 470 hp at 1.35 bar boost and 330 odd ft/pd torque. We then advanced the inlet cam 2 degrees and retarded the exhaust 2 degrees. then made 465 hp but 386 ft/pd torque at 7500 at 1.35 bar.

boosted a bit earlier as well, around 3800 for usable boost pressure.

Worth a try.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/220066-rb26-midrange/#findComment-3881706
Share on other sites

richard,

just did some dyno time last night and i have the same gear as you but forge internals now.

I have a bit of porting done to the head and manifolds but shouldnt be a million miles away.

with the 260 x 9.15 cams we made 470 hp at 1.35 bar boost and 330 odd ft/pd torque. We then advanced the inlet cam 2 degrees and retarded the exhaust 2 degrees. then made 465 hp but 386 ft/pd torque at 7500 at 1.35 bar.

boosted a bit earlier as well, around 3800 for usable boost pressure.

Worth a try.

Cheers for that. The motor I have is a bit rediculous. It has bolt ons to run it up over 500rwhp but stock internals, so has been turned down to allow it try & live a troubled life. I got crunched for time for getting the tune done which meant no fiddling of the Tomei cam gears. The joy of living in the bush is RB gurus are 180km away in Perth.

Anyway I would be curious to see what people are generating in terms of rwhp through 4000rpm.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/220066-rb26-midrange/#findComment-3882559
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...