Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Okay could be a number of models,

Series 1 VL turbo block

Series 2 turbo or non turbo

Any series skyline block

It is good as the oil return and high pressure are already there, so from that point of view it is slightly better than doing some extra work. However some people believe the earlier holden blocks are better as they are cast from better grey iron, however I believe it is a myth!!!

as far as i know there was only the one rb30 block brought out by nissan... got any numbers??? it could be a vlturbo motor if its got the extra galeries drilled out for the turbo or maybe (not sure) could be out of one those m30 skylines they were twin cam (rb20) head but n/a

The most important part of the rb30 block for our twin cam conversions I think is the lack of a machined surface to mount the tensioner on.

Looking at the front of the block you will see two drilled and tapped holes where the tenioner studs screw in to.

Both must have a flat machined surface. I believe its the series 1 blocks that don't have the right tensioner location machined flat.

I've got pics some where of what to look for.

Don't go off what car the motor came out of, these cars are old now and often than not you will find a series 1 with a series 2 motor but a series 2 with a series 1 motor. :P

This is a genuine turbo block that was removed from an 1988 Holden Commodore BT-1. If it isn't the original engine from the vehicle I would be very suprised. Pictures are worth a thousand words so here's my essay :P

100_5597.jpg

100_5599.jpg

As you can see one stud needs to be drilled out in the second image.

Bigsully84,

That block is perfect.. As you can see the right stud hole has a flat machined area.

The blokes that don't have this simply have a hole with no flat machined area.

So it will be fine to use as an RB31DET conversion?

I am wanting to buy it but thought I would get advice from the people on here.

if you don't have the flat machined surface there you will have to do this:

DSC00177.jpg

DSC00174.jpg

which is really not a big deal at all, considering you've either bought the drill bit and tap yourself already, or you're getting a machine shop to do it. the main things to get on the block are the provisions for the oil and water lines, which are a bastard to tap yourself.

everyone with an RB25 or 26..... have you seen how close the standard tensioner and idler pulley come on the twin cam RB's? it's pretty much exactly what you'd get if you used the two pre-drilled tensioner locations on the RB30 block, on either side of the welsh plug there.

as far as being worried about the belt touching because it's too close together, that is pretty much a non-existent danger. if it's not enough that the OEM engine uses a timing belt setup which comes that close together without problems, consider how much the slack side of the belt (inlet cam side of the belt) would have to flop to touch the reciprocal side of the belt moving the opposite direction. a properly tensioned cam belt simply cannot move that much, even under extreme loads (giant cams on rapid RPM changes).

if i had a series 2 block to start with, i would have used the two lower tensioner locations for simplicity and cost reasons. as it was i had to do what the pictures show above, which is quite a good setup as far as i can determine.

I paid $150 for a running motor that had the head ripped off and sold. At a wrecker.

I found the larger wreckers sold them for $200-$300, the smaller little wreckers only wanted $100-$150.

Mine came out of a arse ended VL wagon.

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...