Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I know this might sound a bit stupid, what is faster etc etc etc. .

But I have not yet finished my RB30DE (which have been told will make around 150kw at the rears from many credible sources). .

Now, as it is not finished (should be in about a month), the suspense is killing me as to what will be faster, my RB30DE in my vl or my mates 05 VZ SV6. .

He assures me that his car will wipe the pants off my vl with the RB30DE . .

Discuss. .

Also just a bit of info on the motor. .

Fully rebuilt,

Custom pistons, 20thou oversize

Spool rods with ARP rod bolts

Linished crank

ACL race series bearings

Balanced bottom end, pitsons rods crank flywheel pressure plate and balancer

Head is a R33 head with vct,

Cams 264 degree 10.7mm lift intake, 270degree 10.2mm exhaust

Very mild port and polish to remove casting marks on intake ports. .

All going through a R33 5 speed and 28 spline LSD turbo vl diff wink.gif

Edited by ...Joshwa
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/258175-rb30de-vs-vz-alloytec-36/
Share on other sites

Power tp weight people!

Vl should kick it.

Is the vz auto or manual.

We had a vz alloytech, manual with rear mufflers removed, on the dyno. 150.5 kw at the wheels.

They are a heavy car with a tall diff ratio, something like 2.8:1 !!

You'll beat him.

Guys at no point in time has anyone mentioned comp ratio. What are you running in your RB30? This makes huge difference in NA engines...RB engines respond very well to ignition advance and therefore in the NA version, would also respond to high comp ratios...I am not an NA guru but there are many on the forums...Maybe do some searching and find out what will work well with your build...(before you bolt the head on that is....)

Nor have you mentioned area under the torque curve...Looking at peak power figures is close to meaningless when comparing how quick a car will be...

anyway my 2c worth...

VL Turbo Diff is 3.45:1 lsd centre I believe. See if you can get the comp up to 11:1 and a decent tune and then I would have my bets on the VL. More so if theres a decent length of track involved. Hopefully you wont sit there in wheelspin too much.

VL would have to weigh in 1250-1300 kgs ( I am guessing )

VZ would have to pork the scales at over 1600 kgs ...interesting

Keep us posted on any updates

Edited by GTR-32U

i think in this case the weight of the vz would cancel out the advantage in power

the rb30de with high comp would go well from the getgo, and with the advantage of 4.11 compared to the vz terribly tall diff youd prob nose it in front by 100kays/hour

the alloytec comes into its own at high revs and would be catching you very quickly

Righto considering I have a very hi comp RB30DE and a close mate of mine actually owns a Alloytec 3.6, I can tell that yes you will beat a standard one and one with very minimal mods i.e. exhaust and intake.

We went to the strip and I trumped him with my SOHC 30E (SOHC 30E = 15.6; Alloytec 3.6 =15.9) now in saying that the Alloytec 3.6's have a very very very shit clutch in them and will slip if you decide to even think about pushing them and a tall diff.

The alloytec make peak power very late in the rev range so basically they will keep up quite well in the high end of the rev range but down low, it's nothing but 30DE brother!

Awesome, its good to see someone else building a high comp N/A motor for a vl :D

How did you find the spool rods? From the website they seem to be a strong rod, just interested in what you/maybe your engine builder thought of them? I was thinking of buying a set too for my engine but was a little unsure..

Sorry for being a bit off topic, i think the vl will have it due to the power to weight ratio.. mines about 1210kg off the top of my head but it's just a basic SL model.

Keep us posted! :)

Kev

Alrightio. .

Sorry been at college today wasn't able to reply. .

Somebody asked what comp ratio it is running. . It will be around ~11.6:1, running an autotronic ECU. .

I cant comment on the spool rods in terms of use, as my motor isn't together yet, but I have them here sitting next to me and they look like they are great quality, and they also come with ARP rod bolts, which are essential for higher revs. .

And somebody mentioned torque curve.. Well I dont know yet as it isn't together and tuned yet. . Should be in about a month. .

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


  • 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...