Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

Just thought I would throw this up for discussion.

Looking at drilling and tapping a hole for a remote oil feed for the vct on a 25/30 as it currently does not have one (internal vct mod doesn't work)

The head is currently on the engine and in car and was thinking of doing it in car.

The best strategy that i have come up with so far is:

drilling into head. grease covered drills and taps to catch the majority of the alloy and using compressed air from the other side of the drill location.

Not a real ethic way of doing things, but I am entirely open to ideas

how exactly did you do the internal mod? what size holes did you drill and exactly where did you drill them etc, how have you tested the solenoid? unless theres somehow not enough pressure it should work fine.

how exactly did you do the internal mod? what size holes did you drill and exactly where did you drill them etc, how have you tested the solenoid? unless theres somehow not enough pressure it should work fine.

1.5mm(from memory) drill bit through the sealing wall of the brass bung.

Using a working solenoid and I can turn it on off via vipec.

I am 100 % sure its because of the lack of oil pressure due to recieving it from the lifter gallery

I think you will have to remove the head (or maybe the whole engine) as you only need a tiny bit of swarf to block your oilways - or you could get fine particles circulating in your oil supply.

I think you will have to remove the head (or maybe the whole engine) as you only need a tiny bit of swarf to block your oilways - or you could get fine particles circulating in your oil supply.

That is not an option. someone who has seen the insides of the of a 25 head does the oil return from the vct (when vct off) go directly to vct drain on side of head (2 bolt flange with metal return to sump)

not via anywhere else?

how exactly did you do the internal mod? what size holes did you drill and exactly where did you drill them etc, how have you tested the solenoid? unless theres somehow not enough pressure it should work fine.

have you done this/seen it work?

yer as far as i know myne works fine, havent actually run it on the dyno with it plugged and unplugged but i havent noticed a lack of midrange at all.

from memory i drilled a 1.5mm hole through the plug then another 1.5mm through the top. and block feeds are 2 x 1.6mm with a standard 25 pump

yer as far as i know myne works fine, havent actually run it on the dyno with it plugged and unplugged but i havent noticed a lack of midrange at all.

from memory i drilled a 1.5mm hole through the plug then another 1.5mm through the top. and block feeds are 2 x 1.6mm with a standard 25 pump

i don;t think anyone with a 30 bottom end notices a lack of midrange lol.

I've got a very similar setup. 1.5mm hole through brass bung. block feeds 2 X 1.5mm stock oil pump

been trying to do alot of out of the box thinking to no avail. lol

ive spent a little bit of time to test and compare between my rb25/30 and 3 rb25's.

the 25/30 with internal vct mod does not pour as much oil out as the standard 25 setup (ive got 3 rb25's and they all push out more oil out of the vct solenoid plug when solenoid is removed

has anyone had a play with their inlet cam cam gear, is it possible to move the adjuster (for the cam advance) by hand?

i tried moving a spare cam gear that I had lying around and It was near impossible to budge it. this cam gear could be stuffed just a bit curious.

contemplating swapping over inlet cam gear over for a known working unit atm

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, 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. 
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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...