Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

GT Gearbox won't last long with increased power. Any little-to-mild flaring issues will become much more noticable very quickly.

I ended up going down the rebuild path with my gearbox in the end with HD Kevlar Clutchpacks, HD Bands, new solenoid set, and valve body upgrade. Handles it like a dream since. BUT that cost $3300 and if I did it again I'd get a low-mileage R34 GTT Box and valve body it.

Advice I was given by the performance auto specialist was a valve body can either improve and strengthen, or make worse and weaken an auto box. My auto was flaring quite bad, adding extra power didn't help. Third gear wasn't in a good state. A valve body upgrade would have just done it a lot worse and prematurely ended the gearbox.

Get a low mileage Auto GTT Box in good nick, do the valve body upgrade, and done! If you plan to give it on the track invest in a transmission cooler and temp gauge. I haven't done so yet myself, but that's just purely down to funds. Heat kills autos, more power = more heat... you do the math.

btw, I've just ordered an R34 GTT Front Cut Including Loom etc.. minus the GearBox, and sourced an Auto GTT ECU.

Hopefully next week or so the mechanic will be ready to do the swap and I can shed more light on the issues that arise or may not arise... But as stated before, gearbox will definitely be your first weak link when increasing power so if you haven't rebuilt your gearbox (expensive job!) try and get a half cut including gearbox and do a valve body upgrade.

Not wanting to be a thread hijacker here... but while this is on the topic of dropping a neo turbo engine into a N/A Neo: what is the difference between the wiring loom and ECU pinouts between the RB25DE NEO and RB25DET NEO? Reason being I currently have a Piggy Back eManage and would like to be able to transfer that accross to the new ECU without re-wiring the entire unit, obviously to save money. Would using an existing loom be ok, or is it going to be a case of change loom, change ECU and resplice the eManage harness on likely the same wires? That wouldn't be so bad...

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

    • Get an inspection camera up there. 
    • Yeah, but look at the margin in viscosity between the 40 and the 60 at 125°C. It is not very large. It is the difference between 7 and 11 cP. Compare that to the viscosity at only 90°C. The viscosity axis is logarithmic. The numbers at 90 are ~15 and ~35. That is about half for the 40 wt oil and <half for the 60. You give up viscosity EXPONENTIALLY as temperature rises. Literally. That is why I declare thicker oil to be a bandaid, and a brittle one at that. Keep the oil temperature under about 110°C and you should be better off.   Having said all of that, which remains true as a general principle, if you have indeed lost enough oil from the sump that the pump was seeing slightly aerated oil, then all bets are off. That would of course cause oil pressure to collapse. And 35 psi is a collapse given what you were doing to the engine. Especially if the oil was that hot and viscosity had also collapsed. And I would put money on rod or main bearings being the source of the any noise that registered as knock. Hydraulic lifters should be able to cope with the hotter oil and lower pressure enough to prvent too much high frequency noise, although I am willing to admit it could be the source.
    • Thanks for the reply mate. Well I really hope its a hose then not engine out job
    • But.... the reason I want to run a 60 weight is so at 125C it has the same viscosity as a 40 weight at 100C. That's the whole reason. If the viscosity changes that much to drop oil pressure from 73psi to 36psi then that's another reason I should be running an oil that mimics the 40 weight at 100C. I have datalogs from the dyno with the oil pressure hitting 73psi at full throttle/high RPM. At the dyno the oil temp was around 100-105C. The pump has a 70psi internal relief spring. It will never go/can't go above 70psi. The GM recommendation of 6psi per 1000rpm is well under that... The oil sensor for logging in LS's is at the valley plate at the back of  the block/rear of where the heads are near the firewall. It's also where the knock sensors are which are notable for 'false knock'. I'm hoping I just didn't have enough oil up top causing some chatter instead of rods being sad (big hopium/copium I know) LS's definitely heat up the oil more than RB's do, the stock vettes for example will hit 300F(150C) in a lap or two and happily track for years and years. This is the same oil cooler that I had when I was in RB land, being the Setrab 25 row oil cooler HEL thing. I did think about putting a fan in there to pull air out more, though I don't know if that will actually help in huge load situations with lots of speed. I think when I had the auto cooler. The leak is where the block runs to the oil cooler lines, the OEM/Dash oil pressure sender is connected at that junction and is what broke. I'm actually quite curious to see how much oil in total capacity is actually left in the engine. As it currently stands I'm waiting on that bush to adapt the sender to it. The sump is still full (?) of oil and the lines and accusump have been drained, but the filter and block are off. I suspect there's maybe less than 1/2 the total capacity there should be in there. I have noticed in the past that topping up oil has improved oil pressure, as reported by the dash sensor. This is all extremely sketchy hence wanting to get it sorted out lol.
×
×
  • Create New...