Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The differences are enough to screw up cam timing but shouldn't be enough to cause valve/piston interference. I have a friend here that runs a shop and he swears up and down that he's done a few RB25DETs with RB26 cams and they have no issues. I'll give it a go soon. I have a wonderful Japanese comprehensive inspection first though 8(

  • 1 month later...

I've followed both strings on this mod , anyone have any idea why SK can get it to work and most others can't . What are the potential problems aside from bent cams/incorrect cam and CAS timing/cam journal cap bolts . In other words if the cams are exchanged with no dramas and the timing/s are the same its difficult to understand the idle problem . Nissan must have had the multi throttle system in mind with its anti reversion properties when they developed the RB26 profiles which would allow greater overlap period without the rough low speed / idle problems . I would have thought opening up the cams (reducing the overlap) would have got an acceptable idle ie enough trapping efficiency always assuming the valves closed . I guess a bit of reversion at the AFM could cause problems , does SK do anything different to all else here . Would larger capacity inlet ducting/MAF/IC/better filter make any difference .

Cheers A .

does SK do anything different to all else here

I think thats the million dollar question. From memory he was going to put together a tech article about installing RB26 cams but I don't think he ever got around to it.

I'm just guessing here, but I wonder if there are some subtle cam timing differences that are causing dificulties (eg setting an RB26 cam up using the RB20 timing marks etc might not put an RB26 cam at true 0 degrees, instead it might be advanced or retarded a bit). Who knows tho.

  • 5 months later...
one did but idle was the problem on standard ecu, would it be possible to idle it upto 1500rpm to make it stable??

A few weeks ago Turbine and I did this mod as I had the GTR cams I bought from Ronin7 and two adjustable cam gears I had enginered from the originals for $300.

We fitted the cams and had the same idling problem. Even setting them to 2000RPM would not have solved the problem. They sounded great though at 3-4K and strong. I think Turbine got a phone movie? Not sure.

Anyway had to pull them out the week after to go to the SAUVIC show so the car would be drivable.

Turbine says "oh well have to learn how to do it for the drag car"

Guess who ended up with the GTR cams and Adj Pulleys?!!

See my BLOG for more on this episode.

Forgetting the fact that ppl have had troubel getting ths to work...there isnt any really any solid info that you will actually make more power...so add the two up and i wouldnt bother with it.

Lukes01 i think it is offered to help me out and regrind my cams to suit, adn i was goign to take him up on it, but my cams went walk about so cant get them back...if you insist on tryign this, perhaps take a different tact and chase up Lukes01

Yes Turbox, the cams are in the race car now.

They are standard RB26DETT camshafts both set to zero on the adjustable drive gears.

I fitted the standard RB20DE hydraulic lifters and the standard RB20DE camshaft brackets.

At first I had the cams fitted with no lifters, to get a feel for how they rotated in the head. NO problems at all, smooth and free. So out they came, fitted the lifters back in and refit the cams.

I did apply high temp anti-seize to all of the bolts that mount the cams in. I found that theri was moisture getting into the bolt shanks somehow :confused:

It's interesting that SK mentions about cam timing on the RB's with these cams as a nominal +2IN, -4EX starting point.

This would explain the idle problems when both are set to zero. Moving the cams like the above mentioned actually reduces the valve overlap by 6 degrees total.

RB20's dont have alot of airflow below 2500RPM compared to the big RB26, so....... the horsepower gain could only be through the higher lift.

I'm going to try them at zero first up because i dont care if it idles at 2000RPM, the converter stalls at 5000RPM anyway. I'll let people know how this works out in time.

Turbine.

"It's interesting that SK mentions about cam timing on the RB's with these cams as a nominal +2IN, -4EX starting point.

This would explain the idle problems when both are set to zero. Moving the cams like the above mentioned actually reduces the valve overlap by 6 degrees total."

so your saying if you did this you might have a better chance of it idleing alittle better?

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

    • Yeah i found that alot of parts can be wrong or "very" hard to get the real right one. I already bought some brakes years ago on me "old" GT calipers and they were wrong too 😄  I told them too. Even send them pictures...but they said "EBC catalogue has them on my car... So i dont know what their answer will be. I call monday them and let them know that they are really not on my car. If they were they would be already on a car...
    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
×
×
  • Create New...