Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi I recently have started my build on my rb25det and the block is at the machine shop. But I am now onto the cylinder head and that is were I am having problems, basically I am trying to find out if I should port the cylinder head. I want to make 450-500hp and I was wondering if I can do without porting. I was thinking about removing the humps in the exhaust ports but what about porting the bowls, should I leave it or make a better transition from valve seat to casting. Btw the machinist is going to use a 3 axis valve seat grinder. Also I found some engine manuals for the cylinder head but non of them for the rb25det has any info on valves and valve seat clearances just a basic cylinder head disassemble that does not include removing valves, so if any one has any tech sheets that would be great as the cylinder head is next to go to machine shop.

Thanks

Richard

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/450907-rb25det-cylinder-head-porting/
Share on other sites

You can most certainly do without porting for that power figure. I made that power, as have many others before you - stock head and on PULP. If you plan on using E85 then it's a piece of piss.

All comes down to how deep your pockets are mate, and what the overall budget is. You can certainly save money on that if you need to spend it elsewhere.

I'd just do a quick clean up around the throat/seat area if keen .

You can fit slightly oversized exhaust valves with a bit of machining on the existing valve seats . All RB25 and 26 twin cam heads are a tad down on exhaust valve size and if you re do the exhaust valve seats they can be done for the OS valves in one go . Ferrea and one of the other mobs do them but I don't have part numbers .

I did this and had no power loss . The current trends with turbo engines is to do everything possible to free up the exhaust side so the engine runs more efficiently when on boost .

There is a supposed valve head area ratio exhaust to inlet and I can't remember accurately the numbers but the RBs end up being a tad small in the calc .

Doing this is a bit like having a very mild exhaust cam upgrade but no valve train geometry changes .

Works for me , cheers A .

Hi guys thanks for all the info. Btw I forgot to mention that I do not have e85 were I live, we only have 92-93 octane fuel so I was thinking of maybe running water/meth injection. I was also planning on putting valve springs and retainers in as well and keep every thing else stock.

Thanks

The first cm into the exhaust and intake port is the most critical on the short side, remove a valve and run your finger in there, you will feel a sharpish ridge that needs to be smoothed.

Removing the exhaust lumps also helps.

Dont make the ports any bigger as it will reduce gas velocity. (unless its a all out drag engine)

A basic port cleanup can go a long way.

Sure you can make good power without all this, need more power, run more boost, then again wouldnt you prefer to make it with lower boost levels and a turbo coming on quicker and stronger ....

Thats the most critical area, its the first cm or 2 i spoke of near the valve.

On both intake and exhaust, concentrate on the short side, on the intake its all around near the valve seat that needs work to smoothen the transition to the vavle seat.

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

    • @Kapr Haha yeah thats the one. I missed that you had a built up engine, I wouldn't want to run it on there either then. It was good in my situation just to replace the original turbo on a stock engine. @MBS206Yep definitely not a replacement for anything name brand
    • You are selling this? I have never bought something from marketplace...i dont know if i trust that enough. And the price is little bit "too" good...
    • https://www.facebook.com/share/19kSVAc4tc/?mibextid=wwXIfr
    • It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about. Reliability of everything in a 34 drops MASSIVELY above the 300kw mark. Keeping everything going great at beyond that value will cost ten times the $. Clutches become shit, gearboxes (and engines/bottom ends) become consumable, traction becomes crap. The good news is looking legalish/actually being legal is slighly under the 300kw mark. I would make the assumption you want to ditch the stock plenum too and want to go a front facing unit of some description due to the cross flow. Do the bends on a return flow hurt? Not really. A couple of bends do make a difference but not nearly as much in a forced induction situation. Add 1psi of boost to overcome it. Nobody has ever gone and done a track session monitoring IAT then done a different session on a different intercooler and monitored IAT to see the difference here. All of the benefits here are likely in the "My engine is a forged consumable that I drive once a year because it needs a rebuild every year which takes 9 months of the year to complete" territory. It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about with this car.
    • By "reverse flow", do you mean "return flow"? Being the IC having a return pipe back behind the bumper reo, or similar? If so... I am currently making ~250 rwkW on a Neo at ~17-18 psi. With a return flow. There's nothing to indicate that it is costing me a lot of power at this level, and I would be surprised if I could not push it harder. True, I have not measured pressure drop across it or IAT changes, but the car does not seem upset about it in any way. I won't be bothering to look into it unless it starts giving trouble or doesn't respond to boost increases when I next put it on the dyno. FWIW, it was tuned with the boost controller off, so achieving ~15-16 psi on the wastegate spring alone, and it is noticeably quicker with the boost controller on and yielding a couple of extra pounds. Hence why I think it is doing OK. So, no, I would not arbitrarily say that return flows are restrictive. Yes, they are certainly restrictive if you're aiming for higher power levels. But I also think that the happy place for a street car is <300 rwkW anyway, so I'm not going to be aiming for power levels that would require me to change the inlet pipework. My car looks very stock, even though everything is different. The turbo and inlet pipes all look stock and run in the stock locations, The airbox looks stock (apart from the inlet being opened up). The turbo looks stock, because it's in the stock location, is the stock housings and can't really be seen anyway. It makes enough power to be good to drive, but won't raise eyebrows if I ever f**k up enough for the cops to lift the bonnet.
×
×
  • Create New...