Jump to content
SAU Community

Rb26Dett On A Rb25Det

Joe Nash
 Share

Recommended Posts

Joe Nash Rising Star

Joe Nash

Posted
Posted

Hi all,

i'm new to the skyline rage, i have a R33 GTS T, now i want to do some mods to it and have been thinking about the RB26DETT head.

I simply asking, would this head fit onto my engine, and if so, is it worth doing at all, and if so, is there anything else i would have to change e.g. exhaust, intake.

thanks

Joe

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/372394-rb26dett-on-a-rb25det/
Share on other sites
«Cyph3r» Experienced

«Cyph3r»

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi all,

i'm new to the skyline rage, i have a R33 GTS T, now i want to do some mods to it and have been thinking about the RB26DETT head.

I simply asking, would this head fit onto my engine, and if so, is it worth doing at all, and if so, is there anything else i would have to change e.g. exhaust, intake.

thanks

Joe

Unless you have huge plans for the car a 26 head is honestly not a good starting point and you would just be throwing money away.

I'd recommend having a read through the forced induction section of the forums.

There are plenty of threads in there with good advice on what mods will give you the best power for dollar increases.

If you are starting with a completely standard car however, I'd suggest looking at improving things in the handling department and removing unnecessary weight if that's an option for you before adding power.

Don't cheap out on tires either, if you can't get the power to the ground efficiently you are just wasting money.

If you can give people a few more details on what the car has done currently and what your goals are and budget you will probably get a lot more helpful advice. :cheers:

Edited by «Cyph3r»
Joe Nash Rising Star

Joe Nash

Posted
  • Author
Posted

well thanks for the info so far.

the car is a R33 GTS T, the only mods done are very small, 3" exhaust system from turbo back and FMIC, i also installed a turbosmart BOV and turbo timer when i bought the car.

i'm not looking for ridiculously huge amount of power, more after more then stock power, i believe that the R33 GTS T came with about 180 RWKW, and as such something like 300 RWKW would be more then enough for what i would like to have, i only asked this question as i was looking on eBay and found a few of them, but if it not really woth the hassel then i guess i will simple look at ECU turbo intake injectors and handiling side of things.

Again thanks for the help so far.

Joe

«Cyph3r» Experienced

«Cyph3r»

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi Joe,

If your future power goals are 300rwkw this will be able to be attained with out even needing to port the rb25 head.

The main advantage with the RB26 head is the solid lifter setup allowing for higher revs than the RB25 cylinder head which uses a hydraulic lifter arrangement.

300rwkw is a pretty common power figure from RB25DET setups these days and isn't an overly difficult goal to reach.

Just have a read through the Forced Induction section, particularly the RB25 Turbo Upgrade, All Dyno Results thread which can give you some ideas of how different combinations have performed.

Good place to start would be an electronic boost controller, some 740cc injectors (can use later for 300rwkw), fuel pump, z32 air flow meter if not changing to map sensor and an ecu.

Nistunes can't really be beat for the money if you have a good local tuner that can use them.

Edited by «Cyph3r»
Joe Nash Rising Star

Joe Nash

Posted
  • Author
Posted

thanks for that, i'll be checking those areas out soon, got a mate who had a R33 did some very minor things and got some good power, but i would like a little more then what he got.

got another question here, is it possible to get 370 RWHP out of a stock turbo, changing things like ECU injectors F/pump and some other items?

R31Nismoid Grand Master

R31Nismoid

Posted
Posted

Impossible to make 370rwhp (270rwkw) on a stock turbo. 270rwhp (200rwkw) is the limit.

I think you really need to do some basic reasearch mate before you go looking towards 300rwkw (400rwhp).

Its not a cheap excercise if you want a decent setup - and for goodness sake don't look for the cheap "ebay" special items. They will end up costing you double. Buy genuine the first time.

You are looking at the upper limits of the stock motor as well, so unless you have cash to rebuild, dont be chasing limits that push the reliability envelope.

Joe Nash Rising Star

Joe Nash

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for that mate, a total engine rebuild is on the table and will be getting done properly, using forged internals, but this will be done over time.

the reason for the rebuild will purely the fact that the engine is getting a little old now at 160,000 + k's and like you have said, i want my car to be reliable, as this is my daily car as well.

would a full rebuild with forged internals and a new aftermarket ECU be a wise choice as a first step in mods?

thanks again for the help,

Joe

Impossible to make 370rwhp (270rwkw) on a stock turbo. 270rwhp (200rwkw) is the limit.

I think you really need to do some basic reasearch mate before you go looking towards 300rwkw (400rwhp).

Its not a cheap excercise if you want a decent setup - and for goodness sake don't look for the cheap "ebay" special items. They will end up costing you double. Buy genuine the first time.

You are looking at the upper limits of the stock motor as well, so unless you have cash to rebuild, dont be chasing limits that push the reliability envelope.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...