Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys well i picked up my car today from another tuner in the battle to try and solve my afr problem and he explained to me that i had a series 3 rb25det engine similar to the neo?! based on the crank angle sensor the car has claimin it was from a r34 gt-t and saying they run different cam forks that fit into the sensor.. does that mean it would have variable cams on the exhaust side aswell?? he also said he had to run alot less timing on it due to it being a series 3 engine..

Can anyone shed some light on the subject... oh its a november 97 car aswell

Cheers Jarrod

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/224802-series-3-rb25det/
Share on other sites

There are 'series 3' RB25's [it really only applies to RB26's], they are the last of the 25's and they are basically the same but with a few small differences, they are still called a series 2. They are not as distinctive as the RB26 3's. There are rumours about Neo cross overs, and bigger valves etc etc etc, but I haven't actually seen one like it yet. So I'd say they are just rumours, although the CAS and cam ends are definitely different. Don't think they are Neo though.

RB25's only have variable timing on the inlet side, exhaust side is fixed [live pulley centres notwithstanding].

I wouldn't think you'd have to run 'less' timing because its a '97 25.

Do a search, there is likely a FAQ around here telling you the differences from a series 2 proper.

sorry to bring this thread up again guys but i have read all the forums i can i was still after abit more information on the subject, this engine has got me stumped.. compared to the other rb25det engine maps i have seen it is alot different.. the timing map is very retarded the highest timing it has on the map is 35.. n on full bost it runs a timing of 10

and this engine still managed to make 285rwhp on 12 psi with stock turbo n stock engine

so if anyone knows any definate differences, i'd really appreciate it or if that amount of timing is normal

Cheers

Jarrod

nah.. m for m-spec.. n l is for active lsd.. arent stageas the same as r33 rb25dets with more restrictive exhausts and air intakes?

i suspect i wont get this question answered until i open her up..

what sort of timing do most r33s use on around 12psi of boost

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...