Fabiotorta

Sorry sold it...

Selling my gtst Clutch exedy pink, spitfire,full 3',double funnel. Timing belt,pump,all fluid and hoses brand new 6500$ Txt 0401680907

Hy mate osborne park what u re looking after??? Already sold some stuff

Hy everyone, Selling rb25det engine in parts Complete engine with sensors and turbo Text me 0401680907 let me know what you need and we figure out a price Thanks Fabio

???? Don t know what that is but i love study and improve engines and i don t really want to spend all that money on a greddy plenum to loose low end torque...probably it flows a lot more and improve ram effect at high revs...probably it flows so much that on a mild tuned engine it just slow down air too much giving no improvement at all...it s like the 80 or 90 mm throttle body????? Isn t it big for nothing??? I mean if my engine at 500 hp needs 50 lbs/min why install a plenum that can flow let s say 60-70??? I would never use the potential of that component, maybe and i repeat maybe it is better a 45mm runner as long as i can with air stack to use that cross sectional area the best i can and maybe i would be able to get some ram effect as well. I learned this by working on rally cars...match everything for what u really need by calculation, that makes a good engine....

So it is possible that a 45 mm intake, neo like, works well with short ports keeping speed and flow at a good level. Probably an intake with 45 mm runners greddy style would keep low end torque...and probably is what i m gonna do!!! I don t want to loose low end torque just to increase top end...i reckon on a turbocharged you can achieve both

Thanks a lot for your pics finally i know what they looks like and from what i see the runners are smaller on the intake mani and sligly inside the head but the choke point looks the same as the downdraft angle...actually the ports looks exactly the same as the non neo??? Now the question come,someone felt any differences going with aftermarket intake manifold?? Low end torque loss??? Thanks again for the pics, if you re gonna remove the valves could i ask some more pics to see the port better?? Cheers!!!

From what it looks like to me the neo engine has got a great low end torque at slower revs that is more than the non neo even at 4800 revs peak torque non neo. Less fuel more power but since a neo is not easy to find i wanted to see if is possible get same result modifing non neo head. The low end torque can be gained from better combustion like making more power at the same boost a bigger turbine housing doesn t help low end. Anyway no one that knows what really looks like neo ports??? From the combustion chamber pics looks like the downdraft angle of the valves is reduced but what i am interested is the size!!! I would be glad to have a non neo with tjat low end torque than power can be built with boost... Anyone knows if swapping to a bigger turbo or bolts on that low end torque ability is lost??

Even more curious, does anyone have some pics of the neo head ports?? Or throath size?? I can just find the n/ a. Anyway 600kw if the intake is a restriction there should be massive problems of boost and temperature...and definitely not that power????!!! But are the ports really smaller than rb II ser.???

Even more curious, does anyone have some pics of the neo head ports?? Or throath size?? I can just find the n/ a. Anyway 600kw if the intake is a restriction there should be massive problems of boost and temperature...and definitely not that power????!!! But are the ports really smaller than rb II ser.???

Na+t sound good...i ll check everithing out Thanks

Need some help to search, search button 400kw??? Doesn t work!!?? Anyway is there a thread you know about someone using n/a heads on turbo??? Like rb25de and rb30??? Would be glad to check it out.. Thanks!!!

Ok absolutely right it is basically impossible understand what happen on an itake phase related to pressure and temperature, and derived velocity but one thing can be calculated, the fact that increase in pressure increase density (boost= density adjusting for the temperature increase) plus fuel vapour inside the port that cool down the air so increased density and frm what i know this means that on the same area you can draw more air ( in weight) that s why boost can increase flow even on n/a engines with small ports. What i m trying to point is when really a stock intake port became a restriction in flow on a running engine under boost and when can u see this lack in power, choke, on the dyno or big boost increase with no power added at what power level? Even with bigger cams or valves when the smaller port area on a stock head become a restriction??? Considering that the non neo has got a say worse downdraft angle and so more prone to choke due to bad short turn and that means having a bad use of the area so restriction, a port like this should choke at say 700 hp just say a number or show a big lack of flow???

First thank you all for this interesting answers. Than what i m trying to do or say is not increase boost or put some cams on but i m trying to understand if if possible gain power using smaller ports, do something out of what most of the porting with flow bench is. So if the flow restriction became the ntake valve it means the ports still big enought or too big, at what level of power/flow??? And when the port size became a bottlenech?? If valve is the biggest restriction change valve would increase port speed and performance and that means to me the port still not too small??? Does make sense??? Rb neo has got smaller port and smaller downdraft angle, lets say closer to f1 style, on this configuration (small angle) the port should be bigger from what david vizard says. Ok neo has got other mods but the air needed to burn petrol and make power still the same, how can it draw in that amount of air with smaller ports and make more torque, power and fuel economy??? I believe same air drawn in but at higher speed for sure (smaller port) on a better angle but most important a good turbulence that mix more fuel and make better use of it, fighting detonation in a better way snce no drops of fuel gets in the chamber and better fuel economy and low-end torque without sacrifice top end. Smaller port create greater velocity, greater mixture, greater combustion and more kinetic energy to help the charged air not go back on the overlap period but keep entering. Am i crazy??

I mean we use around 100 m/s max port speed because after that is said we loose more power that what we gain, i say is this true, is this dyno proved or flow bench proved???