Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey team. 

I recently bought a 1998 R34 which has been 25DE swapped from factory 20. Had some running issues so started doing some digging. The ecu says it’s a 23740 AA010. The closest I’ve found to that is a 23710 AA010 which says it’s for a 20DE. So just wanting to confirm ecu is correct for a 25. Next hurdle i hit was engine number. I got 2 numbers on the bottom passengers side of the block. First which I believe to be the number in need is 5L3 but can’t seem to match this to anything. The second is 90188 not sure if this helps any. 

 

Any my help would be appreciated cheers guys

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/478436-block-and-ecu-id-help-please/
Share on other sites

According to this site

http://jp-carparts.com/nissan/partlist.php?maker=nissan&type=81&cartype=&fig=226

your ecu is for an RB20DE auto AWD

That is not to say that this is the cause of your running problems.

1 hour ago, KiwiRS4T said:

According to this site

http://jp-carparts.com/nissan/partlist.php?maker=nissan&type=81&cartype=&fig=226

your ecu is for an RB20DE auto AWD

That is not to say that this is the cause of your running problems.

Thanks mate. Now just need to figure out the engine number. I would assume the fuel and air mapping would be different between a 20 and a 25. So would possibly make it run a bit average 

How about you check your actual engine number ? You know on the drivers side towards the front, it will start with RB something. Rusty nuts sounds like he's right as I've never heard of an 5L3 block. There is a 5L7 stagea block that appears to be a 25 though.

The fact that the ecu is not original but for an AWD auto would support the theory that its from a Stagea  and an RB20 at that. You would think that if it came from an RB25 the matching ecu would have been fitted.

I'm not theorizing or guessing, Nissan make it easy for us when it comes to block part numbers, the 6th 7th and 8th numbers are the casting numbers, no guesses or theories required. The part number of this block is 110005L300    RB20DE

7 hours ago, Hazzid69 said:

The ecu says it’s a 23740 AA010

This ECU is from a HR34 Skyline N/A RB20DE auto 4speed 2WD NON-HICAS. So correct for the RB20DE you have. If your R34 is built after May 1998 then it is the ECU that came with your car.

Edited by Rusty Nuts

I am sure Steve is right. But if they haven't been messed with the RB20DE injectors should be yellow (RB25DE should be red) .

If you can find a way to measure it the 25 stroke is 2mm more than the 20 at 71.7 (the 20 is 69.7 and the 25 bore is 86mm and the 20 78mm.Doubt very much anyone would put a 25 head on a 20 but who knows....

So yes I managed to get hold of my mechanic mate that’s built a few rbs and it’s a 20DE neo. So will just have to be a runner while i gather bits and bobs to either drop a 25 or 30det into it. Bit gutted as I only bought it as it was advertised as a 25. Cheers for all your input guys. Such a primo forum 

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

    • Any difference in induction noise?
    • If I got a dollar for every flipped commuter missile I've driven past I'd have two dollars   Some people get into wild adventures on the road and I doubt it's gender or ethnicity specific. I'm just glad I don't usually drive during peak times.
    • Just got the car back and gave it a good run back home Power wise, whilst it only made a extra 5 killerwasps up top at 7200 rpm, it made more power everywhere from 2500 rpm and kept pulling much harder all the way, to the point of me relearning when to shift so I don't hit the 7200 limiter, with the old intake it seemed to take alot more time to rev out, and, throttle response is also much improved  As I didn't want to remove the bumper every time I serviced the air filter (basically every aftermarket and fabricated CAI has the filter behind the bumper) it currently has a hektic exposed pod in the engine bay sucking in hot air, this will be rectified shortly after some some of my CAD (cardboard assisted design) for a alloy heat shield feed by the OEM intake tube behind the bumper, this will cop some wrinkle black paint, as well as the intake pipe for that totally OEM look... The only fly in the ointment was that the OEM "strut" brace doesn't fit over the rear runner of the new intake with the 2.5 engine is in the engine bay, as the 2.5 raises the engine up by 20mm, it's not a war stopper, and I didn't notice any difference without it in some twisties, but....... MX5 Mania is bringing in some GWR "fancy pants" braces that apparently do fit, if it bolts up I'll grab it, it is also stiffer than the OEM one, which is a bonus All in all I'm happy with the outcome      Fancy pants "strut" brace that gives the required clearance      This is where the clearance issue was, the GWR extends out past this
    • Well, I'm back from the dyno today. Some things do partially make sense. The pod filter/airbox delete picked up between 6-10rwkw on 98 - because heat soak does kind of affect things and there was playing with tune/timing/AFR. Oddly enough, the car was running much leaner than before. So lean it was audibly pinging on the dyno which I got video of:   70de0dd5-2099-4a71-8b10-6fc833fb9d59.mp4   We're talking going from ~12.7 in the past to the first run being at like ~14.0. It is now tuned to ~12.5 on the Dyno, which correlates to about ~12.1 on my wideband in the car. These matched last time, which is very odd. The dyno plots only show the dyno's reported AFR - should be last time, yet now it no longer agrees and was way leaner. Nobody has an explanation for how a pod can make the car run notably leaner, yet not really give any more power when you add fuel in. A few different types of intake design were tested:   94c22c34-7991-4902-af85-314b5f5bf352.mp4   There was no difference other than IAT with the pod sticking out of the bay. The pod sticking out of the bay (but connected) is actually still warmer than what I usually see on the road. Removing the pod entirely lost about ~2kw. But to be fair, all of the runs could be argued to vary by that amount when temperatures climb etc etc. It's safe to say that the filter isn't causing any restrictions of any note that can be reasonably altered in any way. This is in line with what I'd expect given the Engine Masters testing. 323KW on 98 and ~335KW on E85 is actually a pretty solid result, up about ~45kw from 99% of LS1 cammed combos, with generally much larger cams/exhaust etc as well. It is after all up 42KW (98) and 54KW (E85) from before. +10KW from a pod and removing the box is cheap as chips compared to what the head work cost per kw No, I did not get to drop the exhaust and test. When it comes to exhaust... it all just seems to change frequencies and cost or gain 2hp here or there. I don't realistically think I'll drop this to test it - because there's not much else I can really do about it/route it any other way/make it bigger/just bought mufflers. Engine masters beat the hell out of headers with a hammer to deliberately kink them and didn't lose power at all, I sincerely doubt that going larger primaries would help. If it were even possible for clearance/conversion reasons... which it's not... I may throw the E85 in there at some point and do a drag run to see what MPH it traps for science. It isn't lost on me that ~320kw Skylines do trap about the same MPH that ~370kw F-Body/Corvettes do in the USA for the same  or similar weight. (122-125mph). Of course, if I go there and trap 104mph or something then I'll just 'accidentally' have an accident on the way home from the drag strip and buy a M4.
×
×
  • Create New...