Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all!

My little questions are: Can you take rb26dett engine block and head and use rb25det internals? of course forged rods and pistons and rb25 crank or does this make the pistons go to high and hit the head?

As I have been told is that the rb26dett engine block can take more punishment then the rb25, is it so? ore is it that the rb25 internals are weaker?

Sry if my spelling is a little of, Im from sweden and dont speak ore write english regular! =)

Cheers

Edited by Icekallt
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/272489-can-you-combine-the-rb26-and-rb25/
Share on other sites

your english is way above acceptable . if you keep 25 pistons rod and crank together it will be fine . the blocks are the same (as far as size) .

Okey! but does the rb26 block handle more power ore is that just a myth?

My build is being based on a T51-r kai and I might have to lift my rev limit a bit so then the rb26 head are a better start point =)

So im then on the look out for a rb26 head and block =)

The regular 26 block and the 25 block are the same strength from what I've seen. Actually, the 25 block looks like it has a little more webbing on it to me. It's the guts of the 25 that make it weaker.

There is absolutely no advantage running either one. The only RB26 block that is better is the N1.

If anything, due to the stroke being slightly smaller (2mm) that makes the RB25 rotating assembly better equiped to handle higher RPM but it's bugger all. Rod length is the same so meh.

just stick with the RB26 head, block and RB26 internals. it's not like forged RB25 internals are any cheaper. and there'd be no point in installing standard RB25 pistons, rods and crank into an RB26 block and head. you may as well use the standard RB26 gear if you're going to do that.

yes the RB26 head is better than RB25. solid lifters vs hydraulic and of course it comes with the ability to use the nice GTR 6 throttle inlet and forward facing plenum.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...