Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Put a V8 in it.

Or, you can turbo your RB30E, it's been done plenty of times. Have a search, look on the R31 Skyline Club as well.

If you want twin cam, drop an RB25DET in and do the wiring. Worry about 3L bottom end later.

But since you want a fast reliable car, spend $20k on a 25/30 + all other things required to make it reliable.

For a VL commodore :-) street use but powerful to make pretty good times on the 1/4 mile, so I want a fast realiable car

Cheap, reliable, fast,

You can only have two.

Actually he can have all 3, turbo the RB30E.

If it blows a replacement motor costs a case of beer, and we all know you don't need a DOHC head to make an RB30 perform.

Do the following:

high mount manifold (ask hypergear if BRAE make one and he can get you a discount)

50mm gate from hypergear

hypergear G3 turbo

fmic

tbe

adaptronic ecu (order from hypergear with your turbo and gate) + tune

decent injectors around 1kcc

regrind cam to a decent turbo profile (must be done to make decent power)

Totals about $6,000 if you shop smart.

Add another 2k if you plan to run an RB25 box. Another 1k for a clutch that will hold the power.

It may seem cheaper to slap in a stock RB25 but then you will only need to spend the above 6k on that to make it go fast once you are bored of 150rwkw.

I reckon that answers all your questions in one hit. Thread closed.

OP, before even considering anything why don't you just get that RB25DET running in the first place?

I saw in another post you were asking about "turbo pipe"... get the car running first, then build your knowledge by reading up 10000000000000000000000 other threads about power.

Cheap dirty 30 because as far as the authorities are concerned it has a 30 from the factory .

Anyone who's anyone would be less concerned about a twin cam VL than an RB30 in a Skyline 33 or 34 .

Build it up the std cheap way (rods/NA pistons) and with a Neo turbo head , smaller chambers , the CR should be manageable .

More part throttle torque in a 30 than a 25 and being 20% larger is in theory doing everything the 25 does at 7000 from under 6 . VLs have tall gearing

Lastly you lose the dinosaur distributor / cap / leads with twin cam heads .

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

    • 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...