Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 1 month later...
Oh i think a good contender would have to be the JUN spec R34 GTR

http://private.carsales.com.au/photos/386294.jpg

ps. Was built by speedworks

It is 3rd fastest but had a major engine blowup on the drag strip.

ND4SPD is first Jade fisher is second 34 shares 3rd with the 33 from bunbury.

Long intake runners are a definite advantage for low end and mid range torque

i think this is debatable... since you havent got any data to back this up, i'll refer to what others have already bought up.. the rb20 article in zoom that compared the long runner inlet manifold to the short runner gtr manifold. the graph clearly showed that the short runner manifold had more power down low but lost it up top, where as the long runner manifold was the exact opposite.. in fact from what i remember approx half way through the rev range the graphs crossed, at rpms over that crossover the long runner manifold was up in power and below that crossover the short runner manifold was clearly ahead in power

also something to consider, its commonly known that the greddy manifold for sr20det's gives SFA difference to the stock ones for 99% of cars out there... so what im saying is, and this is my opinion, that the stock ones are damn good at what they do, which doesnt leave much room for the aftermarket to improve on... not until airflow figures go waay past the stock parameters they were first designed for anyways

Interesting reading guys. If everyone had the same opinions about what is best we would all still be driving around in model T Fords.

I don't know if this should be a new thread or not but I have an engine here for my own car and one for a customer, both are RB30 block, RB26 head, neither have any intake manifolding at all. Both will be single turbo, t55'ish. Aiming for around the 700hp or so mark, mine will be auto, mostly for drag use.

So, starting with nothing, what would the people who know use? I'm not so interested in what someone read in a magazine but more some real world knowledge. I have a flowbench here and can test myself but I'd like a starting point which will save quite a few dollars.

Mine was no probs either , bolted up like it was factory - because it is . No offence but that system will suffer reversion problems particularly with big cams . Manufacturers go to a lot of trouble to get performance from sporty cam profiles hence V tech or in Nissans case at the time single throttle per cylinder and slightly more agressive cams . There is virtually no communication between the ports on closed throttle . Single throttle plenum EFI manifolds to a degree join up all the inlet ports and are mild mannered with mild cams only . With that scenario and short overlap cams the trapping efficiency is good . With racier profiles most inlet ports and valves flow surprisingly well in the wrong direction . When there's a physical barrier like a throttle plate blocking the reverse pressure wave its got nowhere to go but back in . If any of you have ever tried to live with the racy cam and single throttle set up it gets very tiresome with your daily driver in metropolitan traffic situations . The GTR Skyline and GTIR Pulsar both use the same style of inlet system , both were homologation specials developed at some considerable cost to Nissan . I think the extreme drag teams go with the big single throttle because for very high revs and airflow its the cheap simple way to go . I've no doubt it could be done just as well with six throttles and an ample plenum . Some claim that manifold absolute pressure load sensing ECU's get better signal from the "Big Log" , SK has examples of more than adequate power levels from Mass Air Sensing ECU's . Its beyond me why people spend more than the cost of a GTR head and inlet trying to re-invent the wheel , not cost effective .

Hey Discopotato,

No offence taken, but just for the record 2 of my freinds both running the same intake setup as myself & massive cams have no problems at all. To be perfectly honest with you i dont realy understand what you have said above, what i do understand is "It works, & works very well" (Very streetable cars, there daily drivers), and also is very cost effective. (My head set me back $500.00, +300.00 for RB26 plenum) please PM me a phone number if you can find me a RB26 head & intake for under 1K. You will find alot of people do this because they dont have the $$ for a RB26 head & intake setup, After all if we all had the $$ im sure not to many of us, including myself would bother fabricating RB26plenum to a RB25Manifold.

:P

Trev

No offence but that system will suffer reversion problems particularly with big cams.

Has anyone calculated the ideal runner lengths to counter inversion pressure waves at the various rev ranges (frequencies) for low middle and high end torque for use with the GTR plenum volume and a range of cam lifts and overlaps? I'd be inclined to consider that plenum as an infinite chamber for ease of calculation initially if you use a single throttle body. Maybe one day I'll get of the fat blurter to make an excel based tool.

Also has anyone considered the benefits of a twin throttle setup a'la the Zoom Excel that responded very dramatically some years ago? Is the throttle body a large enough restriction? My thoughts are to put 2 RB25 throttle bodies on a RB25 plenum equidistant from the centreline.

My personal interest is in a forward facing plenum so I can fit a GTR strut brace, as it won't fit with the current plenum.

Give me the $20,000 software and ill model it:) Problem is even with the right software, the model is only as accurate as the assumptions you have made in modelling it. You can use motion analysis software with functioning valves....or use soem rule of thumb calcs for runner length and diam, which are meant to be a good ball park starting point.

LOL...before all my RB20 probs i was going to extrude hone the std plenum and weld up another throttle body. (To see if with the cams and bigger turbo the plenum/throttle was a restriction?!?!?!0

Had the cables etc all sussed, but then lost interest in thinkering when it became a major drama to get the car back on the road. People say it wont make jack difference, but id still like to try. Notice that the NA RB25 NEO has a single throttle body but is connected to the inlet manifold in two places, ie throttle body is above exhaust cam not inlet cam, and over the rocker cover the airflow splits in two?!?!?!?!?!?!

Id love to be unemployed and try these things out Mon-Fri...cant wait to win Powerball.

Give me the $20,000 software and ill model it:) .
I don't think I'd give you a stale fish to slap yourself with mate (just trying to maintain some contention in the forums) :D Actually just get an employer who will let you get away with buying this sort of product. I almost did but instead we put an armoured vehicle in a wind tunnel with greater than 1/3 blockage ratio. Only cost 200+K when the software would be a lot cheaper.
Id love to be unemployed and try these things out Mon-Fri...cant wait to win Powerball.
As I said, the right employer. Maybe time for a job change.

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

    • Let's be honest, most of the people designing parts like the above, aren't engineers. Sometimes they come from disciplines that gives them more qualitative feel for design than quantitive, however, plenty of them have just picked up a license to Fusion and started making things. And that's the honest part about the majority of these guys making parts like that, they don't have huge R&D teams and heaps of time or experience working out the numbers on it. Shit, most smaller teams that do have real engineers still roll with "yeah, it should be okay, and does the job, let's make them and just see"...   The smaller guys like KiwiCNC, aren't the likes of Bosch etc with proper engineering procedures, and oversights, and sign off. As such, it's why they can produce a product to market a lot quicker, but it always comes back to, question it all.   I'm still not a fan of that bolt on piece. Why not just machine it all in one go? With the right design it's possible. The only reason I can see is if they want different heights/length for the tie rod to bolt to. And if they have the cncs themselves,they can easily offer that exact feature, and just machine it all in one go. 
    • The roof is wrapped
    • This is how I last did this when I had a master cylinder fail and introduce air. Bleed before first stage, go oh shit through first stage, bleed at end of first stage, go oh shit through second stage, bleed at end of second stage, go oh shit through third stage, bleed at end of third stage, go oh shit through fourth stage, bleed at lunch, go oh shit through fifth stage, bleed at end of fifth stage, go oh shit through sixth stage....you get the idea. It did come good in the end. My Topdon scan tool can bleed the HY51 and V37, but it doesn't have a consult connector and I don't have an R34 to check that on. I think finding a tool in an Australian workshop other than Nissan that can bleed an R34 will be like rocking horse poo. No way will a generic ODB tool do it.
    • Hmm. Perhaps not the same engineers. The OE Nissan engineers did not forsee a future with spacers pushing the tie rod force application further away from the steering arm and creating that torque. The failures are happening since the advent of those things, and some 30 years after they designed the uprights. So latent casting deficiencies, 30+ yrs of wear and tear, + unexpected usage could quite easily = unforeseen failure. Meanwhile, the engineers who are designing the billet CNC or fabricated uprights are also designing, for the same parts makers, the correction tie rod ends. And they are designing and building these with motorsport (or, at the very least, the meth addled antics of drifters) in mind. So I would hope (in fact, I would expect) that their design work included the offset of that steering force. Doesn't mean that it is not totally valid to ask the question of them, before committing $$.
    • The downside of this is when you try to track the car, as soon as you hit ABS you get introduced to a unbled system. I want to avoid this. I do not want to bleed/flush/jack up the car twice just to bleed the f**kin car.
×
×
  • Create New...