Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey Peeps,

Well I have decided to give "GR33DD" a big makeover as the old 25 is getting a bit tired and the little scratches and rattles etc etc are driving me crazy. So after 10 years of ownership its time for the full rebuild with a respray and some nice interior goodies :)

I have been doing my homework and I am about 110pages :) into the R33 Sticky and have been in touch with a couple of forum members (Thanks Al) and most of you guys seem to like a compression ratio of between 8.5-9:1 for response and to aviod the "doughy" feeling that can be associated with lower compression. Soooooo anyway I decided I would give a reputable engine builder in SA (Im not sure wether its right to name him) the task of building the new engine as he does the whole thing including head work (porting, cams, springs blah blah) is very well priced and seems to know what he is talking about.

I am after a nice responsive package running a 3076r on e85 and i'm aiming for between 300-350rwkw which I reckon will be achievable on jungle juice. I decided to go with what the builder calls his "Torque Monster" build, fully forged, balanced and blueprinted, but I am adding forged rods.

The main reasons I was planning on using him is with a young family time is limited nowadays and I will be spending enough of that running around getting resprays and eng certs and what not so I thought it will be good to not have to worry about the engine and just wait for the truck to turn up with the 30 on the pallet ready to bolt in and turn the key after I bolt on all the ancillaries.

I quized him last night about what CR he will build the 30 to going by what I have said I want to use it for (mainly street with a couple of track days a year) and he insists on a 8:1 CR!

I sent him another email respectfully asking what was his reasoning behind such a low compression as the standard RB25 sit at around 9:1 and the 26 around 8.5:1 and he replied:

"Hi david. Its nice to run a bunch of static comp to get the engine to feel responsive, in the real world a turbo charged engine is a compromise in either top end or bottom /mid/ I prefer to stick with 8 to 1 comp as it is more user friendly. When giving static comp to get engine to be responsive it is either wrong turbo choice or gearing issues etc. the turbo charger is giving the engine its compression as it pumps . the highish static comp will then have you removing timing unusually on boost and its false economy in my mind. Basically what I say to people is why do you want the response? I then follow up with youre turbo charger is too large !! then they say ‘’ it makes 300rwkw and it has no response . truth is it will never be responsive , invest in a good ogura clutch that you can kick theres youre response !... sorry for the rave hope it helps.."

Now I am in no way an expert and quite franky get a little lost at times but to me this does not seem right???????

Could some of you guys in the know give me a bit of advice on wether I should go ahead with the build at this CR or should I look around again

What are some more of the pros and cons of running a CR of 8:1

Im not planning on doing the build next week or anything and have a timeframe of 1yr for the ENTIRE rebuild of the car but I was going to send the engine over in the new year.

Thanks in advance

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/341906-cr-advice-for-my-3025-build/
Share on other sites

Fuel these days is pretty good and 9:1-10:1 isnt uncommon for factory turbo engines, if you intend to run on E85 you could even go higher without any real dramas. Off boost (which really, most street cars do 90% of the time) the higher compression makes it a much nicer car to drive every day.

A few members on here have had their engines built by Greg (ProEngines) as they do lots of RB30's and know what needs to be done, they are also a lot closer than SA.

All I'll say is this; I hope you didnt send any money

Nah Steveo even I'm not that silly mate. I was going to get him to do the build but by the sounds of things I should reconsider it me thinks.

I've tried to get hold of one of the ones you told me about but jeez he is hard to track down.......in a way a good sign cause it shows how busy he must be.

And yeh Adriano apparently all my troubles will go away with a good old clutch kick!

Plus I didn't think a 3076 would be in any way too big a turbo for a thirty

Fark Dave. If you don't need response just throw in a stock RB20 with a TD06 off the side. Whole project will cost you $1000.

This guy sounds like he's still using 1970's theories on forced induction.

Just reply "thanks but NO THANKS!"

It's your money at the end of the day, you're the customer!

His theory has grounds, i.e. less compression and more timing, but in reality, higher compression gives a much better feel when cruising around in vacuum...

Fark Dave. If you don't need response just throw in a stock RB20 with a TD06 off the side. Whole project will cost you $1000.

This guy sounds like he's still using 1970's theories on forced induction.

Just reply "thanks but NO THANKS!"

I reckon you are right Al, you know who it is we were talking about it the other day. Just goes to show it dosent hurt to ask lots of questions.....couldve been a very expensive lessen

ah well looks like I'm on the hunt for a builder again, I've knocked two off the list so I'll get there.

Nah Steveo even I'm not that silly mate. I was going to get him to do the build but by the sounds of things I should reconsider it me thinks.

I've tried to get hold of one of the ones you told me about but jeez he is hard to track down.......in a way a good sign cause it shows how busy he must be.

And yeh Adriano apparently all my troubles will go away with a good old clutch kick!

Plus I didn't think a 3076 would be in any way too big a turbo for a thirty

anything smaller than a GT30 is TOO SMALL for a 3L, as it is the GT30 will be well into boost at 2500.

anything smaller than a GT30 is TOO SMALL for a 3L, as it is the GT30 will be well into boost at 2500.

100rwkw @ 9psi @ 2500rpm

150rwkw @ 17psi @ 3100rpm

220rwkw @ 21psi @ 3600rpm

Then steadily increases to

335rwkw @ 21psi @ 5800rpm

I just love the rb30/gt30 combo :P

Let's not also forget the 900N of tractive torque :P

Sounds nice Al, can you PM me your dyno sheet when you get a chance?

Still haven't heard back from proengines, and I have toldthe original builder that I'll "think about it" and get back to him. I was pretty sure 8:1 was too low.

Thanks guys

8.8:1 works well with E85 (lower comp may slightly effect cold start on E85)

6boost Manifold

CP pistons

Tomei oil Pump

1.2mm oil Restrictor

NEO head and keep the VCT

PM me the name of the workshop and I will point you in the right direction. Having a builder with a level head is not such a bad thing. If he does't know you want to run E85, that may change his thinking.

The builder sounds to be playing it safe. Low comp gives an easier tune and less chance of detonation. The lower comp also gives a larger chamber volume which effects fuel economy in a negative way.

Matt

Pretty obvious it's Darren. Those bagging the builder are jumping the gun a little I think... if he doesn't know what fuel is being used or how competent the tuner will be it's more than reasonable to keep the static cr low.

How many rb dohc engines are running 8.5+:1 comp without detonation, on pump fuel?

The need for low comp forced induction engines is old school, unless setting up a drag car with huge boost and NOS.

Whoever the builder is, hasn't listened to Dave and his intended use of his car and new setup. He is after a responsive 330+rwkw, running E85, with 22psi max. I have acheived that on pump fuel, using 9:1cr and no issues with detonation. Why the need to "clutch kick" when the engine is capable of producing the figures, if built properly.

^^^ OR SR20 they hate high comp, ive had a few lately that have been raised and wont take more than 2 degrees up top and are limited to 16-17psi... Perfect for E85 but when they were told they were to suit bp98 its no good... engines have since had head modified (quench pads removed) and are now back to 12-15 degrees of timing and 22 odd psi and another 30-40rwkw more with no discernible loss in tractability.

9:1 no issues on a rb though and on E85 should be even less of a worry, we are using 13.5:1 in NA e85 applications.

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

    • As I've said elsewhere, I am using the stock intercooler piping path in the engine bay, and a return flow cooler, and making ~250 rwkW (without any effort put into trying to turn it up past there just yet) and expect to be able to make some more, and frankly, I would be perfectly happy with 260-270rwKW. This is peak road Skyline usability territory. You go past there and, sure, the car will snap necks more when it's on boost, but it will also break shit all the time, cost a (even larger) fortune in tyres, etc etc. Anyway, I also do not like the over-the-fan pipe path, and you don't have to do it.
    • I see, honestly I’m not too fussed about the looks. The only reason to go plenum is to make the piping easier instead of the classic over the rad etc. 
    • Not easy to quantify wrt something like how many fractions of a second slower it would be over 0-100. But given that a 250-300rwkW car is able to do that launch sprint in 5-6 sec (and faster with appropriate tyres, and surface)..... giving up as much as a second would feel like torture. A ~450HP capable turbo is not going to make lots of boost in the 2000-3000 rpm range. So, whilst with some boost on hand it will be faster accelerating in that rev range than your engine currently is NA, it will not feel like a fast car until the boost is solidly in. You know what your car feels like right now when you open it up at 2000rpm. if you've ever been in an actual fast car, you will appreciate that the NARB25 is.... not exciting. Well, add some boost and it will be better. But shorten the intake runners and it might not be better at all. It might come out better, but it could end up feeling the same. For me, it's not the 0-X km/h sprints that matter. It is easy to fry the tyres with anything over 200 rwkW. You can't use all the power available in 1st and 2nd anyway, you have to modulate the throttle. What matters is how the car reacts when you're driving in traffic in 4th or 5th and have maybe 2000 rpm on board, and you want/need to add some speed quickly, and don't have time for the downshift. It won't make boost, it will be all NA (at the speeds we're talking about - remember how fast you're going at 2000 in 4th! and don't plan on breaking the limit by too much.) So giving away NA torque is not what I would consider practical for a street car. And retaining that NA torque builds boost faster which makes the car faster. The flashy plenum is not actually better, unless you're looking at a track car where you can keep it on the boil all the time.  
    • So how much difference does it make you think? Like 1 second in the 0-100?  I was have smaller turbo so hopefully that spools quick GTX2871.  currently it’s NA so you can imagine pretty slow, but I do want fast accusation a little as there’s not many places I’ll be driving where I go over 80 even near me. So 0-60 and 0-80 targets   
    • Short inlet runners cost quite a bit. Dulls off the off-boost torque, and delays boost onset, because arrival of boost is driven by gas flow is a product of the ability to flow air which is torque. This is the reason that the stock manifolds have longer runners. On a 3L, or bigger, you can usually accept the compromise of giving away some torque because the extra capacity gives you a little extra to waste. But on a smaller motor, there's not a lot there to start with. Example, I swapped RB20 out of my R32, 25NeoDET in its place. The "wall of torque" that I experienced afterwards made it all worthwhile. That's because I came from RB20 land where torque is not a thing. But I would not do anything, anything at all, to reduce the low/mid torque I have now, because I remember what it is like to not have it!
×
×
  • Create New...