Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yeah the next package will be pure insanity and super special i cant wait!

I can tell you from the drivers seat that the 2.8L is absolutely insane it free revs like an roadbike engine! A tiny blip on the throttle and the needle shoots off to redline as quick as you can blink! In any gear from 2nd gear and 4000rpm HANG THE f**k ON to that steering wheel as shit around you gets blurry and things start coming up REALLY fast!

Ive been in all kinds of wound up stock 2.6s and nothing is remotely as ferocious as this thing is! If you think that your 500kw 2.6L will touch this car you're dreaming as it just makes grunt like nothing I've ever experienced its sad to see it go as it really is a rare engine and theres definitely not another engine around like this thing.

buy it then

this ^ has now got me intrigued

Im gonna guess and say that he's going for RB 3.5, with GTX2863r with -5 comp housings, OS88 tranny in an R34 GTR

Nope.

The same head (still need to work out if I take out both squish pads or just the intake like this one had), OS 3.15, V cam with a EFR 8374 or 9180 hanging off the side of it.

I just need to sell this engine first so I can order the bottom end and get the head started. I spoke to Marcus last night about it all. I'll just buy a brand new stock head in Japan to save shipping costs and do what needs to be done over there. Cams, springs, retainers and assembly can be done here. Plonk it on the bottom end and just wait for the right car to pop up.

Box, brakes, ECU, intercooler, front and rear diffs, suspension arms and suspension itself will be taken from the 33 as it all bolts straight in. It's always been the plan so the effort that I've put into the 33 isn't in vain. Pretty much the outlay will only be for the car itself. 90% of the parts I either have or will be already covered by the sale of what I have now (IE engine).

If I put the box in the 33 I'll just never do it so it's pretty much a now or never.

I did some rough calcs assuming I used the same head as I have (intake squish removed only) and assuming a 0 deck height (still waiting on confirmation from OS GIKEN as to what it is) with the Nismo 0.9 mm gasket. Compression was 9.88:1. Sounds good to me with it running on E85. On petrol I'll have to pull boost out of it but who gives a shit.

It's not going to happen overnight but there will be no shortcuts, "hurry I need to make an event" or "rushed jobs".

  • Like 1

Nope.

The same head (still need to work out if I take out both squish pads or just the intake like this one had), OS 3.15, V cam with a EFR 8374 or 9180 hanging off the side of it.

I just need to sell this engine first so I can order the bottom end and get the head started. I spoke to Marcus last night about it all. I'll just buy a brand new stock head in Japan to save shipping costs and do what needs to be done over there. Cams, springs, retainers and assembly can be done here. Plonk it on the bottom end and just wait for the right car to pop up.

Box, brakes, ECU, intercooler, front and rear diffs, suspension arms and suspension itself will be taken from the 33 as it all bolts straight in. It's always been the plan so the effort that I've put into the 33 isn't in vain. Pretty much the outlay will only be for the car itself. 90% of the parts I either have or will be already covered by the sale of what I have now (IE engine).

If I put the box in the 33 I'll just never do it so it's pretty much a now or never.

I did some rough calcs assuming I used the same head as I have (intake squish removed only) and assuming a 0 deck height (still waiting on confirmation from OS GIKEN as to what it is) with the Nismo 0.9 mm gasket. Compression was 9.88:1. Sounds good to me with it running on E85. On petrol I'll have to pull boost out of it but who gives a shit.

It's not going to happen overnight but there will be no shortcuts, "hurry I need to make an event" or "rushed jobs".

why don't you just keep the head you already have Paul instead of doing it all over again. That would save you a considerable amount of cash and time.

why don't you just keep the head you already have Paul instead of doing it all over again. That would save you a considerable amount of cash and time.

Because the bloke that wants it, wants the head also.

Because the bloke that wants it, wants the head also.

You must have something very special in mind if you are selling THAT HEAD !

You said it was the best head job you ever had :wub:

Edited by Nismo 3.2ish
  • Like 2

Try build it for that price though, good luck!

Wasn't advertised, just word of mouth and went to very appreciative owner.

What people don't get is that to get the sort of responsive power that Pauls engine has costs $$$ and time.

Anyone can build a peak power engine but to build one that gives you that nice big fat torque hit sorts the real engine builders out from the wannabees. Straight line grunt, pfft...you want a drivers car that gives race engine performance every time the loud pedal gets touched and will do it all day long.

You can bang your head all day arguing the point but proof is best kept to actual bum in seat feel but all passengers must wear a nappy as you'll soon get sick of cleaning shit stains off the passenger seat.

What Paul's planning now will be a very special and unique package and engines like these are far and few between because there are no short cuts, plain and simple they cost $$$, a lot of time and frustration.

post-26741-14269917278742_thumb.jpg

:D:D:D

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...

So with this new build Paul, have you considered getting GTRNUR (sorry don't know his real name) to do you up one of his big open deck spacer engines to retain your flash RRR block and your head you already have? Or is it not going to be a cost effective way of looking at it?

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...

So with this new build Paul, have you considered getting GTRNUR (sorry don't know his real name) to do you up one of his big open deck spacer engines to retain your flash RRR block and your head you already have? Or is it not going to be a cost effective way of looking at it?

I have a few guys interested in my engine so it needs to go complete.

I'd like to retain the GT block but it's will just complicate things and make it all soooo much more expensive.

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...