Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have a forward facing plenum for an RB20det I got with the car that I don't need.

What you see in the pictures in what you get. It looks fairly complete.

I will start at $220.00 ono

I am located in Brisbane with Pickup preferred, or the purchaser to arrange their own freight.

Please email [email protected] or call 0412 547 402 if you are interested.

Thanks

post-66731-1257661066_thumb.jpg

post-66731-1257661082_thumb.jpg

post-66731-1257661103_thumb.jpg

post-66731-1257661119_thumb.jpg

  • 2 weeks later...

not to be a nay sayer but isn t there a reason why you don t put a forward facing planum on a rb20?

I remeber my performance mechanic saying people had tried it and it did something wrong with the motor.

I could be wrong but that is what he said when a mate of mine asked to modify his rb20 planum to forward facing.

Leafy Bug

You would have to at least modify intercooler piping, and your throttle cable.

As for the computer I don't know sorry.

Maybe.... just maybe GTIR-Keiron's (comment above) 'performance mechanic' who is an RB20 guru might be able to give you some performance advice though. It really sounds like his his mate's, wife's, cousin's, roomate's, aunt knows what they are talking about.

R32_Abuser

Thanks mate I have replied to your email with some options. Perhaps if we were to go ahead with a deal we should get GTIR-Keiron's 'performance mechanic' to provide some independant consultancy services, and a complete a full compare and contast report on the efficacy of the RB20 forward facing plenum, versus the standard plenum. Sounds like he really knows his stuff.

GTIR-Keiron

Thanks for the input buddy/nay sayer. Ive sent you a PM requesting you to edit your comments. Please keep your unquantified comments out of other people's threads. Why waste everyone's time here?

in light of GTIR Keeirons amazing advice i guess i should remove my forward facing plenum which seems to be working quite well and funnily enough dropped my intake temps but hey if MR K says so ill have to take it off

on a serious note these things are great and shorten your intake pipe by almost 1m if you use a standard cooler with an outlet on either side and less intake pipe means less air volume to take the car from vacum to boost

but hey just my 2c good luck with the sale mine cost more than this

Thanks 'ez 10'.

It's good to get some quantifiable performance gain info.

They are supposed to be a really good value mod.

I would fit it, I just want under my bonnet to look standard.

Edited by NW007

would love this if it was straight bolt on ....so how do you modify the throttle cable? just extend it? how did you do your one? any pictures of it installed?

Your standard throttle cable may already fit seeing as it has a standard throttle body?

It should just bolt straight on top of your intake manifold with some minor intercooloer plumbing changes?

I don't have any pics of it on the car as I have never had it on. I got it with the car when I bought it. Here's a pic though of one I found. It looks like a standard one that's been modified slightly differently though?

http://media.photobucket.com/image/rb20%20...n/april2005.jpg

i did the same thing to my 25 plenum but with a 90mm throttle body it gave me another 13rwkw but this was tuned on a hot day (got retune because it was running little rich cause of the volume of air in the intercooler changed) i used my std cable too. it made it more responsive also, to get this done it will cost at least 300 or so depending on the place u go to

Thanks 8znR33. Good info!!

Yeah they say they go well.

$300 you say for the mod?........ and I bet that is supplying your own too?

At $220.00 this is a bargain people!

Thanks 8znR33. Good info!!

Yeah they say they go well.

$300 you say for the mod?........ and I bet that is supplying your own too?

At $220.00 this is a bargain people!

hey sorry been a while since i was last on but yea the mod cost me 300 and i supplied the throttle body as well.

I'm not here to say anything ill of the item since I've seen it a couple times before. But I know with the stock form of where the intake is in the middle of that manifold when it comes in sideways in as stock, cylinders 5 and 6 are naturally lean. Now, moving this to the front, which I can tell is a well done job from the welds and such, will the intake be as lean or more lean than stock in cylinders 5 and 6 since the air is directly into the first several cylinders.

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...