Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So i have come accross a cheap RB20 NEO from an R34. I understand its a whole 140hp of 2L goodness and was the most economical engine in the R34 range. But thats all i can find out on them? Does anyone else know much about them?

Looking at the timing belt cover there is a pronounsed bulge, so i am thinking it has variable inlet cam like the RB25s. I want to see if anyone knows anything of them before i buy it...but i am hoping it has a better head and possibly uses solid lifters and may accept RB25 Neo cams etc.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/268302-rb20-neo/
Share on other sites

Might be worth contacting Brad from spool imports. I believe he had a rb20 neo head for sale a while back and from what I could tell I think they have solid lifters and also run an inlet butterfly setup similar to the redtop rb20's.

Spool Imports

Edited by HR31_RB20DET
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/268302-rb20-neo/#findComment-4572516
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

The 20Neo is obviously a far better engine than the old 20. It has everything that is good about the 25Neo......but it is missing 500cc. Same as the old RB20s. Makes one wonder why one would bother buying one and doing the work to install it in something when there is a 2.5L version available.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/268302-rb20-neo/#findComment-6646533
Share on other sites

I can't think of a reason to keep any car's engine capacity to 2L where it would make more sense to use an RB20 than a 4 cylinder like an SR20. Any Skyline can be legally embiggened to 2.5L without pain. Anything smaller car that can't go above 2L capacity would not be a good thing with a heavy lump of cast iron 6 cylinder in the front.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/268302-rb20-neo/#findComment-6646857
Share on other sites

I can't think of a reason to keep any car's engine capacity to 2L where it would make more sense to use an RB20 than a 4 cylinder like an SR20. Any Skyline can be legally embiggened to 2.5L without pain. Anything smaller car that can't go above 2L capacity would not be a good thing with a heavy lump of cast iron 6 cylinder in the front.

Yeah, agreed here...kinda makes more sense in any situation to go SR20 over RB20

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/268302-rb20-neo/#findComment-6647766
Share on other sites

Yeah, agreed here...kinda makes more sense in any situation to go SR20 over RB20

It definitely makes more sense to use the SR20... as long as you dont mind driving around with ear muffs on to hide how crappy they sound :P

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/268302-rb20-neo/#findComment-6648391
Share on other sites

Someone somewhere must know the exact differences with late RB20's . Variable cam timing and a shim type valve train would be worth having .

I'd also be looking at chamber shape and size because they changed on the Neo 25 - possibly be cause of emissions and detonation reasons .

How do the CR and power output compare R32 to R34 RB20s ?

Is there an engine manual available that covers all the R34 era RBs ?

A .

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/268302-rb20-neo/#findComment-6650104
Share on other sites

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 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...