Rb26/30 Build, Yet Another One... ;)

[gobiz]

Ive seen rockabilly's video and IMHO it doesnt really help you to decide

whether rb26 or rb30 is better on track. There's so many other factors other than just hp and torque.

This may sound like heresy but if I was serious on a trackday car it wont even be a skyline. Rockabilly and his mate were easily overtaken by a caterham-type car, gt3 and a ford escort rs (hope i got the cars right LOL)

[Simonster]

The whole 26 vs 30 is bullshit anyway, it's like saying, my dad is better than you're dad. We all have different requirements and we like what we like, it just may be different that the next person and really, if you're going to get wound up about it, then power to you, i really couldn't give a shit.

I love the 30, it suits me and my requirements and when i get the rest of the timing sorted it'll sing its nuts off like a 2.6.

For people in QLD who want one in their 32, ring Mick and Signature Performance, he'll be very happy to oblige fitting it in.

That said i'll be putting a 26 in my S13...

[Beer Baron]

  On 14/05/2011 at 6:53 PM, FineLine said:

Until you've lived with a 30 for a while you will not appreciate the advantages of the engine. It simply wins in every department.

Yes its easier to fry tyres but its also easier to not fry tyres. The larger engine gives you far more control and can deliver the power in a more linear fashion just by throttle control. Theres also plenty of evidence around to shoot down the myth that the 30 cant rev. There is simply no need to make it rev to make most people's target goals so why lean on it if you dont have to. The exponential loads on an engine as revs increase make it a no brainer to keep the revs as low as possible to make the required power.

The built 25/26 does sound amazing up in the rev range, the howl of a well tuned example still makes me wet and I'll bet I am not the only one who can pick it a mile away sight unseen. The smaller rb literally howls as beer baron stated. How many times have you beeen sitting in a restauraunt or similar and stopped half way through mid sentence because you heard that unmistakeable sound. The good news for the forklift lovers is they give nothing away in the noise department. Come sit in my shed and listen to the deep rumble of a lumpy cam driven rb 30, It is pure porn. It doesnt howl on wot, It literally roars. The day it stops making the hair stand up on the back of my neck is the day I'll give it away.

Baron the reason why we dont all drive 5 and 6 litre powered cars is because we drive skylines. Fitting a 30 is a no brainer compared to doing a v8 conversion. Its so easy in comparison its almost cheating.

I'll never dis the 25/26 but given the opportunity I would take the twin cam 30 every time.

you are far too cranky and far too good at winding me up for me to argue so I'll agree.

but don't tell me you don't think berry/newmans tomei 2.6 in the 32 doesn't sound better than berry's RB30 in the 34.... and don't get me wrong, they BOTH sound fking off the planet but there's that special something in the RB26 note that's hard to emulate. pretty good back to back as both have run the same twins at some point, both dry sump, both tuned by the same blokes and all the other hardware like headwork etc very similar between the 2 donks. no question the 30 makes the power and torque though.

I'm not shitting on the 30s either. they make a bloody impressive combo. but the fact is they do have different characteristics to the RB26/27. if they didn't what would be the point of doing it? the reason people like them is because they are different.

[Beer Baron]

  On 14/05/2011 at 10:20 PM, Marko R1 said:

i agree & have experienced this with my rb26 & rb30 as once you are in the sweet spot, the tables turn & it falls in the favour of an rb26...for example, when i had my rb30, due to the early boost i found myself shifting @ 7krpm as anything above that wasn't beneficial & my engine could rev to 9.5krpm (i saw it on the dyno). if i compared the power band of both, rb26 won in this dept. for some reason, the rb30 did not feel as revvy & free revving was much slower as well.

interesting you mentioned power band marko. it's something I've talked about with a few smart people. and we looked at a number of big effort engines built. we reckoned with the same turbos, headwork etc the built 26's power band (revving to 10K in this case but could go to 10,500 comfortably) was wider than the built 30s which rev'd happily to 8,500 (I think most would agree pretty stout for a 30).

they found the 30 shifted the power band down 1,000rpm (meaning hit certain power and boost targets 1,000rpm earlier) but lost out on 1,500rpm up top so it's power band was 500rpm smaller. on the street the 30 was a fair bit faster as fact is you are hitting power band sooner. so unless you launch the 26 at 7K off every set of lights the 30 will leave you for dead in a gentle take off then floor it kind of situation. on the track where you are up in the power band all the time the 26 walks away. this is only one example of 2 engines built by one bloke so don't take it as gospel but it's a factor many people don't consider.

[FineLine]

P'raps you should build yourself an rb 20 Richard, imagine how wide your power band would be. (they sound orright too)

That an engine with a 10,500 rpm limit can be setup with a wider power band than an engine with an 8,500 rpm limit isnt really rocket science, That the 30 shifts the power band approx 1000 rpm lower is the whole idea of the excercise. Similar overall power and greater torque levels at lower rpm is what motivates most 30 builds that I know of.

Its the old street v track thing. the odd fang to 10500 rpm on the street has none of the perils of a track engine costantly seeing those numbers.

Whilst I hero worship the berry cars along with near everyone who has seen them in action They sound like arse to me. the whole idea of a screamer pipe leaves me scratching my head as to why anybody would want their car to sound like an xb falcon with blown exhaust gaskets when for the sake of plumbing it back they can have the sweet note of a hot rb.

[Marko R1]

  On 18/05/2011 at 7:13 AM, Beer Baron said:

there's that special something in the RB26 note that's hard to emulate.

that is for sure & something which i never realised until i jumped back in an rb26!

  On 18/05/2011 at 7:17 AM, Beer Baron said:

interesting you mentioned power band marko. it's something I've talked about with a few smart people. and we looked at a number of big effort engines built. we reckoned with the same turbos, headwork etc the built 26's power band (revving to 10K in this case but could go to 10,500 comfortably) was wider than the built 30s which rev'd happily to 8,500 (I think most would agree pretty stout for a 30).

on the track where you are up in the power band all the time the 26 walks away. this is only one example of 2 engines built by one bloke so don't take it as gospel but it's a factor many people don't consider.

with my rb30 i never revved it hard because i didn't have to & it never felt as comfortable or solid up top as my rb26

  On 18/05/2011 at 8:13 PM, FineLine said:

Similar overall power and greater torque levels at lower rpm is what motivates most 30 builds that I know of.

the whole idea of a screamer pipe leaves me scratching my head as to why anybody would want their car to sound like an xb falcon with blown exhaust gaskets when for the sake of plumbing it back they can have the sweet note of a hot rb.

that is the main motivation i agree, although, i was ill informed that the rb30 would still rev like the rb26 & that disappointed me once i drove it, i luv the sound of revs (personal taste)

screamer pipes are a waste of time, with external wastegate sounds farken hectic bro YALLAAAA! reminds me of my uncles kingswood from the 80's with a worked 202 & that thing had a lot of noise haha, different era (god rest his soul)

[sucram]

the older you get the less attractive screamer pipes become

[Beer Baron]

  On 18/05/2011 at 8:13 PM, FineLine said:

P'raps you should build yourself an rb 20 Richard, imagine how wide your power band would be. (they sound orright too)

That an engine with a 10,500 rpm limit can be setup with a wider power band than an engine with an 8,500 rpm limit isnt really rocket science, That the 30 shifts the power band approx 1000 rpm lower is the whole idea of the excercise. Similar overall power and greater torque levels at lower rpm is what motivates most 30 builds that I know of.

Its the old street v track thing. the odd fang to 10500 rpm on the street has none of the perils of a track engine costantly seeing those numbers.

Whilst I hero worship the berry cars along with near everyone who has seen them in action They sound like arse to me. the whole idea of a screamer pipe leaves me scratching my head as to why anybody would want their car to sound like an xb falcon with blown exhaust gaskets when for the sake of plumbing it back they can have the sweet note of a hot rb.

blasphemy! newman/berry's 32 doesn't sound like arse! and no screamer pipe on it either. it (was till it cracked last year) a GT block, tomei 26 crank, dry sump running twin 2860s (and making about 700hp). yeah it did run open side pipes but it sounded fantastic. berry's 34 with the RB30 in it sounds mental too but it's a different sounds and to my taste the 32 with it's 36 sounded better.

agree with you on the sweet RB note at least. I don't wear my cap backwards and I don't have a screamer pipe on my cars! I like good exhaust note as much as the next bloke. probably more. not just nissan in-line sizes either (though they are a magical sounding engine when done right).

anyway, I'm not arguing the 30 has it's place and makes a good combo. just some people have a 1 sided idea of the 30 being the greatest gift to motoring since fluffy dice on string. people need to understand added 400cc to a RB26 doesn't suddenly make it a super fantastic engine does everything. yes it has some advantages over a 26 in a few area, but it also has some negatives too and they come as part and parcel of those advantages. you can't have it all.

[Beer Baron]

  On 19/05/2011 at 1:35 AM, sucram said:

the older you get the more attractive noel becomes

scary!!!

[bubba]

  On 18/05/2011 at 7:17 AM, Beer Baron said:

interesting you mentioned power band marko. it's something I've talked about with a few smart people. and we looked at a number of big effort engines built. we reckoned with the same turbos, headwork etc the built 26's power band (revving to 10K in this case but could go to 10,500 comfortably) was wider than the built 30s which rev'd happily to 8,500 (I think most would agree pretty stout for a 30).

they found the 30 shifted the power band down 1,000rpm (meaning hit certain power and boost targets 1,000rpm earlier) but lost out on 1,500rpm up top so it's power band was 500rpm smaller. on the street the 30 was a fair bit faster as fact is you are hitting power band sooner. so unless you launch the 26 at 7K off every set of lights the 30 will leave you for dead in a gentle take off then floor it kind of situation. on the track where you are up in the power band all the time the 26 walks away. this is only one example of 2 engines built by one bloke so don't take it as gospel but it's a factor many people don't consider.

I think something a lot of people forget about is their diff ratios, you would probably find that with some taller ratios behind the 30 it would be more comparable with the 26 on the track (less revs means less speed in each gear, 2000rpm is a lot of road speed in any gear, so you need to go taller ratios to make better use of the torque at lesser revs).

[mico]

gtr skylines are 2.6ltr. vl commos are 3l. im pretty sure they are exactly 2.6ltr for a reason. no more no less.

[bubba]

Yeah.. because Group A regs or whatever they were called didn't allow more? (just making an assumption here seeing as the 32R was designed to meet those regs pretty closely).

And they're not EXACTLY 2.6L either.. they would have found the best bore:stroke ratio (while keeping the 86mm bore probably for easiness) to allow them to rev really hard as that's what you do to a race car..

[zebra]

Is that exact reason why the Z-tune is a 2.8?

Bubba - the MA70 Supra turbo A was a 3L in group A

Also not entirely applicable to RB's

but related to the displacement Debate.

Ford once build a 302cube (4.9L) V8 for NASCAR to run agaisnt the 350-360 cube motors that the other manufactures were using (icl Ford at the the time)

the 302 was so much faster than the bigger motors on the Ovals and the Road circuits simply because they revved a shit load more.

They accelerated faster because they revved quicker, they had more top speed because thye could easily pull another 1500-2000rpm without falling apart etc

In the End NASCAR changed the rules so that the engines had to be between 340 and 365 cubes.

Same goes with the 2.6 vs 3.0 debate, so while the 3.0 might get a bigger turbo on song sooner which makes a fair difference in Turbo cars. but the 2.6 will sure rev a lot quicker than the 3.0.

Also has less strain on bearings with the lighter crank, piston speeds are less etc, so being able to use more revs in the 2.6 doesnt really hurt them reliability wise over the a lower revving RB30.

[Marko R1]

  On 19/05/2011 at 5:48 AM, mico said:

gtr skylines are 2.6ltr. vl commos are 3l. im pretty sure they are exactly 2.6ltr for a reason. no more no less.

haha good post

if u want real capacity & this is what you are chasing, sell your house & buy the r35gtr

[Bunta]

  On 18/05/2011 at 8:13 PM, FineLine said:

P'raps you should build yourself an rb 20 Richard, imagine how wide your power band would be. (they sound orright too)

That an engine with a 10,500 rpm limit can be setup with a wider power band than an engine with an 8,500 rpm limit isnt really rocket science, That the 30 shifts the power band approx 1000 rpm lower is the whole idea of the excercise. Similar overall power and greater torque levels at lower rpm is what motivates most 30 builds that I know of.

Its the old street v track thing. the odd fang to 10500 rpm on the street has none of the perils of a track engine costantly seeing those numbers.

Whilst I hero worship the berry cars along with near everyone who has seen them in action They sound like arse to me. the whole idea of a screamer pipe leaves me scratching my head as to why anybody would want their car to sound like an xb falcon with blown exhaust gaskets when for the sake of plumbing it back they can have the sweet note of a hot rb.

I remember sitting in the stands with you at super lap and you saying the R32 was the nicest sounding RB ever or some such thing!

[FineLine]

  On 19/05/2011 at 6:03 AM, Bunta said:

I remember sitting in the stands with you at super lap and you saying the R32 was the nicest sounding RB ever or some such thing!

Shu'up you.

[mico]

  On 19/05/2011 at 5:54 AM, bubba said:

Yeah.. because Group A regs or whatever they were called didn't allow more? (just making an assumption here seeing as the 32R was designed to meet those regs pretty closely).

And they're not EXACTLY 2.6L either.. they would have found the best bore:stroke ratio (while keeping the 86mm bore probably for easiness) to allow them to rev really hard as that's what you do to a race car..

2597

[Piggaz]

  On 19/05/2011 at 6:42 AM, mico said:

2597

2568 :)

[mico]

ahh yeah cheers whoops

[Beer Baron]

  On 19/05/2011 at 6:03 AM, Bunta said:

I remember sitting in the stands with you at super lap and you saying the R32 was the nicest sounding RB ever or some such thing!

i literally lol'd! sprung noel!! but it's ok mate. cause you are right. berry/newman 32 was/is one of the horniest RBs on the earth and I've heard plenty of good ones both here and in 7 years spent going to and from japan.