Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Rightio guys.

Just a little build thread thanks to my oil pump destroying itself and taking my engine with it.

A little bit of history of how things were 6 weeks ago;

- GT block

- Tomei 2.8 (86.5 mm pistons)

- "Ported and polish head"

- Tomei Procams (270 @ 10.25mm)

- Garrett -5's with a slightly modified turbine housing

- Tomei Series 1 dumps

- Racepace Motorsport twin 3 inch from dump pipes back

- Link G4 ECU

- ID 2000 injectors

- Nismo 100 mm intercooler

- Nismo intake plenum

- Standard Airbox :3some:

- Ross crank trigger

That setup on Unigroup Engineering's dyno made 426 RWKW at 24 psi dropping off to 22 psi top end.

Dyno graph below:

49b755bf.jpg

OK, so onto the failure.

Oil pump into 9 pieces, lost oil pressure, Exhaust cam welded itself to a few cam caps and pistons and valves got a bit raunchy in the chamber. :wub:. The bottom end somehow survived! The engine was together for 7 years and just on 35,000 KMS.

Picture of the oil pump:

427735_10150581862512337_719527336_9288754_231707328_n.jpg

Drive of the pump.

395910_10150581866647337_719527336_9288791_2004099_n.jpg

All exhaust valves cracked

425872_10150581863187337_719527336_9288760_900070127_n.jpg

Uh huh Uh huh

418911_10150581864762337_719527336_9288774_703799385_n.jpg

Engine oil. Now with glitter and sparkles.

404180_10150581865667337_719527336_9288783_659095642_n.jpg

The valves. The "tapping" that shouldn't have happened :3some:

417326_10150581874222337_1528063720_n.jpg

Big end bearings. Look good for the damage done!

Bigend%20bottom.jpg

OK. Enough of the destruction. Now the fix.

I decided to keep the 2.8 as much I wanted to go 3.0, I couldn't justify moving away from the 2.8 when it was all good.

Over the last 14 months I have been building a head at HKS Japan (Thanks Marcus for all those 2 hour talks and organising this for me). The guy that has built this head also ported the HKS drag R33 GTR back in the day.The spec of this head is;

- "port and polish" for engines up to 900 HP

- JUN Ti retainers

- 1.5 mm oversize valves

- HKS step 2 valve springs

- JUN 264 @ 10.5 mm cams. I was originally going to go with the Mines 252 @ 10.05 mm BUT I may run V-cam at a later stage. They recommend a 264 degree cam for 2530's/-5's, so the choice was made.

- The head also copped the full treatment from NAPREC. This consists of taking one of the squish pads out, reshaping the combustion chamber and decking the head 1.0 mm. (thats the short version of it)

I also had a set of standard manifolds ported to the head and sent a manifold to turbo gasket to Japan to get matched up. The other side a 'balance tube' was sourced (the bit between the throttles and the head) and matched that to the head also.

A few cheeky photo's of the head;

P2110197.jpg

P2110199.jpg

P2110200.jpg

Pistons got ordered this arvo which are 87 mm Tomei pistons which will be valve recessed to suit the 1.5 mm OS valves. As soon as that is done they will be flown over so I can assemble the bottom end, then wait for this head to rock up.

- A racepace 9 Litre sump has been organised to be drained by a Tomei oil pump.

- My gearbox got a quick strip down, inspect and reassemble as we found 2 'locator pads' on the magnet.

- A Quaife front diff has been bought and is going in the sump/diff when I get it.

- Alcon 6 pot 365mm front/4 pot 350 mm brakes are on the car. I'll take some pics tomorrow and throw them up.

I was very surprised with the clutch and how it came out. Anyone that has seen me drive it knows the launches this thing gets. I have done 250 launches atleast since I have owned it and i'm just going to put it back in the car. Love those coppermix Nismo's :wub: .

Keen to see what changes you end up making Paul. Looking at the dyno sheet I should have taken you up on that test drive offer too.

How does the crank journals look? Considering the mains still look reasonable (despite particles), i'd imagine they look ok if the nitriding has held up.

Were you using cut back valve stem's? Just wondering what caused the valves to make contact... Did the belt slip too?

You didn't say what brand of pump that was either...?

Keen to see what changes you end up making Paul. Looking at the dyno sheet I should have taken you up on that test drive offer too.

How does the crank journals look? Considering the mains still look reasonable (despite particles), i'd imagine they look ok if the nitriding has held up.

Were you using cut back valve stem's? Just wondering what caused the valves to make contact... Did the belt slip too?

You didn't say what brand of pump that was either...?

If i wasn't so hungover and struggling from the previous nights stupid decisions I might have had a chance of giving you the keys. It also had no PS belt and on semi's... it was such a prick to drive around town!!!

Crank looks fine. It's polished up and will be reused.

Yeah the belt slipped when the EX cam siezed in the head. The pistons and valves had sexy time because the pistons were not valve relieved and the lift on the cams (10.25 mm)

It was an N1 pump.

It only had to last a few more months. I was going to change it when the head came (which is next month)

Yeah the lack of PS was the main reason I wasn't too keen.

Sucks the pump didn't survive. I don't think there is such a thing as luck with performance cars. You can just count on everything going wrong when you least expect it too.

That head sounds and looks paaaawwwwwnn

Where and how much you get the brakes??

Looking to upgrade soon

England I got them from. A bloke on the pommie site had them on special but have since gone back up. Landed they were about $6000 after getting raped by customs!

I'll post some pics soon.

Yeah the lack of PS was the main reason I wasn't too keen.

Sucks the pump didn't survive. I don't think there is such a thing as luck with performance cars. You can just count on everything going wrong when you least expect it too.

Oh well. Take it for a belt at this years nationals if you're coming down.

England I got them from. A bloke on the pommie site had them on special but have since gone back up. Landed they were about $6000 after getting raped by customs!

I'll post some pics soon.

That's actually quite a good price for front and rears, cant wait to see them on the car

Such a shame it decided to lunch itself Paul.

I remember seeing your ride at unigroup and having a chat to you about it. (I just finished my 33 and brought it down to show the boys)

The new setup sounds even more impressive.

Paul, what did you do with your old brakes? Weren't they big enough? lol

Cant wait to see this up and running again

Nah, couldn't stop the prick at Wakefield (braking before the kink and still having issues).

They went to Milano (Aggroman).

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...