Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Im not expacting a MASSIVE increase in power, as a final figue. As Michael said, the differences should be huge.

As there is 1.5m less of intercooler pipeing and individual throttle bodies the turbo will spool quicker, reach peak boost at a lower RPM and be alot more responsive.

More responce means I have a widerpower band, more usable torque and power at lower RPM.

Please bear in mind this is going in a fairly light R32 too, not a bulky R34.

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

The wait is finally over guys! This is it - the one of a kind RB25DET NEO with GTR plenum, NO adaptor plates!

Engine fired-up no probs, now taking it easy for a while to run-in the head and make sure there's no leaks etc. The engine asks for a tune-up.

Latest details of the mod are as follows:

- Used the standard GTR air box, AAC valve and air regulator under the plenum (for last two, harness modded with connectors to suit).

- Used the standard GTR water tube under the air box and water hoses to suit. One outlet from the water tube was plugged.

- Used the standard GTR blow-off valve setup.

- Ditched the Neo oil cooler/filter holder as it interfered with the air box and used instead a standard oil filter holder from any RB20/RB25.

- Used for now the NEO fuel rail and injectors. Will upgrade later to GTR rail and higher flow injectors.

- Used the NEO TPS (throttle position sensor) with adaptor piece as seen in the photo.

- Used the NEO boost sensor (connected to the plenum).

- Ditched the throttle motor and sensor (NEO traction control system).

- Ditched the carbon canister purge solenoid and connected the canister through one way valve to the GTR factory port.

- On the turbo side, used a Turbosmart elbow reducer 3in to 2.5in to connect the turbo outlet with the GTR air tube

More pics to come!

plenum.jpg

Edited by GTS4WD

Sweet, getting back my head this weekend so I will throw up some pics to compare and then I will be PMing for the much needed advice. Still need to replace the guides and get them reemed though :D. Sweet job nonetheless, how is the response and PM me details as I am going with an RB26DETT bottom end with the Neo head and keeping the VCT and using the RB26 covers and whatnot, may just keep it single turbo as I already got my HKS cast iron setup with external gate.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
Do you think there would be any problem with leaving out this bolt as my machinist forgot this and widened the water outlet for the GTR setup. Thinking about leaving it this way, your thoughts?

f_IMGP1080m_00a5f62.jpg

I think this is a bolt guide, nothing more.

Has done similar work, perhaps someone would be helpful:

http://picasaweb.google.ru/strelok.vc/2009...feat=directlink

No. It is still at the stage of assembly. Plan before the end of the month run.

At the moment, is a problem - how to control valve VCT because ECU will stand by RB20DET. I do so out of ECU, the external electronics.

There are thoughts about this?

No. It is still at the stage of assembly. Plan before the end of the month run.

At the moment, is a problem - how to control valve VCT because ECU will stand by RB20DET. I do so out of ECU, the external electronics.

There are thoughts about this?

Strelok, ya tebe otvetil na nisme.

I would certainly try to get a bolt back in there. Its not a ocating bolt, it clamps the head down to stop a coolant oil leak from those 2 passages.

Hmmmm this would require me to get the area filled and tapped for the bolt as the inside of the head in that area was ground to mate proper with the RB26 ITB water ports. Gonna ponder on this for a bit, I am think the headstuds should have more than sufficed for this but I will rethink it.

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...