Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i just read somewhere the neo6 uses variable valve tech

why doesnt the rb? wouldnt it help dramatically with low rpm/cruise fuel consumption and high end open throttle power?

does have 2 turbos make it obsolete? wuldnt u get even more power?

if so, is it possible to adapt the vvt from the neo to the rb engine?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/54818-rb26dett-vs-neo6/
Share on other sites

The R34 GTR's RB26DETT has VVT from my understanding.

Don't forget, the older generation RB26's are designed way back in the 80's with the R33 GTR's engine being more a improved version only, not a complete overhaul.

You may be able to but that would mean use the neo's head and changing ecu's. Not sure though.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/54818-rb26dett-vs-neo6/#findComment-1071796
Share on other sites

the power output of the RB25DET neo and the RB26DETT might be the same on the nissan brochure but in real life they are quite different.

The RB26DETT revs higher and puts out 50Nm more torque. The stock power figure is probably closer to 250kw. Fujitsubo claim about 247kw for a stock BNR34 on their exhaust website.

I offer to put mine on any 4 wheel dyno. I dont know where the nearest one is.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/54818-rb26dett-vs-neo6/#findComment-1072004
Share on other sites

is that figure at the flywheel??

It would be expected that the NEO wouldnt match the RB26 but it seems that the factory figures (obviosly changed for the jap power laws) are extremely inaccurate. Also comparing RW figures on the NEO and RB26 would be difficult as the cars run with differnet drive setups.

Sewid, if your gonna put your car on the dyno, could you disconnect the front driveshaft :D

I want to know what the power difference 4WD and RWD is with the same engine

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/54818-rb26dett-vs-neo6/#findComment-1072009
Share on other sites

Yeah both power figures are innacurate - the NEO probably makes more than 206kw as well. There was a gentlemans agreement between manufacturers in the 90s that limited power output to 280ps (206kw). This is why cars kept coming out faster and faster and with more and more torque but still had 206kw.

Figures are at the flywheel.

If i could find a 4wd dyno I would not remove the drive shafts as I never really plan on leaving the car like that so am not personally interested in its RWKW figure. Bit of a hassle and im too lazy is the real reason though :D

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/54818-rb26dett-vs-neo6/#findComment-1072013
Share on other sites

Isn't 206kw the limit for the gentlemen's agreement?

I don't believe that the RB26DETT has 206kw stock at all like sewid says it has more in stock form and I don't think any RB26DETT has VVT (NVCS - Nissan Variable Valve

Timing Control System) at all.

http://www.tomei-p.co.jp/_2003web-catalogu...haft-specs.html

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/54818-rb26dett-vs-neo6/#findComment-1072014
Share on other sites

any of you guys read wheels about a year ago when they compared an N1 R34 GTR with a Monaro GTS?

They put the GTR on a 4WD dyno and came up with 215kw at all 4 wheels. this equates to 300+ kw at the flywheel. Tho this is the N1 with bigger turbos and more boost, im guessing the figure of 250 kw for the normal GTR R34 would be about right.

I read that the japanese 206kw agreement is off due to other manufacturers (international) making cars with much more than this and they want to be able to keep up.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/54818-rb26dett-vs-neo6/#findComment-1072126
Share on other sites

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...