Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Really? That's one of the best thought out responses you are likely to get.

yeah man, I tend to have this thing where I kind of understand but don't, so need someone telling me a solid yes or no.

but other than that, got complete rb25det ready to be mashed up with the rb30 :P

What I meant was using an RB25 Neo turbo head and it's inlet manifold .

It's not an easy job grafting a RB26 inlet system onto any RB25 head and if driving conservatively much of the time I don't know why you'd bother . To me there is only two reasons anyone would ever go with an RB26 head and they are the shim under bucket lash system and the six throttle inlet manifold . The aims being valve train reliability at very high revs and sharp throttle response . Big revs is not a consideration for normal road driving and single throttle inlet systems work fine in these applications .

So basically yes I think an RB30DET based on the Neo turbo head would be easier to get better consumption from - particularly if you can get the static CR around 9.5 to 1 and run it on something better tan basic E10 or 91ULP fuel .

I'd also consider using a taller diff ratio like say 3.7 or 3.9 because doing close to 3000 revs at 110 km/h won't help consumption . A 20% larger engine can in theory pull 20% taller gearing which works out to be around a 3.29 diff ratio , not hard to see how that's a bit extreme so if you halved that to 10% it works out to be a 3.7 final drive ratio . Lighter VL Commodores with RB30Es (SOHC 9.5 CR) from memory had a 3.45 ratio final drive and something very similar to an RB20DET gearbox inc ratios .

A .

Edited by discopotato03

What I meant was using an RB25 Neo turbo head and it's inlet manifold .

It's not an easy job grafting a RB26 inlet system onto any RB25 head and if driving conservatively much of the time I don't know why you'd bother . To me there is only two reasons anyone would ever go with an RB26 head and they are the shim under bucket lash system and the six throttle inlet manifold . The aims being valve train reliability at very high revs and sharp throttle response . Big revs is not a consideration for normal road driving and single throttle inlet systems work fine in these applications .

So basically yes I think an RB30DET based on the Neo turbo head would be easier to get better consumption from - particularly if you can get the static CR around 9.5 to 1 and run it on something better tan basic E10 or 91ULP fuel .

I'd also consider using a taller diff ratio like say 3.7 or 3.9 because doing close to 3000 revs at 110 km/h won't help consumption . A 20% larger engine can in theory pull 20% taller gearing which works out to be around a 3.29 diff ratio , not hard to see how that's a bit extreme so if you halved that to 10% it works out to be a 3.7 final drive ratio . Lighter VL Commodores with RB30Es (SOHC 9.5 CR) from memory had a 3.45 ratio final drive and something very similar to an RB20DET gearbox inc ratios .

A .

thanks mate. my goal is to just gain more rwkw and better response in comparison to my NA RB25DE Neo without compromising fuel economy . no need for high revs as I've never gone over 5k rpm anyway.

What I meant was using an RB25 Neo turbo head and it's inlet manifold .

It's not an easy job grafting a RB26 inlet system onto any RB25 head and if driving conservatively much of the time I don't know why you'd bother . To me there is only two reasons anyone would ever go with an RB26 head and they are the shim under bucket lash system and the six throttle inlet manifold . The aims being valve train reliability at very high revs and sharp throttle response . Big revs is not a consideration for normal road driving and single throttle inlet systems work fine in these applications .

So basically yes I think an RB30DET based on the Neo turbo head would be easier to get better consumption from - particularly if you can get the static CR around 9.5 to 1 and run it on something better tan basic E10 or 91ULP fuel .

I'd also consider using a taller diff ratio like say 3.7 or 3.9 because doing close to 3000 revs at 110 km/h won't help consumption . A 20% larger engine can in theory pull 20% taller gearing which works out to be around a 3.29 diff ratio , not hard to see how that's a bit extreme so if you halved that to 10% it works out to be a 3.7 final drive ratio . Lighter VL Commodores with RB30Es (SOHC 9.5 CR) from memory had a 3.45 ratio final drive and something very similar to an RB20DET gearbox inc ratios .

A .

your memory must be failing you :-) rb30e sohc had 9:0 to 1 cr , not 9:5 to 1 due to cats piss 88 octane available at the time Edited by StevenCJR31

Yes well memory fades and yes we did start out with urea grade ULP .

Anyway torque is king IMO and getting it in a reasonably free spinning package can only be good . I hear people say that in basic terms the difference between an RB25 and an RB30 with the same lid/CR is about 500 revs . I think at the end of the day the head and manifolds have a large say in the total power potential and the capacity dictates at what engine speed you reach the top ends limits .

Obviously more cubes means more torque at the same revs or same torque at ~ 20% less revs than a 25 .

If you soft pedal most places with small throttle openings and lowish revs then the 30 is good because it will pull higher gears down there more easily than a 25 .

If you give it taller gearing , final drive , you will get a bit more speed in the gears and make the best of the extra low down torque . Life would be good cruising down the Hume at 110 doing 2500 revs and never having to change down . If you sized your turbo so its not trying to boost at these revs every time you touch the loud pedal and tune the engine properly it should get good consumption .

A .

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

    • Just trying to get my head around this. At 5psi of boost, you turn on your wmi pump, and then you're using a 3000cc injector, to allow flow upto the actual engine, where you have your 6x200cc injectors and a 500cc injector. If the above is correct, what advantage are you obtaining by having the 3000cc injector blocking flow, is this just incase a line breaks between that injector and the motor you can stop flow immediately? Or are the 6x200cc and 500cc less injectors and just spray nozzle?
    • Welcome! New member myself, but I had an R33 back in 2002. Best advice I could give, based on my experience: if you're running the factory turbo, be very conservative with boost. I made the mistake of just fiddling around with the boost controller and cranking the boost for fun, and the end result was my intake pipes popping off frequently from the constant deluge of oil that was being blown into the recirc by the stressed-out turbo, which itself was siphoning oil from the engine and farting it out both sides of its centre bearing (or something to that effect). If I could do it all again, I would have gotten a new turbo and had a tune dialled in professionally and then just left it alone! Funny you mention the metal shavings in the gearbox, as I had the same thing - the probe plug (magnetic drain plug, essentially) would come out caked with shavings. At least it was doing its job. Not sure if that's just sacrificial wear and part of the deal, or if my gearbox was shagged, but I wasn't abusing it. Enjoy the R33 - they're a dying breed, and if they weren't $35k+ on CarSales in Queensland, I might have picked up one of those again, instead of the 370GT I own now (though I'm loving the 370GT, that big 3.7L V6 just hits different).
    • Howdy folks. I owned an R33 back in 2002, which was thoroughly beyond my capacity (financially speaking) to maintain/insure, so we parted ways in 2004. Fast forward 21 years (to literally yesterday, in fact) and I'm now the proud owner of a 2007 V36 370GT. I'm happily surprised by how much power the VQ37VHR makes, compared to the RB25DET, considering the latter is turbocharged. I had planned to add a turbo at some point but I'm on the fence about whether I'll even need it (though I do love the sudden onset of extra torque). Any other 370GT owners around the traps, I'd love to hear about your experiences with this car (good and bad).
    • Perhaps the answer is... more jacks!* *proper jacks must be used.  
    • I NEVER think about using a scissor jack unless there is absolutely no other alternative. f**king things are dangerous, annoying and stupid.
×
×
  • Create New...