Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hi guys, its time to come to rebuild the motor.

the path i am going is to rebuild the 25 block with 26 internals (crank/rods/pistons - i manage to score the bottom end for real cheap so its a cheap way to stroke it & be stronger at the same time)

now i need info from ppl who has done this and what complications they came across if any or any help/tips that they can provide.

I've searched on sau, skyline owners & google and have seen a few ppl do it with success but there were really no technical answers, just yes it will fit but like anything there is always a hurdle to jump over.

the head ill be using will be a R34 RB25 Neo which should work fine. Would the pistons clear the valves & not smash them?

RB25 stroke: 71.7mm

RB26 stroke: 73.7mm

difference in stroke is 2mm so would i assume that by adding 2mm thicker headgasket will make things clear or am i wrong?

parts list include

R33 GTR crank

R33 GTR rods with arp bolts

ACL 86.5mm pistons

cometic head gasket (not sure on size?)

any help much appreciated.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/321488-rb26-crank-in-a-rb25/
Share on other sites

hi guys, its time to come to rebuild the motor.

the path i am going is to rebuild the 25 block with 26 internals (crank/rods/pistons - i manage to score the bottom end for real cheap so its a cheap way to stroke it & be stronger at the same time)

now i need info from ppl who has done this and what complications they came across if any or any help/tips that they can provide.

I've searched on sau, skyline owners & google and have seen a few ppl do it with success but there were really no technical answers, just yes it will fit but like anything there is always a hurdle to jump over.

the head ill be using will be a R34 RB25 Neo which should work fine. Would the pistons clear the valves & not smash them?

RB25 stroke: 71.7mm

RB26 stroke: 73.7mm

difference in stroke is 2mm so would i assume that by adding 2mm thicker headgasket will make things clear or am i wrong?

parts list include

R33 GTR crank

R33 GTR rods with arp bolts

ACL 86.5mm pistons

cometic head gasket (not sure on size?)

any help much appreciated.

i would assume you are thinking about using GTS-t pistons?...the easy way is to just use RB26 pistons as the pin height is correct but you will have to run a thicker than std head gasket as the NEO chambers are smaller. Should be able to work out the static comp on paper and you will be able to see the difference each size head gasket makes.

Edited by Swiper the Fox

I too am looking into this after reading an article in HPI. A member on SAU "GTS-t VSPEC" from the WA Section has done it, I have gotten in contact with him via pm, here is a bit of info he has supplied;

We took the easy way out and used an R34 GTR crank an then used oversize pistons to give us 2.7L. Its amazing that more people don't use GTR crank, pistons and rods as they're virtually a straight fit.
The R33 GTR crank is fine, but you'll need something like the JUN Crank Collar to avoid the chance of damaging the oil pump (the R34 cranks have a better attachment to the oil pumps).

You could go standard RB26 pistons, but then of course you'd only get the standard stroke. For the money it's hard to go past forged pistons, probably just 1mm oversize.

I think my headgasket was 1.2mm, but for me it was important not to drop the compression ratio too low, as the 9:1 ratio on the 25's is pretty much perfect.

Mind you, I was asking about stroking the RB25 into a RB27, not sure this info applies to the NEO, as I was reading somewhere recently that there is something smaller on the head...however don't quote me on that.

I too am looking into this after reading an article in HPI. A member on SAU "GTS-t VSPEC" from the WA Section has done it, I have gotten in contact with him via pm, here is a bit of info he has supplied;

Mind you, I was asking about stroking the RB25 into a RB27, not sure this info applies to the NEO, as I was reading somewhere recently that there is something smaller on the head...however don't quote me on that.

Yes...as stated above the chambers are smaller...hence the static comp. increases as an engines chamber cc decreases.

Most of the parts are interchangeable.

As swiper said, use the rb26 pistons (or forged pistons to suit an rb26) as they have a different pin hight to allow for the longer stroke.

You can use the rb25 rods as they are the same length and bearing size, but the rb26 rods are stornger.

rb25 balance and crankshaft cambelt drive pulley fit the rb26 crank but you need to buy the rb26 crank balancer bolt and washer as they are a differnt size thread.

rb25 flywheel/clutch will fit the rb26 crank.

Only clearance problem i had was the oil squirter cut outs in the pistons were not big enough, 10min with a die grinder and that was fixed, but i believe that was just the brand of pistons i used.

Cheers

NutR33

It'll only give you 2.7 because of the over bore. If you have a standard bore it will be exactally the same displacement as a standard RB26 as both the 25 and 26 have an 86mm bore.

Just wondering why it was said that the R33 crank would need a crank collar. I was under the belief that it was only the 89-92 RB26 cranks that had the short oil pump drive?

Yes 26 stroke is longer than 25, The reason why you end up with an 2.6 is using stock bore size.

Only difference between RB25 and 26 block is the head stud size, VVT oiling and lower block face for the 4WD sump basically everything else is the same give or take a few castings for the Twin turbo oil drains, and oil grooves under main bearings etc.

Fantastic news, thanks for all the info guys.

Sorry i should've mentioned that i'm going to be using RB26 pistons not RB25 :D

AFAIK as well the R33 GTR onwards had the longer nose crank so won't be needing the crank collar, is this correct?

he R33 GTR crank is fine, but you'll need something like the JUN Crank Collar to avoid the chance of damaging the oil pump (the R34 cranks have a better attachment to the oil pumps).
- this might be a printing typo as i've researched and only early R32 GTR cranks need it.

Technically it will be stroked so it brings the cc up to around just below 2.6 just like a RB26.

By my calculations an 86.5mm bore and 73.7mm stroke gives 2598cc capacity .

I believe many consider 87.5mm the bore limit on an RB block and with this and the RB26 crank stroke the capacity is 2659cc .

At 86 by 85 the RB30 comes out at 2962cc std . If your states legislation allows don't you think this would be an easier way to go ?

If you only spent money on two areas in an RB30 - crank collar and coated std piston crowns the build would still be reasonably affordable .

A .

Definatly keep the 25 and throw the 26 rotating assembally in it. Correctly preppared and assemballed the 26 gear is good for 400rwkw, is lighter than a 30 rotating mass and cheaper/easier if your building a motor anyway.

Also crank collars are so cheap- you might as well have on installed.

Shot peen the rods and intall arp bolts.

Ceramic coat the piston crown and teflon coat the skirt.

Any you'll end up with a really nice, inexpensive bottomend.

Definatly keep the 25 and throw the 26 rotating assembally in it. Correctly preppared and assemballed the 26 gear is good for 400rwkw, is lighter than a 30 rotating mass and cheaper/easier if your building a motor anyway.

Also crank collars are so cheap- you might as well have on installed.

Shot peen the rods and intall arp bolts.

Ceramic coat the piston crown and teflon coat the skirt.

Any you'll end up with a really nice, inexpensive bottomend.

sounds like the old bottom end that Paul used to run 10.3's with. 450+ though

Edited by Red R Racing

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

    • Let's be honest, most of the people designing parts like the above, aren't engineers. Sometimes they come from disciplines that gives them more qualitative feel for design than quantitive, however, plenty of them have just picked up a license to Fusion and started making things. And that's the honest part about the majority of these guys making parts like that, they don't have huge R&D teams and heaps of time or experience working out the numbers on it. Shit, most smaller teams that do have real engineers still roll with "yeah, it should be okay, and does the job, let's make them and just see"...   The smaller guys like KiwiCNC, aren't the likes of Bosch etc with proper engineering procedures, and oversights, and sign off. As such, it's why they can produce a product to market a lot quicker, but it always comes back to, question it all.   I'm still not a fan of that bolt on piece. Why not just machine it all in one go? With the right design it's possible. The only reason I can see is if they want different heights/length for the tie rod to bolt to. And if they have the cncs themselves,they can easily offer that exact feature, and just machine it all in one go. 
    • The roof is wrapped
    • This is how I last did this when I had a master cylinder fail and introduce air. Bleed before first stage, go oh shit through first stage, bleed at end of first stage, go oh shit through second stage, bleed at end of second stage, go oh shit through third stage, bleed at end of third stage, go oh shit through fourth stage, bleed at lunch, go oh shit through fifth stage, bleed at end of fifth stage, go oh shit through sixth stage....you get the idea. It did come good in the end. My Topdon scan tool can bleed the HY51 and V37, but it doesn't have a consult connector and I don't have an R34 to check that on. I think finding a tool in an Australian workshop other than Nissan that can bleed an R34 will be like rocking horse poo. No way will a generic ODB tool do it.
    • Hmm. Perhaps not the same engineers. The OE Nissan engineers did not forsee a future with spacers pushing the tie rod force application further away from the steering arm and creating that torque. The failures are happening since the advent of those things, and some 30 years after they designed the uprights. So latent casting deficiencies, 30+ yrs of wear and tear, + unexpected usage could quite easily = unforeseen failure. Meanwhile, the engineers who are designing the billet CNC or fabricated uprights are also designing, for the same parts makers, the correction tie rod ends. And they are designing and building these with motorsport (or, at the very least, the meth addled antics of drifters) in mind. So I would hope (in fact, I would expect) that their design work included the offset of that steering force. Doesn't mean that it is not totally valid to ask the question of them, before committing $$.
    • The downside of this is when you try to track the car, as soon as you hit ABS you get introduced to a unbled system. I want to avoid this. I do not want to bleed/flush/jack up the car twice just to bleed the f**kin car.
×
×
  • Create New...