Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone :)

I've built a new Rb26 motor for my 34GTR, now the stocky one I yanked out is being eyed off by my younger bro who has a Gtt..

Before I help him with it transplanting it in, is it as simple as going / calling vic roads about the swap so they can put it on file or will I need an engineers cert? (Melbourne)

was told by a mate shouldn't be a problem and a cert wasn't needed along as the engine was an option in the range, but I just want to make sure :)

Cheers :action-smiley-069:

Yeah in NSW I remember reading something about changing displacement by a certain percentage is okay. But after calculating whatever that percentage was, an RB30 is not suitable for a car that comes with an RB25 but the RB26 is all G

meh, most people don't bother because no policeman/woman will read the engine number when they pull you over

Anyone who would consider swapping a 26 in place of a Neo 25 is not using their brain anyway.

Neo 25 is the superior choice of the two, straight up

Rb26 isn't really much of a street engine hey. VCT is awesome

by stocky I mean fully built engine making 490rwkw and FOC to him.. that's why he's keen.. :whistling:

iv'e gone a different single turbo path with the new 3lt motor.

not interested in what's better what else has to be done etc I was just wondering If anyone has swapped a 26 into a gtt / gt and been able to have it on the vicroads database with no certificate..thats all.. :yes:

not interested in what's better what else has to be done etc I was just wondering If anyone has swapped a 26 into a gtt / gt and been able to have it on the vicroads database with no certificate..thats all.. :yes:

Victoria = fully engineered for that conversion. Hell, in SA I had to put my car across the full Regency inspection routine and upgrade the brakes (and make sure every single aspect of the car was 100% legal) in order to get an RB25 transplant legal. Victoria are a pack of arseholes by comparison. You can only have 2 intake system mods without needing full engineering. How many such mods are involved in swapping in an RB26?

Edited by GTSBoy

In vic, you need to make a claim that the engine was offered in that model car.

The query really is that "model" = r34 Skyline, or is the "model" a GTR?

That's the point of contention.

For example, I had a N/A R34 GT. I put a RB25DET Neo into it, and some 33 GTST brakes.

I went to vicroads. I spoke to them and said "I have put this turbo engine into my car"

They checked the rego number. They looked at the brakes for about one millionth of a second and then updated the engine number.

That was it. No engineering cert required, no follow ups, no cost, nothing. In and out in 15 minutes.

I could conceive (having done it before!) that you could go there with a R34 coupe and say "this is a RB26, it came in this chassis" which it pretty much did.

Show some 324mm brakes (they wont measure, 310 is enough I'd wager) and they will probably just update the engine number and away you go. You can engineer almost any swap.

If someone gave me a 490KW forged RB26, I would be doing exactly what you're doing as you can make it EPA proof and Legally put it into a R34 GTT.

If you were starting from a base RB26 vs a RB25 neo, I wouldn't go that route - but that also isn't what you're doing.

I went to the one in Burwood, as I was working at HP at the time, which is literally directly across the road.

The law says you don't need an engineer certificate to put an engine in that was an option for that chassis.

But shit, even if you do need an engineer certificate and they knock you back? I'd just try and get one anyway, because that's going to be cheaper than buying a forged RB26 when you think about it.

Though if I was going to do that, I'd like to engineer a forged XR6T engine, because that'd be legal but a RB26/30 isn't, because GO VICTORIA!

  • Like 1

It didn't come in that chassis. If you get it "approved" by just lying to them to the effect that it "came in that chassis" and the dumb flamin mongrel behind teh counter just does it for you, it doesn't make it legal. That comes under the category of a clerical error and leaves you with no protection at all. You're hanging out to dry as far as 3rd party liability goes (ie, no insurance on an illegally modified/registered vehicle), plus your comprehensive insurance, should you have it, will have an opportunity to shaft you if you like.

There is only one way to get this stuff done properly, and that is properly. Anything that requires relying on counter staff ignorance might make you feel warm and fuzzy when you get the wool pulled over their eyes, but you better hope that nothing bad happens thereafter.

Edited by GTSBoy

It didn't come in that chassis. If you get it "approved" by just lying to them to the effect that it "came in that chassis" and the dumb flamin mongrel behind teh counter just does it for you, it doesn't make it legal. That comes under the category of a clerical error and leaves you with no protection at all. You're hanging out to dry as far as 3rd party liability goes (ie, no insurance on an illegally modified/registered vehicle), plus your comprehensive insurance, should you have it, will have an opportunity to shaft you if you like.

There is only one way to get this stuff done properly, and that is properly. Anything that requires relying on counter staff ignorance might make you feel warm and fuzzy when you get the wool pulled over their eyes, but you better hope that nothing bad happens thereafter.

Is it though?

I get what you're saying, and the 'best' option is to get it engineered, no questions asked, and for the cost, I'd probably do that anyway.

But you can put a V8 into a V6 commodore.

You can put a RB25DET Neo into a non turbo R34 (with brakes)

But there's a lot different between a GT and a GTT in my example. Different gearbox. Different steering, different suspension, different diff, different every other component in the car as I found out later. The only thing similar in the end (or exactly the same) is the chassis the panels sit on.

Is that not the same scenario for the GTR vs the GTT?

It's an interesting Ship of Thesus style thought experiment, really.

In the end, to be fully certain, I'd ask an Engineer, armed with the definition of what is required for a Legal engine swap in Victoria.

The exact wording is:

"Fitting a manufacturer's optional engine together with any associated components (e.g. brakes, suspension, etc) as supplied by the manufacturer for that same model vehicle"

Is 'model' = R34? or is 'model' = GT-R?

Keeping mind they also state you can put a XR8 engine into a XR6, the model would seem to be 'Ford Falcon' in that case.

In the end, I'd get an engineer's word before I even touched a wrench to move the engine, and have a certificate before you try and explain these definitions on the side of the road if someone wants to hand you a defect for it.

Yes it is different.

For one thing, V6 and V8 Dunnydores have the same chassis. The same model code.

NA and turbo Skylines have the same chassis. The differences are just window dressing and can be bolted on and off. The GTRs are considered (by the authorities) to be a completely different model code. And you cannot turn a GT into a GTR or vice versa by swapping parts.

So whilst we all know that the R32 or R33 or R34 part is technically the chassis identifier and therefore you could make an argument that a GTR and a normal Skyline only differ in the specifications, both we and the authorities know that the cars are sufficiently different that they treat them as if they are completely unrelated.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...