Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

old setup,

fmic, safc, exh, small t3 highflow, pod= 192rwkw@1bar

will have the new setup finnished soon with td06, gtr injectors, bigger pump, ecu. (std manifold/plenum/tb/coils etc) anyone had problems with the std coil packs at higher power levels? i was forced to run a really small gap on the plugs to stop it missfiring with the old setup already

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi just wondering what you guys think. I am going to do a rebuilt in the not too distant future on my RB20DET. I wish to have the tomei 2.2ltr pistons and have the tomei 260 Duration, 8.5 mm lift cams (both inlet and exaust). Possibley a set of tomie valve springs. The only thing I need to know is what turbo would be good for this set up.

I was thinking GT2835 but I don't really know what to expect from this turbo. A set of 550cc injectors would probs be the injectors used too.

In the end I want a reliable 250 odd rwkws. Any advise would be great thanx guys.

dont know what to expect hp wise all depends on the tuner i suspose the head is of my rb20det geting ported at the moment and all the mods are going on as it is reasambled the mods are

Q45 afm

hks cam gears

hybrid 600x300x76 fmic

hks 264 cams inlet +exhaust (9.0mm)

grex remote oil filter

oil cooler

gtr fuel pump

nismo fuel regulator

recon 460 hi flowed injectors

twin thermo fans

cast hks exhaust manifold

hks 32mm external waste gate

hks panel filter with cold air induction

to4e bb turbo (new)

3" trust exhaust with hyflow cat

custom dump pipe

extreme clutch and pressure plate

master cylinder brace

wolf 3d ver 4 plugin ecu

and as i said the head has been ported and the valves are going back in next week but the bottom end is staying stock engine only has 60,000 ks on it hone marks in the bore still look like new very little wear no piston slap hp goal well lets just wait and c as i said depends how good the tuner is these parts will be going on in the next month or so as i get time to assemble it the main reason for bolt on parts only at the moment and stock bottom end is the long term goal is an rb30det as all these parts will still bolt on to it the bottom end is being done in that engine so if this one goes bang it dont matter as the other engine goes in then kinda keen to find out myself wot sorta hp it will make hoping for around the 250rwkw though

If you ran this setup (assuming motor has forged pistons), where would your new redline be now?

Meh, forget forged pistons...i dont hear about too many RB20s killing pistons, they seem to normally get tired and stop making the power they once did, so im not going to bother whilst the engine still has good even compression.

Im going to keep my rev limit between 8,00-8,500rpm depending where boost comes on with new cams and cam gears, assuming it is still making good power. Ill grab some valvesprings whilst im at it because my engine has got 170,000kms on it.

hehe 2nd time was intentional.. told them to wind in lotsa boost rofl. Not like a replacement RB20 costs anything :D

Based on your experiences then ill see you all in the graveyard shortly... :wavey:

...but seriously these engines sound as though they gave up the ghost because of youthful exuberence more then piston failure. Im sure most cars that are simply boosted up with little attention to A/F, engine fueling, cooling etc will have probs.

Anyway i put my theory to the test shortly :D

HKS GT2510 Turbo

Re-mapped stock computer

Stock injectors

Bosch 040 pump

3" exhaust

FMIC 600x300x70mm approx

Pod filter with air feed

Remote oil filter and cooler

Extreme single plate clutch with 4.5kg cromoly flywheel

Modifed stock BOV (bypass/overboost hole plugged)

200.4rwkw at 1bar with stock BOV, 200.2rwkw at 0.9bar with BOV modded)

Boost controller problems meant that the run with the modded BOV was done with no boost controller, only the HKS acutator contolling boost

I'd say 210 rwkw at 1bar with boost controller working. I have run up to 1.4 bar with octance boost, but haven't dyno'd it at that due to boost controller problem

In process of planning the next stage to try and get 220-230rwkw

Motor is stock, 125,000km and may be replaced with a fresher but still stock example when the next stage starts

Based on your experiences then ill see you all in the graveyard shortly... :wavey:  

...but seriously these engines sound as though they gave up the ghost because of youthful exuberence more then piston failure. Im sure most cars that are simply boosted up with little attention to A/F, engine fueling, cooling etc will have probs.

:(

he he yeah... :wavey: pistons... crack, crack, crack, crack, crack, crack, crack.

count em. all seven.

yep did both lands on no#5, and my oil rings were siezed together & my compression rings have worn down about 10thou.

I'll take better care next time 'round

Yes

just thought I'd ask for a opinion from everyone in reagrds to RB20 upgrades

After reading a thread in regards to modified RB20 power outputs, Sydneykid mentioned fitting standard RB26 cams to a RB20

from what I can gather on the thread, the cams are a straight swap?

I want to use a set, but I am unsure of wether to isnstall them as is,or convert to solid lifters as well

The motor itself, hopefully, will remain internally standard, with a rev limit of no more than 8100rpm, so I am unsure if the solid lifters would be a improvement or a advantage?

Also, I may add a set of cam gears as well if needed

My goal is 230rwkw (currently 200rwkw) at around 1.3bar of boost. I am installing GTR injectors, Microtech computer as well. All the other stuff - HKS GT2510 turbo, FMIC, fuel pump etc are already proven performers and will stay as is

Will the GTR cams help, with standard hydraulic lifters, and what type of increases have you seen in the past?

Sorry for all the questions,

regards, Chris

I should be able to give you an answer in about 2 weeks, picking up the cams and cam gears next weekend.

Cool, I look forward to seeing the results

Are you going to run them with stock lifters etc?

Are all RB26 cams the same? By looking at the specs on the Tomei site it suggestes they are, but each model the torque output seems to rise, maybe suggesting a differant camshaft profile for each model?? Are yours 32 or 33 cams?

Running std hydraulic lifters with GTR Valve springs and cams...only changing the valve springs as my engine has done 170,00kms so probably well past their best.

Good quesiton about the cam differences R32 to R33 etc. Could be the different turbos and tuning that increased the torque more then a mechanical change in the engine...i think the cams im getting are off an R32 GTR

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...