Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I'm prepeared to get a lightweight front pulley made for the Rb26dett. At present I have a post on the forced induction area.

I have the oppertunity to have a front pulley made when a mate gets a few RB26 engines in a few months but, I was wondering if anyone has a spare front crankshaft pulley lying around they would be willing to lend me so I can have a copy made in alloy. This would save me waiting around and mean the 'test' will begin earlier and provide WA Rb26 owners with an earlier oppertunity to get cheap pulleys should it work.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/47433-lightweight-pulley-experiment/
Share on other sites

The factory unit weighs about 6kg. An alloy unit can be made around 800gms, thats a saving in the order of a light flywheel with the same effect.

There is a possibillity of making a unit with a vulcanised rubber sleave just like the factory one however instead of steel it can be made of alloy. I'm guessing the weight would be around 1.5kg. This type of setup would probably cost two or three times as much to make. I would need to pull the factory one appart, have the alloy machined to the same dimensions and have a vlucanised rubber sleave bonded with it.

Will be the same disaster as the Alloy Z32 ones were with destroyed cranks and bearings

and as ND4SPD had no problems at just over 10000rpm with a stock nissan one id stay safe and use a factory job or tested billet steel ones.

Alloy dampers on the market now for other engines are not alloy copies of factory ones but much larger and no lighter than the stockers.

I've had custom balancers break cranks so violenty that even core plugs have come out of the block from flex.

Race balancers are for the topend of the performance market and wont give any gains worth the time or effort in mild engines so the money would make bigger gains in other areas.

I appreciate where your comming from Steve.

In the performance thread some time ago we covered the argument about the RB series being of the NVH style of pulley or an actual harmonic balancer. I am placing a bet that it is a NVH because so far no one has given any data or examples of it not being one. It's certainly not a 'rock solid' position but one I am willing to test due to the fact there is great benifit to be had if I am on the right track. I don't mind putting a well worn motor to the test because due to the pre-existing wear any harmonic issues will show up straight away. That and I think 230,000kms is pretty good out of an Rb26 and if it needs a rebuild I guess it deserves one :(

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/sh...ighlight=pulley

Thanks all the same for the input I'm quite glad for it. It's good to have people looking out for you trying to save some heart ache.

So far I have a pulley offered to measure up and a place to get it done. I'm interstate for the next two weeks so when I'm back I'll start to the ball rolling for the test.

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...