Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

My engine has had some issues and now doesnt have any oil pressure. I havent removed the engine for a few years so am going to have a go at the task in the next few days in my garage.

I have an engine hoist and jack etc, but was interested in what most of you guys found easier (with limited tools), either ripping the engine alone, or taking the gearbox with it. My concern was being able to get the car high enough to get the angle needed to get the engine and box out, or potentially getting the top bellhousing bolts. Wouldnt mind taking the turbo etc out at all the same time without having to do it first.

Engine is an rb30det with 25t box in a cefiro.

Any ideas would be great.

Cheers

Edited by SirRacer
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/299934-quickest-way-to-remove-engine/
Share on other sites

My engine has had some issues and now doesnt have any oil pressure. I havent removed the engine for a few years so am going to have a go at the task in the next few days in my garage.

I have an engine hoist and jack etc, but was interested in what most of you guys found easier (with limited tools), either ripping the engine alone, or taking the gearbox with it. My concern was being able to get the car high enough to get the angle needed to get the engine and box out, or potentially getting the top bellhousing bolts. Wouldnt mind taking the turbo etc out at all the same time without having to do it first.

Engine is an rb30det with 25t box in a cefiro.

Any ideas would be great.

Cheers

remove the gearbox first. Last person i know who tried to remove the engine with gearbox attached destroyed the radiator supports.

Im fairly certain i took my 25 out with the box still attached.

But the 31 bay is slightly different, i have a tad more room and crossmember etc sits lower, so that could be a factor.

If i had a car hoist - gearbox would have come out first >_<

took my rb26 out from the top without the gearbox attached no sweat at all

I already had the head off which made it much easier I guess

but with a few (borrow from ya mates) extensions I cant see any of the bellhousing bolts being that bad

am currently wondering though if I can actually put it back in without taking the gearbox out

I seriously doubt it so consider that too

I have a trust sump and long dump/front pipes so that adds to the problem

Been a while since I took one out to and managed by myself without to much sweat

bro arrived just after I got it out gotta love having help eh!

on the floor engine out, leaving the gearbox sitting in the car on a jack or block.. in my opinion its a risky job pulling the engine and gearbox out in one go.. things get damaged and peeps get hurt

guaranteed if you try and pull both out at the same time someone will have to hop in the engine bay to lift the gearbox up to clear the rad support.. if something lets go someone could get hurt real bad..

and the cheap cranes that most companies sell these days come of the floor easily with that amount of weight.

ps. take photo's of as much of the engine bay as you can for future reference!

leave the crossmember and gearbox attached

drop it down onto a trolley jack...

lift the front of the car up with an engine crane or block and tackle, it doesnt have to me super high...

slide the motor and box out on the trolley jack.

Edited by midnight

Pull it out as a unit.

Cefiro's have a nice long engine bay.

Get the front of the car up high and hook the chains back around cylinder 4/5 so you can angle the engine back as you lift it easily and then lift the back of the box easily too.

Edited by badhairdave

I always do my R33 engine and gearbox together. It's all about getting the perfect distance from front lie on location to the hook, and back tie on location to the hook. Get the perfect angle, you don't need to "lift" the gearbox at all.

i pull the motor and box in one unit as well, i dont lift the car at all, except to fit the engine hoist under the suspension arms (only needs to go up about 20mm max) but thats because my car is real low.

As said above, get the angle correct (pretty steep, more than 45 degrees anyway) and its simple, i have tried doing the box seperate and its a pain in the arse to get the box back onto the motor when the motor is getting put back in.

I actually made up a little trolley that sits 10 mm off the floor to sit the rear of the box on when lowering it back in so it slides back without neeeding to sit it on the floor or on a trolley jack which is just too high.

Edited by unique1
how high are you guys lifting your cars that do engine and gearbox in one go?

If you have wheel ramps then that'll do it. Or i just use my axle stands on the highest setting on the front of the chassis rails

remove the engine and gearbox out at the same time. you may need to lift the front of the car up a bit to get it out correctly depending how low the car is.

remember to drain the gearbox oil ;)

no one has mentioned an engine ballancer.

they make the job a lot easier..

i removed the engine and box from my r32 alone with a crane and balancer.

ONE OF THESE

you can use it to adjust the angle of engine and box by up to 45deg either way..

a good way to do it but take my advice... dont to it on your own,,, have atleast 1 mate with you.

Cheers guys, havent done it for a while so will get into it in the next few days. Dropped an auto box and engine out a wee while ago and just thought id let the oil ooze out. Turned into a massive headache so good to remember to do this.

Do you guys remove turbo manifolds etc, or just take the whole thing in one go? Whats the best mounting point you use also?

Cheers guys, havent done it for a while so will get into it in the next few days. Dropped an auto box and engine out a wee while ago and just thought id let the oil ooze out. Turned into a massive headache so good to remember to do this.

Do you guys remove turbo manifolds etc, or just take the whole thing in one go? Whats the best mounting point you use also?

My stocker came out by removing the dump pipe only off the motor.

My RB25/30 I can't remember if I do it with or with out the turbo... I think I took it off because it sits less then an inch off the strut tower...

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...