Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I was thinking about fitting a RB25DET into a VL Commodore.

My plan in the future is to have it running in the 12 second zone, at least with slicks.

I was wondering if there was anything to look for in these engines and also how easy it would be to get running in the 12's second zone? (computer, Turbo, injectors and so on)

Thanks.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/63025-rb25det-into-vl-commodore/
Share on other sites

i have a friend with a r31 with a similar kind of idea. He kept his 3ltr bottom end and just went to a rb25 head, he did internals, turbo, cooler, computer and all the other normal stuff and his car makes 477hp at 14psi, and they told him depending on tyres and stuff his engine would be good for 11's, dunno how true that is but his car is pretty fast

My future Son-in-law has embarked on the RB30/RB25DET combo with his Calais Turbo.

He was after a job for $5000 to go well.

After twice that amount it still isn't finished.

Will post any info that may be relevant and watch this thread for ideas etc.

El Bee

Mates R31 with RB30ET, T3/T4 Hybrid, FMIC, modified inlet with throttle body relocated to the 'forwards' position, R32 5 speed, etc produces 170rwkw. He's got a RB25DET head and a T04E ready to go in, estimated to produce 230+ rwkw.

The RB30 and RB25 are physically the same block, all you really have to watch is the sump as the RB25 obviously comes with a sump to fit the Skyline so you'll have to use the RB30 sump that came with the VL.

I have previously seen RB26DETT fitted to VLs and what they had to do was to make a minor modification to the sump and the oil pick-up for clearance.

Good luck with this conversion as I too am interested in this mod for my VL. I want to put the RB25DET from my series II R33 into my VL and then get a RB26DETT for the '33. A bit of swapping around but it's all worth it. Imagine, a VL with a RB25 and a R33 GTST with a RB26 ! I'll let you guys know the results.

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

    • 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.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...