Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Unless your chasing massive HP then don't unless your cylinder wall are stuff.

Generally sleeving gives more strenght when quality sleeves are used and fitted by a competant machine shop"rare"

There are quite a few big hp rb26 running around with sleeve, but most of them aren't into discussing about what they've done.

Talk to a machine good shop and see their view.

I don`t have a block at the moment. The one from my car has nice big holes in both sides. The problem is finding a block that is still at standard bore or a maximum of 0.5mm over. I am chasing around 700 flywheel hp from this engine so do not want a block that is over 86.5mm bore.

Cheers, Dror

Sydneykid,

Have you not had any problems at this power level with a block overbored that far? I had been warned that the cylinder walls would crack at this sort of power.

Cheers, Dror

Only done 11 engines that bore size, no problems so far. :D

We have seen 87mm bore RB26s with cracks .we use std or .5mm over bore in very high powered RBs.We use new blocks when the budget allows at a cost of around 2k but remember that much of the machining is already done so some cost is recovered there.

500rwhp is the max we run 87-88mm at.The block flexes and cracks exturnaly on large bore motors and loose power due to bore flex.

We have seen 87mm bore RB26s with cracks .we use std or .5mm over bore in very high powered RBs.We use new blocks when the budget allows at a cost of around 2k but remember that much of the machining is already done so some cost is recovered there.  500rwhp is the max we run 87-88mm at.The block flexes and cracks exturnaly on large bore motors and loose power due to bore flex.

It is interesting how even very skilled people can have differing opinions and experiences. I have seen 86 mm (standard) bores with cracks as well, I don't believe that the bore size is the only reason. Temperature management, machining tolerances, metallurgy, boost pressure and parts used have as much to do with it as arbitrarily limiting bore sizes. Plus we never use "new" blocks, I much prefer an aged one. The more heat cycles they have seen, the higher chance there is that any manufacturing (and casting) stresses are long gone.

I like it when people have differing opinions, makes for an interesting discussion. :D

  • 10 months later...

can a rb30 block be fully boared out (to like 94mm) and have a full new sleve put in to run 89-90mm pistons? it would seal the water jacket at the top and bottom of block,

what do the os gikin boys do when resleeving there n1 blocks with the rb30 kit? does it rmove the whole existing sleeve or just enought to press in?

when a rb engine is re-sleeved is it fully bores out or not?

i did the maths checking out spaing etc, i could use 92mm pistons if this works, and have new sleeves and sill have 2mm of bore around hole cyl (is 2mm enought) idd say 90mm a reliaty tho, 87x90=3320cc nice

can a rb30 block be fully boared out (to like 94mm) and have a full new sleve put in to run 89-90mm pistons? it would seal the water jacket at the top and bottom of block,  

what do the os gikin boys do when resleeving there n1 blocks with the rb30 kit? does it rmove the whole existing sleeve or just enought to press in?

when a rb engine is re-sleeved is it fully bores out or not?

i did the maths checking out spaing etc, i could use 92mm pistons if this works, and have new sleeves and sill have 2mm of bore around hole cyl (is 2mm enought) idd say 90mm a reliaty tho, 87x90=3320cc nice

Adventurous, and I have no idea. RB30 blocks are cheap, all I can suggest is to try boring one cylinder and see how far you can go. It may also be worthwhile to check the cylinder head first. I don't think the water jacket will allow the combustion chamber to be much bigger than 88 mm. There would be no head gasket sealing surface.

From memory the OS Giken 3 Litre liners are around 5 mm thick at 86 mm bore, so that's ~96 mm OD.

:P

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

    • Welcome!  Car sounds great, anypics ?
    • Welcome.  800hp should be a bit of weekend fun!
    • I'm going with "Just run two gates". Fix the problem conclusively. It's the only way you'd ever truly know, right?. This is all pretty much splitting hairs. Even the extreme example where it takes two whole seconds at 100kmh or something sounds monstrously dubious. And anyway, when you're punching the throttle when you 'need' this power, you aren't at 2800rpm in the wrong gear. Test it at 5600rpm in 3rd gear, when you're traction limited punching out of a sweeper. Much difference there when you account for traction?
    • And the full R32 GTR wiring diagrams are also freely available. Hmm.... there's supposed to be an auto replace that would have linked the thread. Here it is, manually  
    • Ahh...should have been clearer ~ there's 2 ... SMJ = super multi junction (connector)...   ...this is connector 6 & 25 in above image -- body harness to engine loom (6) & body harness to main loom (25) Headlights go to front via connector 6 ; fuel gauge goes to tank sender via connector 25  ...like I say this is R33 diagrams, but at a pinch R34 won't be too far different. *IF* the two ground faults are related, this can be the only place where both wires converge (as one runs to the back, the other to the front)... ....thing is, you probably need to establish if the faults are related (unless you examine that area and find obvious chaffing on the looms there to body ground)....*IF* the fuel gauge is still broken (full needle deflection), I'd be headed for the boot, remove fuel sender wire, key on and measure the voltage there ~ it should be roughly 10volts. If that's ok, check sender to ground resistance...if this is a dead short to ground (and there's fuel in it), then sender has failed or something funky has happened to wiring in the tank. edit: ahh...rereading the thread, this is R32....above fuel sender test still valid tho'
×
×
  • Create New...