Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

As for a power figure, when running 20+ psi and maxxed out i would ideally like it to make around 400kw.

But as the car will be used primarily for drifting when i drop it to the tuner (probably JEM or DVS Jez) i am just going to tell them to make it as safe as possible and i don't care how much power (within reason) has to be sacrificed. I think it should make 300kw on an ultra safe tune. Is all this possible with a Hypergear SS2?

I'm doing this on a 2.8 atm, GTX3076 with .82 externally gated off the stock manifold. Should be very responsive.

Whats an ETA on the finish date? Is it a stroked 26 or 25? I presume you mean a standard 25 manifold.

After seeing all the RB2530 results with GT35's it has me a little nervous the old GT30 will be struggling up top.

Stroked 25, running an auto box though. He is hoping for a responsive 350kw, should probably just do 400kw on a manual car with no restrictions, you may want the 1.06 rear though, and must be external gated.

As for a power figure, when running 20+ psi and maxxed out i would ideally like it to make around 400kw.

But as the car will be used primarily for drifting when i drop it to the tuner (probably JEM or DVS Jez) i am just going to tell them to make it as safe as possible and i don't care how much power (within reason) has to be sacrificed. I think it should make 300kw on an ultra safe tune. Is all this possible with a Hypergear SS2?

The SS2 won't be making 400rwkws. It will get you a super responsive 360rwkws mark on E85 fuel working with RB30det engine. You will be looking at SS3 or SS4 for some thing 400rwkws+. Also I'm not too sure how doable it is on stock manifold, might need to run a proper high mount.

The SS2 won't be making 400rwkws. It will get you a super responsive 360rwkws mark on E85 fuel working with RB30det engine. You will be looking at SS3 or SS4 for some thing 400rwkws+. Also I'm not too sure how doable it is on stock manifold, might need to run a proper high mount.

I thought as much. Would have been nice to crack 400 but i thought it would run out of puff. Out of your turbos what would you recommend for just being able to crack 400kw? IE what turbo would be maxing out at around 400, as most of the time i would be running much less than that and would like it as responsive as possible.

Edited by iruvyouskyrine

Currently have an RB25/30DET with ~9:1 CR CP Pistons, little to no head work done (R32 RB25DE head), with Tomei 256°/8.5mm cams. GT3076R strapped to the side of it (I bought Cubes' turbo off him!).

Car made 281RWKW @ 18 PSI on a pretty conservative dyno (Jaustech) - dyno plot is in the RB30 Dyno thread/sticky img-301131610-0001 (2).pdf

Realistically, if I had more AFM (Q45 @ 5.1V) and bigger injectors (was at about 90%) it would have hit the 300 easy with good boost control. But tbh, I didn't care about the number as all I was after was response. Makes ~220-230 RWKW @ 4000RPM which is far more than my diff and tyres can handle.

Only regret I have is not using a Neo head for the build. Would have meant I could achieve around 9:1 CR with a stock bottom end and the head is better anyway. Also would have meant I could run VCT :)

Edited by R32Abuser

I thought as much. Would have been nice to crack 400 but i thought it would run out of puff. Out of your turbos what would you recommend for just being able to crack 400kw? IE what turbo would be maxing out at around 400, as most of the time i would be running much less than that and would like it as responsive as possible.

For this size engine you can run a SS-4 turbo. That maxed at 435rwkws. It is more responsive then a 3582 also.

Hi #@R32Abuser thanks for that mate :)

Sorry for this but here come the questions haha

What size rear housing is the 3076 running?

And i'm guessing it is revving to 7000 RPM?

98 or E85?

Certainly a nice looking graph either way, mine should look even better with 9.5 CR and VCT! I'm thinking i should just stop worrying about numbers and enjoy the car when it's done. I'm sure it will fry tyres just fine.

What size rear housing is the 3076 running? 0.82 Rear

98 or E85? BP98

Cutout at 7000RPM. That said the thing was starting to nose over up top anyway.

VCT would be awesome - well worth the small amount of effort. 9.5:1 is definately getting up there in terms of Static CR.

Initially, I was having big issues with the motor pinging not being able to take more than about 8 degrees of advance. I thought it was CR initially and that the builder had f**ked up. Long story short, went to another tuner and made more power and no pinging (using knock ears).

  • 1 month later...

Uppers are the way to go.

Those oil restrictors, if rebuilding i dont knock the new ones over the old, i pull the old one out, you would be surprised how much gunk collects under them, i knock the new one in after cleaning the block.

Yeah i wouldn't be surpsised to see a fair bit of stuff there after 20 years of running. Unfortunately it's too late now as the head is already on haha, this bottom end was untouched anyway. If it was doing a bottom end rebuild i would pull them out for sure!

Okay i have what is hopefully the last quiestion.

I have this from Simon that was posted in another thread

its easy as... drop the sump, then undo the large pressure relief valve nut, inside is a spring and a ball bearing. leave them there, then get 2xm6 flat washers (i used spring washers and then bent them in vice to become flat) and place 2 of them on top of the spring and then refit the cap. reseal the sump.

should get an extra 20psi out of it.

I had my engine on a stand when i removed the relief valve. I was careful to remove the nut and spring carefully, but then as i placed them down something else fell out. It looks like a bucket type thing, will post a pic in a second. But can anyone tell me which direction and order these things go back in. Annoying because i tried hard to keep it all together i just didnt realize there was another thing in there. Also i don't know what ball bearing simon is talking about, i can't see one in there.

That looks pretty well like it. So what Simon is saying is stick your washer or two in the seat under the spring in the screw in plug. Good job so far.

Only thing I would do is add a crankcase vent off the sump somewhere (typically intake side above oil level) while the engine is outside of the car. Even if you don't use it, its there for later on.

Yeah I was sure that's the way it went back together. I added 2x M6 washers which added an extra 3mm preload to the spring.

Also got the crankcase ventilation sorted, got my sump baffled and trapdoors added. Also got 2x -10 AN fittings welded to the sump :)

post-84937-14042973476451_thumb.jpg

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

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...