Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey all.

contemplating rebuilding the old rb20 into a rb24 as the engine has terrible compression (140psi across back in jun; still pulled 288rwkw's tho :D ) and if so to go in with nice forged bits for longevity.

everyone knows to make a rb24 you use a rb26 crank with rb26 rods and tomei/custom/4agze pistons but it seems that everyone always forgets about the head.

the rb20's head isnt exactly a fluid dynamics wonder, so what can be done to improve the head flow?

also since we would be boring the snot out of the rb20 block to fit the new pistons whats to be done with head as the CC would need to be worked to suit the over bore right?

im not really familiar with this kind of stuff so i would like to learn as much as i can.

thx.

carl

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/90293-rb20-rb24-head-question/
Share on other sites

well starting off you already know the RB20 head isnt the most friendly to even the 2ltr

I think the figure is 30-35% that generally is thrown about.

To get the flow required would definately require a lot of head work, not a cheap endeavour.

Im not down with all the terms but its not going to be something that small.

Cams selection is also going to play a very large part in it all i would think

This will be another great thead for sure

i'm thinking of doing this conversion, but i still need alot more infofmation before i start. i would like to know how much more response it gives, how much is a crank worth, is it necessary to go for a 33 crank for the wider oil pump drive, what inlet manifold should i use. what cam specs should i use. so far the power i have is enough to drift with but it would be alot easier with better response.

main reason im looking into it is because i want reliabilty as well as having good lowdown response.

not to mention my rb20 has seen much better days and with the 2.4 it should spool a large turbo fairly quick like.

from what i gather you should use a r33 crank because of the oil drive fix, as for intake manifold ive got a custom RIPS one so im good on that front :D .

since i was planning on building the engine to be 9k capable i was gonna run some kind of 260/270 combo or 270's.

ive already got 260 tomei procams in the car now......

Hi guys, I will try and answer the questions, but before I do I should point out that you can swap most of your good bits onto/into an RB25DET and end up with a better result than building an RB23/RB24. And it will cost a damn site less as well.

On to the questions;

The standard RB20 bore is 78 mm, the most common RB23 (2,280 cc's) piston upgrade is 4AGZE which are 81 mm (from memory). This means you will need to relieve the combustion chambers radius at the bore by 1.5. Then taper it into the normal combustion chamber shape. Pretty simple really, any machine shop could do it.

You will need to relieve the combustion chamber volume to achieve your target compression ratio. From memory about 3 cc (slightly more than a good polish) gives 8.8 to 1 for an RB23. The combustion chamber volumes will have to be equalised of course.

Porting is pretty much essential if you want to use the higher rpm effectively without huge amounts of boost. There is a lot of work on both the inlet and exhaust ports needed. If you do a really good job, you should end up around 85% of what a standard RB25 cylinder head flows.

Depending on the experience of the machinist and the workshop hourly rate you are looking at around $1K to do the above.

There are larger valves available for RB20's , I have seen 2mm larger inlet valves and 1.5 mm larger exhaut valves. I have a recollection that they were for a VG30 or CA18 but they fit the RB20. Since VG30's are popular in the US there are quite a few valve, valve spring alteratives. A quick check of the sizes should confirm the suitability.

From memory the VG30 valves where around $US20 each, so that's $640 for the set plus freight.

RB26 cranks vary considerably in price, I have seen R32GTR cranks around $400, rods around $200. Up to double that for R33GTR cranks and rods. The best suggestion I can make is to shop around the For Sale forum and check out the historic prices.

As for cams, 256 to 264's would be fine for using with the hydraulic followers (260 Poncams for example) . But to really use 272's or higher you would need to do a solid follower conversion. No, RB26 bits won't fit, well not without some serious engineering and machining. But CA18/VG30 may well fit, worth checking anyway.

By the time you have the necessary RB23/RB24 parts purchased, get it all machined and assembled you are looking at a bit over $5K. Then you have to add the accessories, manifolds, turbos etc.

Hope that was of some help

:D cheers :O

Edited by Sydneykid

and of course as usual sydney kid is on point with the info....... cheers gary!

at this point ive realized that even tho the rb24 would be loads of fun for bragging rights, it really isnt practical anymore.........

while rb25's are the better alternative they arnt as reddily available over here as they are round you guys.

not to mention we have to pay super inflated prices for stuff, thats the way of capitalism i suppose.

what i think ive decided to do is tear downt he old girl and rebuild it with slight over bore pistons to clean up the walls and get a hair more displacement (rb20.5 comes to mind :D ) and get the rods cleaned up and new bearings and gaskets with gtr pumps.

new hydro lifters and some decent springs and i should be good for a while.

besides being a student and trying to build a fast car isnt too practical atm.

thx for the info.......

  • 6 months later...

Do we know the difference in piston height between std RB20 pistons and std RB26 pistons. Have doen a search on a few piston sites and cant find the info. Before i have a go at building my proper motor, im tempted to use a bunch of second hand pieces to build a long stroke, std bore RB20 using R32 GTR crank and rods. Use std water.oil pumps etc, std RB20 pistons, perhaps with a shaved head to bump up compression to closer to between 8.7:1 and 9.0:1...

Ii dont want to go learnign expensive lesson on a motor that is coting me lost of moiney in new partds.

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

    • 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...