Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Of those people that have used cams what have you found with 300-330akw? I read that some of the guys in VIC actually went back to stock while still making decent power. Its hard to comprehend cams with similar duration and only more lift not helping the drivability but I am keen to hear from those that have actually done/been through it.

You can make 350kw on stock cams but you need more boost than you would with mild upgrade cams say tomei poncams. sure you can make the power but there are benefits to the upgrade when you are at that level of power.

So what's the consensus on boost needed to get into this power range?

20psi or more. 12psi and i have 250rwkw, stock cams etc etc

Of those people that have used cams what have you found with 300-330akw? I read that some of the guys in VIC actually went back to stock while still making decent power. Its hard to comprehend cams with similar duration and only more lift not helping the drivability but I am keen to hear from those that have actually done/been through it.

What seems to happen is not really seen on a dyno. Its on the street, well rather circuit that its noticed the most, better response on/off throttle and that kinda thing. So arguable in a street car in many respects.

I have a BNR32

BNR32

Mods are

Jun cam gears

Hks cam shafts

Jun valve springs

Garrett 25/60r Turbos

Power FC

Sard 660cc injectors

Bosch 040 in tank fuel pump

Apexi air pods

(Standed dump pipes, cat and AFM's).

Low Boost 14psi made 268kw High Boost 18psi 297kw.

So if i boost it alittle more i would see over 300kw's.

Ive done the bolt on upgrades from stock engine to 300kw i went

GT-SS turbos

Trust dumps

highflow cat

700 cc sards

nismo afms

tomei pump

power fc

tomei b cams and wheels

hks evc 5

294awkw @ 18psi

edit stock clutch blew in 2 days

post-30208-1221727742_thumb.jpg

Edited by spilmer

You should just ask Ben most of this stuff, as he is the tuner, he knows whats needed and what works best to make the power and achieve the driveability you want.

I know this because i asked him all the same questions you are when I had my engine built.

I asked about bigger/different afms as well, he said you dont need them, you can tune around it. After my tune Ben had my car running 326 on 17psi! ...2560-5 turbos. Stock cams, adj cam gears.

He also told me d-jetros arent the best for street, you get better fuel efficiency with afms.

D-jetros are better for big singles i rkn, with comp surge etc.

Cam gears are a must, theyre just too cheap for the gains you get from them.

Wheres Marcus? (Ronin09) Hes running a stock engine last time I spoke to him, i think with similar power you are chasing.

Of those people that have used cams what have you found with 300-330akw? I read that some of the guys in VIC actually went back to stock while still making decent power. Its hard to comprehend cams with similar duration and only more lift not helping the drivability but I am keen to hear from those that have actually done/been through it.

The key factor is what the tuner reccomends and can do with the cams. Stock cams aren't bad at all in fact they are very good. To get the most from aftermarket cams it takes lots of mucking around on a mild setup. However I still personally believe that the Tomei 260 units are superior all round for performance.

I have used the Tomei cams on a stock turbo'd motor and I was able to tune more power into it down low than you will see from any of the stock cam / turbo motors in the Rb26 sticky for that matter it would rival most small turbo RB30 hybrids. It made the power with less timing & boost.It was a great setup but, admittedly took lots of time buggerising around with the tune and that costs punters money.

If he replies he's doing it on his own time when it suits him rather than me hassling him with the same questions he's heard a million times. So I'm happy to sit on it for now.

Thanks heaps to everyone for your input. This is a good solid thread now.

We just need the guy who posted all the average power figures to pop them in here (I tried searching but couldn't find them) then we can sticky this.

is this what you mean?

Standard stroke only comparison, includes budget and built motors on 98';

The average for the 2530's is; 388rwkw

The average for the GT-SS is; 335.4 rwkw

The average power made by the -5's is; 313rwkw

Of the same data the best power of the -5's was 388rwkw

Best of the 2530's was ; 451rwkw.

Best of the GT-SS was 364rwkw

budget un-opened/ non-built motors maybe with just some drop in cams it looks like this;

-5's average ; 298rwkw

2530's average ; 358rwkw

GT-SS average ; 332rwkw

im in the process of forging my engine now,, was pushing 270awkw with stock internals/turbos/fuel system,

all i had was hks cam gears /intake (pods), super dragger 4" all the way, Power fc, and tuned ,, and she decided to pull the pin on me a few weeks ago...good fun while it happened tho!

Old setup on mine was,

Stock R33 engine

tomei 260's

80mm Z32 afms

700cc sard

non ported exhaust manifolds (untouched)

GT 2530's

hks dumps etc.

stock airbox with bigger inlet

apexi

adjustable cam gears on zero.

311RWKW @ 12

330RWKW @ 14

352RWKW running 17 psi

322AWKW @ 17 SAU dyno day.

Full boost at 4000ish

Pulled engine out due to flogged key way on crank cam gear. Bearings, rings and pistons were in good nick considering 100,000km from me. All in the tune and servicing, and luck of the draw too. Only damage was from rear ceramic turbo failure in it's original life in an R33 GTR.

New setup getting put in tomoz........hoping for the same and better lol.

Edited by GTRsean
  • 2 months later...

this is really interesting, particularly the figures guys are quoting for the SS's.

I have a 97 33, with genuine (was one owner with books in Japan) 59,000 kays on it, only had a cat back and pods (still had boost restricter in the line :O).

engine compression came back all good, all above 155, within 1 or 2 of each other.

I have just had the following fitted (all new parts):

GTSS's, HKS dumps, mines stainless pro front, tomei manifolds, sard 700's, hks fuel pump and adjustable pressure regulator, tomei pon B's and cam gears, tomei cam cap stud kit, HKS racing chamber kit, decat, kaki mega 3.5 rear, PFC d'jetro, evc6, splitfires, and some other bits n pieces like essential catch can, mines cam cover baffles etc.

Now the car was put on the dyno at Xspeed on Wednesday for the first run, at about 4200 rpm and 15 psi with very rich AFR's as first run, no timing and no cam dial in (as first run) the clutch started to slip at 342 rwhp (X-speed's dyno is I have heard, conservative on power so maybe as high as 345 ish on others) and so the car foot was taken off the go pedal and the car removed from the dyno.

I have now (see other thread) ordered a HKS GD Max which will be here next week, installed and then the car returned to Ant for tuning. Being the eager person i am they have estimated that I will make 380 to 400 rwhp so I am a little confused and somewhat dissappointed with other figures quoted above indicating 330 odd kw which is closer to 450 hp, particularly when I have done every supporting mod possible.

anywho we will see what happens

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...