Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

All depends on the engine, course all engines have a tolerance for operating at a little higher temperatures.

But I would keep the engine temp at whatever the temp of the engine runs when stock, thus while you do modifications run different oils, coolants dependant on season, larger oil cooler, radiator, cooling plates, air ducts, vents...actually cool tuning as it's known in Japan is a completely different look at performance and maintenace of your engine.

after many years of trouble with this in my commodore w/ worked 253, you need to run water at about 80 hot enough to disperse moisture in the rocker covers, but cool enough to keep performance to a tops, the cooler the temp, the better the performance

It vary's for each motor.

I remember being told my old VS 5ltr made best power at 75degree's.

BUT with the lower temps you also loose a little economy.

ibuckout2... I tend to agree with your comment 'only milk and juice comes in 2 litres' :thumbsup:

Just to let you know, I've never been beaten by a V8, RB25 or RB30-powered car on the street and that's with my old FJ20 setup (everything standard apart from cooler, cpu and exhaust + boost)...The only thing that beats me is a modified GTR and oh yeah, some rotaries. So I'll let you ponder on that bias slogan if you want, but as they say, winners are grinners and Im certainly grinning. My car gets either good remarks or bad one's, the bad one's mostly from dickheads in their commodores with crappy NA engines trying to break the 200hp barrier. Just because an engine has cubes, doesnt mean its good, but cubes can be good.

Don't knock what you can't beat.

I respect all performance cars and everyone's personal choice. It may be your personal choice to like large engines, but you dont need to undermine the smaller counterpart...There are a lot of excellent 2L engines out there, some that can make 600hp reliably. Just for matter of interest, where does your bias come from and what leads you to pay out the 2L clan???

Hope I didnt offend anyone. :cheers:

I don't think any 1 is really 'paying out' 2ltrs. Its harmless stirring.

I had great fun in mine. I felt the need for Diesel power. lol

Which the 3ltr sure does feel like it with the stock turbo turning the wheels as it hits 2300rpm on 11psi. :cheers:

I don't think any 1 is really 'paying out' 2ltrs. Its harmless stirring.

 

I had great fun in mine. I felt the need for Diesel power. lol

Which the 3ltr sure does feel like it with the stock turbo turning the wheels as it hits 2300rpm on 11psi. :cheers:

OK dude.

How much torque you making?

Cheers

OK dude.

How much torque you making?

Cheers

I haven't had the motor on an engine dyno.

Nor has it been on a regular dyno as its only just run in. lol.

You can't compare dyno torque figures, cars run different final drive ratio's, tyres etc, all of which affect the dyno's tractive effort reading.

A comparison could be made if the wheel speed of two cars on the dyno were the same.

It will get a cheap tune on the rb20det turbo soon.

I'm curious as what sort of power it will make with the stock turbo.

I have known of other RB30DET's running the RB20DET turbo on 11psi make ~170rwkw with peak power around 3700rpm. After that the VE drops dramatically and power noses over. Thats the limit of the rb20det turbo.

RB30 + small rb20det turbo = bad top end flow.

Without being tuned it does appear to go fairly hard. Low speed 3rd gear corners coming on to boost will spin third gear and send you sideways.

Its a strange feeling having the motor sound like its not reving/doing anything, yet you hear the wheels squeeling.

After I push the rb20det turbo to its limits I will bolt on the GT35R .82.

From the experience of others I expect the GT35R .82 only just make 1bar by 3500rpm.

Guestimating 1bar of airflow at 3500rpm from the GT35R 'should' be around 180rwkw.

If it feels a little laggy I will throw a .62 on it and be happy with less top end but better spooling.

According to the turbine map a GT35R .62 flows the same as a GT30R .82 and the GT35R .82 = GT30R 1.06.

The 3ltr at 3000rpm only just keeps the GT35R .62 out of surge if running 1bar. It should work well.

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...