Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i've searched and everyone says they're a waste of $$ on a RB25, with zero gains

Really? OK, I stand corrected. Everything I have ever read suggested that the RB26 and RB25 were the most responsive to cam gears, (a friend played with custom inlet cam gear on a NEO and got nothing from it...but an adjustable cam gear worked well on his exhaust side)...and RB20s respond well, but not as well as its bigger cc cousins.

I have read that cam gears were a waste of time and money if you were running Poncams. But...can't say I have paid too much attention to it the last 5 years...it used to be a golden rule

Really? OK, I stand corrected. Everything I have ever read suggested that the RB26 and RB25 were the most responsive to cam gears, (a friend played with custom inlet cam gear on a NEO and got nothing from it...but an adjustable cam gear worked well on his exhaust side)...and RB20s respond well, but not as well as its bigger cc cousins.

I quickly discovered a page or so back he hates one of the best engine makers in the world - based on that lot I'd not really expect him to have the kind of appreciation or understanding of optimising engine efficiency needed to treat as an authority on the topic.

i think it was Trent who mentioned something about cams being not worth their $$ on a RB25.

(a friend played with custom inlet cam gear on a NEO and got nothing from it...but an adjustable cam gear worked well on his exhaust side)...and RB20s respond well, but not as well as its bigger cc cousins.

got a dyno sheet of this? if there is proof of gains i will get an exh cam gear.

Lithium, you referring to me about my honda post last page?

i think it was Trent who mentioned something about cams being not worth their $$ on a RB25.

got a dyno sheet of this? if there is proof of gains i will get an exh cam gear.

Cam gears , not cams! I have not heard of too many RB25s not responding well to cam gears on std cams.

As for dyno sheets? Hell man, we are talking around 2004-2005 when he made a custom inlet cam gear that could be adjusted as part of all his trial and error. It was all for 0 anyway as the setup worked best set at 0 and the exhaust side retarded a little using his off the shelf HKS exhaust cam gear

It all depends on the set up some rb engine greatly benefit from cam gears some not so much personally I think it would be a decent investment cos lets face it if your chasing power you have wasted money on worse things I know I have

Gone through the last 40 or so pages. Am I imagining things or are not many people running the TD06H-25G? I know heaps are running the 20G.

I am looking at this turbo http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Kinugawa-Turbocharger-4-Inlet-TD06H-25G-T3-V-Band-10cm-AR73-500P-/270913941567?pt=AU_Car_Parts_Accessories&hash=item3f13bab03f

Im not a guru on turbos so I thought I would ask here. I want great response since ill be doing track days, am I looking at the right turbo? Chasing around 300ish kw.

I also noticed the two types, water cooled and oil cooled, which is better?

If you were looking for a easy 350KW on 98 would it be better to go as TD06SH 25G 12cm or T67 25G 12cm?

Whats the power difference between the TD06SH and T67?

I know the TD06SH has the 58.8 and 67 turbine wheels but would it push it enough to make it worth the lag?

Cam gears , not cams! I have not heard of too many RB25s not responding well to cam gears on std cams.

As for dyno sheets? Hell man, we are talking around 2004-2005 when he made a custom inlet cam gear that could be adjusted as part of all his trial and error. It was all for 0 anyway as the setup worked best set at 0 and the exhaust side retarded a little using his off the shelf HKS exhaust cam gear

sorry, it was a typo, i meant cam gears. i'm still against them until i see proof provide decent gains.

It all depends on the set up some rb engine greatly benefit from cam gears some not so much personally I think it would be a decent investment cos lets face it if your chasing power you have wasted money on worse things I know I have

it will not be a decent investment after the $$ you spend for your tuner to tinker with them and to set them up especially after all the work and only to find maybe 1-2kw gain (if your lucky)? Lol

+1 i didnt notice any gain from my cam gear install

:yes:

If you were looking for a easy 350KW on 98 would it be better to go as TD06SH 25G 12cm or T67 25G 12cm?

Whats the power difference between the TD06SH and T67?

I know the TD06SH has the 58.8 and 67 turbine wheels but would it push it enough to make it worth the lag?

You answer your own question the h has a bigger turbine wheel I had the td06h-20g on my 20 and was seeing full boost at 4200 18psi so it's only a few rpm if you want bigger numbers

sorry, it was a typo, i meant cam gears. i'm still against them until i see proof provide decent gains.

it will not be a decent investment after the $$ you spend for your tuner to tinker with them and to set them up especially after all the work and only to find maybe 1-2kw gain (if your lucky)? Lol

:yes:

Haha depends if your tuner try's everything and not just turn up the boost. I don't think it wound be worth it on your set up because the turbo is already working very well. From what iv heard you can get more mid range and bring the turbo on faster that why I thought it would be worth it not so much power out put.

i've still yet to see a dyno sheet where it provides a gain in response in the mid range.

i've seen some results with cams installed but not with just exh cam gear adjustment only.

feel free to prove me wrong, i am skeptical until i see evidence that it works.

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

    • 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...