Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So im trying to refresh my setup to get more response, torque, this is purely a drift car, but i cant seem to decide what would work out to achieve my goals.... I was planning to get tomei cams, 260 9.15mm, but as far as ive seen the stock ones give a better low end/mid torque setup, springs and retainers ill hold it off for now since i dont wanna rev more, i want low end torque.... exhaust manifold ive been reading that the stock one being a log style, would give better spool.... only thing that comes to mind right now is a standalone ecu and switch from 100 octane to VP fuels 109 octane or VP 113 with lead and give it more timing.... maybe even switch the headgasket to a thinner one to get 10.5:1 CR

 

What are the options for these engines to improve it torque wise and in the low rpm range?

 

RB25 Neo specs:

-Rb26 Crank, CP 26 Pistons, Eagle rods

-RB25 Neo head, quench pads removed, 2.5mm cometic HG, compression ratio is around 9.5:1

-Stock exhaust manifold, Godspeed intake manifold

-Holset HE351 turbo

-550cc rx7 injectors

-Z32 ecu, chipped

-Oil control mods, crank collar, jun oil pump, restrictors etc etc.

 

Last time i broke the exhaust poncam installing it so im back to stock cams. But now im stumped. i dont know whats the best plan, budget is not very big and the turbo selection was made because i can easily repair and replace that turbine without hazzle (im in a Caribbean island), thats the dyno sheet, its pretty close to my last dyno on a stock rb25 neo, before mixing the rb26 forged parts. Compression ratio stayed pretty much the same so i guess thats why. (Stock is 9.5 i think right?) and i had 450hp @ 23psi before, so im pretty much in the same position as before.

That was last friday, i broke the clutch on sunday, it was slipping so i think thats why the dyno sheet has a weird peak in 2 places. speed remained constant so thats why we ignored that we had a clutch problem but it was definitely slipping on the track @ WOT

IMG_20180510_162534289_HDR.jpg

Edited by Lopin18

All of that will have tiny, marginal gains.

Want response?

Change the turbo or change displacement. (i.e 3L but availability could be hard there!)

They are by far the best, easiest ways of getting response and in the real world also the most cost effective.

I'd be putting the standard RB25DET Neo inlet manifold back on it . The runners are reasonably long and Nissan downsized them compared to the R33 spec inlet manifold obviously to increase air speed into the inlet ports .

A lot of people seem to think that fitting the short runner ie Freddy etc style inlet manifolds to any RB25 costs it torque and throttle response in the lower to mid range .

 

I assume you are running external gate. I have a recent case of a turbocharger that we've built, that pulled over 530rwhp E85 ( similar to pump 105) @21psi full boost by 4000RPM out of a stock R33 Rb25det.  With an Neo head and slightly larger capacity you should see even better response. details of the build is at:

https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/261613-hypergear-turbochargers-and-high-flow-services-development-thread/?page=604 

Taking lots of notes lol. 

Thing with response is that im running Achilles 123s and similar grippy tires and it would be better for me to get a better torque curve down there.(our track layout keeps giving me a hard time when i have to get the power back up to spin those tires after they heat up, they are insanely grippy and i have to keep up with the high budget setups here) Right now i have low torque on low end, clearly due to the turbo selection as far as im seeing now after watching responses and dyno sheets from setups used around here. 

AHh that damn dyno sheet didnt have the torque line, ill try to get it. 

 

Now diving into that huge thread from hypergear.

 

Edited by Lopin18

Couldn't really read your chart anyway.  To get low down torque on my heavy Stagea I got a GT3582  .63 a/r and as you can see from my charts it worked much as planned (although top end was limited). This was on an RB30 but could work on your car too.

2013.11.21 Power & Torque 001.jpg

  • Like 1

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...