Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys just a noob question here... When we dropped the engine into my R32 rb20de some how two pipes got stuffed up on the plenum and no one can seam to figure out how haha..

These two pipes on the plenum were are they meant to run to ?

And the second one is a little valve on the back of the plenum?

Thanks for any help in advanced.. Last thing left on this build!

post-139471-0-21199900-1434083903_thumb.jpg

post-139471-0-87595900-1434084017_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/457418-plenum-pipe-issues/
Share on other sites

The upper one on the plenum goes to the nipple where the plenum meet the head right at the upper right of the cylinder one runner.

The lower one goes to the water pump if my memory serves me right. I need to check that on the pics I got. Will confirm this later.

The little pipe on the pressure regulator need to be plugged into the plenum. There is apparently to type of fuel rail on the rb20, one with only one fuel pressure régulator at the exit, and a second one with one at the entry and a second at the exit.

Both need to be pressure referenced to the plenum.

Well with the top pipe removed you don't feed water to the "water rail" on the top of the runners, so it seems that the intake manifold gasket is leaking. Pretty badly I'd say if making the water flowing in the bloc/head is sufficient to fill the cylinder.

Would it matter / cause Any damage if I was to keep this perminatly blocked off?

That is until a later date that I redo all my gaskets.

Bearing in mind the engine is only being used on the track for 60km sprints one a month?

Cheers.

If you do not have the problem without the upper hose, it means that the coolant circuit is not bleeded properly so you can't run it like that.

If you do it anyway, the gasket could broke entirely and you risk a hydrolock and/or an overheating of the engine because of the non bleeded coolant circuit.

So no it's not really a good idea to run it like that.

All right looks like I rip the plenum and air intake manifold off this week and find the issue :3 cheers for your help!

Just found a oil leak too... Is there a easy way to get the oil filter housing off without removing the engine ?

This is the gasket where the runner meet the head that need to be changed not only the upper part of the plenum.

Once the runners off you'll have all the space needed to fix your oil leak too.

Os for the hoses yes it's right the way it's is plumbed. This is the idle/fast idle air circuit.

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'm going to slap an old nismo logo sticker on my spare one and sell it to the land of the free for a thousand bucks
    • lol, probably should have read further!
    • Well - they have arrived.  And they are easy on the eye to put it mildly... These only have three bolts - but for a start there is a key that fits with vacuum like precision..  And as you can see by my ruler, the interface is large..   I listened to a podcast on HP Academy about Dan (KiwiCNC) and I'm more than comfortable he knows what he is doing. R35 Bearing assembly should arrive later today so can mock that up for a look. Can't wait to get these on and get some brake pressure logging too. IMG_3860.MP4
    • I would be very confident that they are the same parts (the 2 different SKUs). It seems very clear that you can drop the cam in the 2-way opening, or in the other opening. If you arrange it in the other opening in the same way that you see any other 1-way diff, ie, with the flat of the cam up against the 1° side of the opening, then it would work as a 1-way. It can only spread the ramps when driving forwards - cannot spread the ramps on overrun. It would then appear obvious that if you put the cam into the opening "backwards", that you would get the angled flats of the cam working onto the "points" of the 1° side of the opening, which would give you ramp spread in both loading directions. I do wonder if the forward direction of the 1.5-way config is equivalent to the forward direction of the 2-way, seeing as the cams are flipped and the angled surfaces on those would need to be the same on each side - AND - clearly when installed in either the 2-way or 1-1ay configuration they are not intended to work exactly the same (the ramp angles on the 2-way are 10° different between forward and backward, and the ramp doesn't exist in the 1-way config). 'twere me, I think I would rather actually have a set of rings that offered the 2-way with two different sets of ramp angles, say the 55/45 of the existing design and maybe a 45/37.5 combo for a less aggressive effect), AND another set of rings with a dedicated 1.5-way opening and a dedicated 1-way opening. The 1.5-way opening would actually have the steeper angle on the overdrive side that causes it to be less pushy than the forward drive angle, like you see in many other diffs. But really - if this Nismo thing is thought out properly and all those surfaces work on each other the way that they need to, who am I to argue?
    • I would be very confident that they are the same parts (the 2 different SKUs). It seems very clear that you can drop the cam in the 2-way opening, or in the other opening. If you arrange it in the other opening in the same way that you see any other 1-way diff, ie, with the flat of the cam up against the 1° side of the opening, then it would work as a 1-way. It can only spread the ramps when driving forwards - cannot spread the ramps on overrun. It would then appear obvious that if you put the cam into the opening "backwards", that you would get the angled flats of the cam working onto the "points" of the 1° side of the opening, which would give you ramp spread in both loading directions. I do wonder if the forward direction of the 1.5-way config is equivalent to the forward direction of the 2-way, seeing as the cams are flipped and the angled surfaces on those would need to be the same on each side - AND - clearly when installed in either the 2-way or 1-1ay configuration they are not intended to work exactly the same (the ramp angles on the 2-way are 10° different between forward and backward, and the ramp doesn't exist in the 1-way config). 'twere me, I think I would rather actually have a set of rings that offered the 2-way with two different sets of ramp angles, say the 55/45 of the existing design and maybe a 45/37.5 combo for a less aggressive effect), AND another set of rings with a dedicated 1.5-way opening and a dedicated 1-way opening. The 1.5-way opening would actually have the steeper angle on the overdrive side that causes it to be less pushy than the forward drive angle, like you see in many other diffs. But really - if this Nismo thing is thought out properly and all those surfaces work on each other the way that they need to, who am I to argue?
×
×
  • Create New...