Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just wondering whether this is possible cause if you go to: http://www.area-51.co.nz/mod3.htm

They claim they did one but i thought the bonnet cannot close with the RB26 inside. Also if it does work would it be possible for it to be street legal.

Cheers

(If it works it looks like a cheaper alternative to my wishlist of a GTR R34 :P)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/28073-rb26dett-in-a-180sx-possible/
Share on other sites

Originally posted by quik180sx

and with the lighter chassis you would burn all these gtr's!!!!

very hard, not on the street at least, VERY HEAVY wheel spinning with be a big issue, the tyre size, then 2wd vs 4wd...:uh-huh:

never been a big fans of doing such conversion, as they make the car more unbalance. why don't just work on yr sr20det? as the latest speed magazine show a s13 pulling 310rwkw at stock internal. it work out cheaper to mod the engine internal even with those 2.2L kit then do a Rb26 coversion.

Still u could do internal work and get 300+hp easy for the price of shoehorning an rb26 in there. Rb26 are not cheap :P

Plus whenever u put something where its not suposed to be u end up with problems. Well thats what my proctologist told me.

HPI had a silvia from japan with the same very conversion, it was a very tidy article. I would stick with the sr and doing the internals as sujested above, simple because yeah the Initial engine cost is massive, you could buy all the aftermarket parts for the price of the engine then use the money you would spend on the install on the sr rebuild. Once done you get a fresh 0km engine (the rb26dett wont be that), and you dont mess up the the realy good weight balance of the sr20 equiped car.

Originally posted by rbs13

but how easy is it to get 300rwkw and still have something good to drive on the street... WITH OUT doin internals... i would imagine a rb26 would last a hell of a lot longer at these power levels.

well it's all about give up the balance and make it a straigt line ONLY car. As the front is too heavy the car will lost the RWD oversteer natural and understeer a lot more.

btw, what's wrong with doing the internal? look at aust magzine, everyone seems to be proud to have STOCK internal/ bottom end.

u hardly found the engine internal is stock for even lower power car in japan. They usually OVER mod the engine like what the factory does to keep daily reliable.

well it's all about give up the balance and make it a straigt line ONLY car. As the front is too heavy the car will lost the RWD oversteer natural and understeer a lot more.

***Have you driven a car with a RB engine in a sil? If not i wouldnt make such a comment.

as the latest speed magazine show a s13 pulling 310rwkw at stock internal.

*** I doubt it would last very long or be very streetable.

i have OWN a silvia with ca18 and now skyline R33. i am a person who want to put smallest engine on the front to make the car close to 50/50. like meggala's sr20 R32.

well i recommend him to do the bottom end with those 2.2 kit.

i guess after that they should be even stronger than stock RB26.

with tough 2.2 botton end and some head job, it should be alright to push a tubro support 300rwkw and streetable.

btw, will u run 300rwkw everyday on a RWD car??

I have a 180sx with an rb20 and another with an sr... The guy who owned the sr spent alot of money on it (read 15-18,000) and it makes 435rwhp.... To be honest i could never justify spending that much money on a 4cyl, i worked out a RB26 conversion would cost around 11-13000 fitted, plus you can sell your sr/gearbox. From a standard 26 if you really pushed it with the standard turbos you should get 270-280rwkw which is around 370rwhp..... bolt on a turbo and ecu, with a fuel pump an d injectors and your laughing. The weight difference in the rb is noticable, but not what i would call un-balanced!

"Would i run 300rwkw on a rwd on the street??" F*** yes! Its a blast, drive it off boost and you get 420km to a tank, open it up at 80-90kmh with not clutch and the back end just breaks traction and squirms under power, pushes you so hard into the back of the seat! Makes me laugh every time i do it.. Plus you suprise more than a lot of people on the street

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

    • 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.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
×
×
  • Create New...