Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I like this thread. I'm curious as to know where all the peak torque figures are for our RB20's sit at.

Would 5250RPM be too high for most of us or is it higher.  

The higher would be better for my setup.

I'm guessing my peak torque would be around 5000 to 6000 rpm.

Hopefully I will find out this week at the Ingham car show.

Just before 8000 rpm.

Ussusally about 7800 going from what my safc tells me.

I get 14psi buy 6000rpm.

The turbo is a little big for the RB20 i think.

It will make really good power but way in the rev range.

Would be more suited to an RB25 id say.

Oh well gota go with what I got now.

i recently did the converision for my car and i wholely agree with StarioTurbo - the rb25 has so much more low-end torque and is a whole lot smoother than the rb20.

I can do roundabouts in 3rd gear, don't have to downshift as often to pick up the pace and the car launches like no tomorow.

I would highly recommend the conversion to anyone. Engine + PFC = 200rwkws. Thats more than enough to have alot of fun with on the road.

I'm not sure, but would 200rwks out of an rb25 be equivalent to 220rwks out of an rb20? Due to engine capacity? I've been thinking about this one for a few days now....

I often use 3rd for roundabouts when cruising. Speed, around 20-30kays exit speed. It accelerates easily from idle. Obviously just cruising, full throttle requires around 1700rpm on board otherwise it rattles the gearbox a little.

The 3ltr through the hills has removed the need for second gear.

I was recently playing around behind a R32 Rb20DET through the hills, he was flat stick through second in to third, I was much more relaxed simply accelerating out of 25kay hair pins in third.

Don't get me wrong it wasn't a full thrash, just a mild slow in fast out type drive. The safer way to drive. I've never been for hammering really hard in to corners on the street, its a receipt for disaster.

...

I'm not sure, but would 200rwks out of an rb25 be equivalent to 220rwks out of an rb20?  Due to engine capacity?  I've been thinking about this one for a few days now....

A power rating is just that and makes no difference if its coming from a 1.8L, 2.0L or 2.5L, the torque charactoeristics and if the delivery is peaky may influence if one car is quicker....

Sure the RB25 transplant, especially with the RB25 gearbox is a good thing. The best street car i think i have been in was an R33 GTST with a 2530 setup, the thing was choice:)

BUT... me, i dont like playing around on the street. My car has plenty of punch to drive around day to day on the street...i can go round roundabouts in 3rd gear as well, i often do 2nd gear takes offs as well:) But i dont for a second think that this translates to my car having as much punch at 3,000rpm as a R32 with an RB25. But how quick do you want to go on the street, i can change gears at 2,500rpm and happily cruise along with traffic..often do. I can only ever go as quick as the car in front lets me.

An R32 GTST with a RB20 and turbo/ecu upgrade can easily pull mid to high 12s for the 1/4. That in my eyes is pretty quick. So can an RB25 powered R32 so there is no difference.

If you want to drive around in a gear higher then what is required...i dont understand why that hold so much appeal, but if you want to then go the RB25. As for smoothness and traction, my car hooks up perfectly with 235 rwkws in 2nd gear, doesnt wheelspin all that badly in 1st either...dont believe me :( Your welcome to drive it yourself It even has bald tyres at the moment.:)

By all means go and put an RB25 in the car if thats what you want to do (thats not what this discussion was about:)) ... and IM NOT SAYING RB20s ARE BETTER!!!!

All im saying is that you want a cheap / quick street car capable of 12sec qtrs then the RB20 will get the job done...if you want more then sure the RB20 aint the place to start...especially if you want a car that will storm out of corners on the street where your doing 35-40kms and hour...

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...