Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Sorry to bring up such an old thread but im currently in the process of building a RB30DET (Forged 3.0l Bottom end, RB26 Head, GTX45, E85, Built C4). My engine builder has told me we want a 11.5:1 compression ratio because we are using E85. ill be looking to run 30+psi with this. Ive contacted Brad @ Spool Imports to see what pistons he can get his hands on that would get close to this CR. He reckons that they (CP Pistons) wont be able to fit enough Dome on the piston to achieve that. Another issue im looking at is, ill be running fairly high lift cams (between 9-11mm lift) so with such High compression im assuming ill have to fly cut the pistons which would lower the compression again surely. So what CR have people running high boost and E85 run and how did you achieve that CR (original CR of piston, work to block, HG thickness etc)?

you're really in unknown territory there mate. I don't think anyone could give you advice having been in a similar situation. 11.5 CR is stupidly high for a 30+psi goal Internal cylinder pressure is going to be incredible, hope you've got strong internals.

Cam wise I'm sure someone could weigh in, you can measure the valve movement and height of the piston so surely clearance can be worked out beforehand

Yea the motor is being built to go for the 850+rwkw so alot of people seem to be very quiet in regards to advice. my builder has a lot of experiance building High HP and high boost motors, and to my knowledge hes built 2 RB30DETs and both went 600+kw for years so i trust what hes doing. just interesting to see that no one else has gone big power with high comp on E85.

Yea the motor is being built to go for the 850+rwkw so alot of people seem to be very quiet in regards to advice. my builder has a lot of experiance building High HP and high boost motors, and to my knowledge hes built 2 RB30DETs and both went 600+kw for years so i trust what hes doing. just interesting to see that no one else has gone big power with high comp on E85.

is your builder from tas by any chance

Yea the motor is being built to go for the 850+rwkw so alot of people seem to be very quiet in regards to advice. my builder has a lot of experiance building High HP and high boost motors, and to my knowledge hes built 2 RB30DETs and both went 600+kw for years so i trust what hes doing. just interesting to see that no one else has gone big power with high comp on E85.

You would think there has to be a good reason for that.

I take it your engine builder has not used astronomical compression ratios in his previous 600w builds otherwise you wouldn't be asking how to acheive it.

I be questioning the engine builder how he is going to run 11.5, over 30psi and achive it with removing the squish pads from both sides of the combustion chamber to handle those power levels and DET and still remain at 11.5.

Oh hell, did i just drop a spanner in all the works by saying that? :)

There is someone in the US from memory who has a CNC machined open cumbustion chamber design with a custom domed piston to suit, still not near where your engine builder wants to be compression wise.

Most builds in your power bracket are running flat tops with open chambers, so very low compression then winding copious amounts of boost into them, usually in the low 8 compression ratio.

If your engine builder wants 11.5, ask him for the piston part number or to organize to get it custom made......

  • Like 1

I don't know why you would do it just to get a handful more hp off boost; you are fuel constrained (or more specifically octane constrained).

More info on NYTSKY's mate would be interesting!

I don't know why you would do it just to get a handful more hp off boost; you are fuel constrained (or more specifically octane constrained).

More info on NYTSKY's mate would be interesting!

I'm not sure I agree. I reckon that no-one really ever gets close to using up all the anti-knock property of E85 just by winding up the boost and adding timing. You have to stop adding timing a fair way before you can make most E85 engine knock simply because you stop making power.

Trying to use up the knock margin by taking the easy option of just piling in massive boost is unlikely to be better than starting with a more capable base engine (more compression) and adding less boost. Boost is bad. Every psi you pump the air up adds heat that you have to cool out of the air. Every psi that you add to the air is also pretty much added into the exhaust manifold. That adds exhaust contamination back into the cylinder that doesn't have to be there.

I reckon it is smart to try to find how high you can run static comp + boost on E85, still get realistic ignition advance numbers, etc. More static comp is going to make the engine more willing to work off boost and very much improve the boost threshold. What's not to like?

  • Like 1

I'm not sure I agree. I reckon that no-one really ever gets close to using up all the anti-knock property of E85 just by winding up the boost and adding timing. You have to stop adding timing a fair way before you can make most E85 engine knock simply because you stop making power.

Trying to use up the knock margin by taking the easy option of just piling in massive boost is unlikely to be better than starting with a more capable base engine (more compression) and adding less boost. Boost is bad. Every psi you pump the air up adds heat that you have to cool out of the air. Every psi that you add to the air is also pretty much added into the exhaust manifold. That adds exhaust contamination back into the cylinder that doesn't have to be there.

I reckon it is smart to try to find how high you can run static comp + boost on E85, still get realistic ignition advance numbers, etc. More static comp is going to make the engine more willing to work off boost and very much improve the boost threshold. What's not to like?

That is the same thoughtI had up until I talked to some serious enginer builders; I explained exactly that and all dismissed it stating their experiences. It makes the engine more prone to issues with excessive squish velocity and the handful of hp made off boost was offset by the much larger increase in performance by increasing boost pressure.

I agree there is a balance, but it would be dependant on application as with most of these decisions.

There is a simpler way to get the static CR up and it's as simple as using an RB25 Neo turbo head - smaller volume combustion chamber .

It involves changing manifolds or fixing points but if you want super power it can be done .

I agree that extra fuel octane is great but the point of it is to have the optimum ignition firing point for most power rather than finding the limits of the fuel .

As per boost thresholds I'm not sure higher static CRs will bring them down , more likely increase the pre and just post positive pressure torque .

My mentors taught me that there are two benefits of high static CRs .

First , the only way to increase an engines power other than FI revs and capacity increase is the static CR .

second , it's the way to reduce the torque loss (reduced dynamic compression) on an engine with long duration cams .

Thing is that really high cylinder pressure and power loads means having the engine structure more like a diesel though if anything they are worse off because they make comparatively big torque at low revs . It may not be silly to search what Nissan did to RD28s to make them a reliable diesel .

A .

Has anyone had failures from using E85, from what ive read, E85 being an alcohol cleans and washes the cylinders so with a lot of compression/boost and increasing piston clearances from forged pistons or worn stock pistons I wonder if there could be an increased heat and friction build up to cause a piston failure. Could this be possible on an RB30 piston that doesn't have the oil

squirter to help cool the pistons or does the amount of oil outweigh the ethanol content in the cylinders.

Edited by AngryRB
  • Like 1

E85 engines run MUCH cooler than petrol engines. So your worries about heat issues are unfounded.

E85 does clean up all the crap in the combustion chamber and so on.....but not from "washing" as in wet fuel washing like you appear to be worried about. If it was wet fuel washing the bores then you might worry about reduced lubrication, but the cleaning action is actually from steam. So I wouldn't fret there.

There is a concern with old tired engines or engines with forgies that have been built too loose (as in they don't actually need to be built as loose as a lot of people think they do, and if you make the mistake of building it very loose, then yes, it will be loose enough to possibly permit this concern to occur) then you can get a lot of blowby into the oil, and E85 blowby is full of water. So that can upset the lubrication and possibly lead to failures. But it's not because of heat. The absence of an oil squirter probably not an issue given the lower heat issues with E85 - but any potential lubrication issues from water in the oil are a separate issue that may or may not be assisted by having a squirter - as in, I think if the oil has enough water in it to be a problem, the a squirter probably won't help anyway.

Edited by GTSBoy

I know that engines run cooler, my point was more that if lubrication was being lost from the alcohol's cleaning effect then there would be increased heat build up around the top comp ring as friction increases with boost/comp.

What piston to wall clearance would you suggest if dedicated E85? I was thinking a 4thou could allow washing down the skirts on cold start?

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

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...