Unzipped Composites

Haha, well it's more like a favour vortex... working in the industry has it's benefits. I love working for free anyway ?

Spent a bit more time going backwards over the weekend: Couple hours later, engine was stripped down and the bare block, head and crank are flying around the back of the Territory. Turned out to be not a terrible idea to pull the running motor apart - bit of scoring on the mains and big ends showed she didn't have a lot of time left in her. Didn't have too much of a look at the pistons, they looked ok but no doubt have some cracked ring lands. Bores aren't bad, not as good as the last time I saw them when the head came off 8 years ago. But, everything came apart quite easily, nothing major going on so makes life easy from here. To take my mind off questioning my life choices, the Alpha Omega Racing adapters I ordered awhile back rocked up last week, so I gave the old Evo 9 Brembo's I've had sitting on the shelf for awhile a thorough refurbishing. Disassembled the calipers and spent the time taking off the 4 or 5 old paint jobs with paint stripper rather than sandblasting, etch primed, then mixed up a custom paint colour using pearlescent powders: Wasn't what I had in mind when I started, but I don't hate how they've turned out. The photo's make them look a bit brown, but they are actually a metallic dark purple/maroon sort of colour. Wanted something different but not too wild, so I think they turned out alright. Just need to put the Brembo rebuild kit through the calipers, get the hardware nickle plated, and then reassemble and I can throw them on the car. To go along with those, I also got a BM57 master cylinder from HFM DOT parts. Have read about the issues people have had with these, but having spoken to HFM I'm confident it will work well. And, a little preview of what else is going on: Have also finalized the wiring harness documentation and ordered the materials for that. Pretty amazing, I simplified the harness as much as I could without going PDM, but I still need 600 metres of 20 and 22 AWG Tefzel... That's not even including the bigger gauge wiring for the higher current stuff. Lot of wire in a car!

Haha, you and my machinist would get on well I feel. He also isn't one to do things by halves, and over the years has tried to talk me into dry sump/Motec/PDM/sell the Skyline and buy a Lamborghini if you actually want to go fast, etc. I'll ask him what he thinks of your keyhole suggestion, I feel his response will be something along the lines of it being practically too difficult to do vs the theoretical advantages of it. GTSBoy, I feel you've nailed the answer to my question, thank you.

Yeh I sort of expect to, which is why I want to get it right. However there are a few cars in Racer that are going under the 60.0 bracket, none of them are dry sump (Laine and Simon are the two that come to mind, though perhaps I'm forgetting if Simon has gone dry sump - I'm quite sure he hasn't) and not having crazy oil control issues. So I'm sure it can be done. Oil accumulator I am sort of planning on. Perhaps not initially, but I do feel it is affordable insurance, so I think it will happen.

Yeh I would have thought it would help for sure, and I do intend to vent the sump properly. I'm really just going off the info in this thread vs what experienced builders are telling me. This is a pretty respected thread, and there seems to be a pretty widely accepted summary of feed restrictors, vented/extended/baffled sump, drilled oil returns, no rear head vent. So I just wonder where the discrepancy comes in between that consensus, and what engine builders/machinists say is the way to do it. Is this thread out-dated? Or are the engine builders?

It isn't what I would consider a 'serious' time attack car. It's a development car for my business, so will primarily be used for developing and collecting real world data on aero and other carbon fibre components that I build. I already build half the field in Racer class, as well as sponsoring two of the cars in that class - so I don't really want to try to compete with those guys, that isn't in my interests. That said, I still intend to compete in the secondary Tuner Class, so I am aiming for the 61 second bracket around Barbs. Which is no 55/56 second car, but it is still very very quick for a RWD front-engine car. The engine is going to have to be capable to do it. But dry sump is not part of the equation.

Yeh that was sort of my suspicion. I know a lot of these guys are building 1000hp+ engines, so it doesn't surprise me that they are thinking of block strength. But it was something I considered interesting enough to ask the question. I'm currently building my motor with a goal of 450rwkw so nothing crazy, but it is for a dedicated time attack car, so I want to get the oil control right (in Perth though, so our track is going to be pretty forgiving with no fast left-handers). My block is currently with my machinist, and he is happy to drill out the returns to 7mm and chamfer them, although he said it looks like the gasket might cover some of that anyway and isn't really sure there's any point. I'm sure I saw a picture in this thread of how the gasket sits with the enlarged return, but I can't find it now.

Yeh, but I think it is pretty widely accepted that the rear head drain doesn't act as a drain, it's a vent. But I find it interesting that in 82 pages of discussion and the general consensus being to drill out the oil returns to 10mm, nobody has mentioned weakening the block by doing so. But any engine builder or machinist I speak to is hesitant to drill out the returns. One said he might do 7mm, but certainly not 10mm. And I believe CRD also say don't touch them, leave them standard size.

No one?

Yes. You need to do the fuel pump wiring, the fuel rail, the fuel reg, the injectors, Motec M150, 6Boost, BW EFR 8374, Samsonas.

No i understand the enlarged oil returns and why it is done, I meant is it considered bad practise to weaken the block by drilling out the holes on big horsepower builds. I know of a few engine builders who would say doing anything that makes the walls of the block thinner is not a good idea. Just hadn't seen it discussed in this thread at all.

82 pages in 2 days, what a wild adventure. It's like reading of the rise and fall of several different dynasties throughout time - except interesting. One thing I didn't find a mention of anywhere: is it a drain or a vent? Haha. Jokes. Seriously though, enlarging the oil returns. I know of a few experienced engine builders who would say touching the block at all is a bad idea. Is this only true of very high horsepower applications? Ie. 1000hp+?

I would phone up your local road authority and speak to them about it. Bit of a risky thing to make a decision based on forum recommendations. You'll probably get your answer, but I would still phone and speak to them to have peace of mind.

Ok sure, but that's not the fault of the short shifter. I've had mine in the car for the last 10 years, and it was in the old NA gearbox when I bought the car 2 years before that. Wouldn't have any idea how worn my synchros are, but they're still going. Get the odd crunch going from 4th into 5th after 5 or 6 laps, but that'll learn me for trying to use 5th gear on a race track. I think if you're the sort of person that drives like that then you're going to end up breaking things anyway, stock shifter vs short shifter is the least of your worries.

This is easily in the top 5 coffee machine build threads on SAU right now, keep it up guys.

Feels off topic, but I really don't understand how a short shifter could increase synchro wear. All it does is change the throw at the top of the lever, the bottom of the lever stays exactly the same. Surely the only thing that effects synchro wear is engine speed vs gearbox shaft speed, ie. Not rev matching. So if your driving style smashing through gears, it doesn't matter what lever you've got, you'll wear the synchros with a stock shifter just the same.

Looks like it will work fine, it seems to come with both size bushes so you use the one that suits the gearbox you are using. Shouldn't need to use anything from your current shifter, it looks like it's all there.

The shifter does fit actually, as long as it is an R34 gearbox. The R34 pull-type gearbox and the RB20 gearbox use the same shorter nylon bush. If you get an RB25 gearbox from an R33 and try to use the shifter from an RB20 or R34 then it will actually fit, but it won't work nicely. The R33 push type gearbox needs a longer nylon bush on the shifter, so it will pop out of gear.

Driveshaft, as I said above.

Massive pressure surges, coupled with heat. Not an ideal situation for AN style fittings. The issue is, in most situations the hose will be ok, you don't tend to load up a power steering rack too much in every day operation. But on the odd occasion, you might hold the steering on full lock for too long and the hose will let go. Or you might need to make a couple of sharp yanks on the steering wheel and you'll see momentary pressures over 3000psi. Hydraulic hoses will often be made with a crimp fitting that gets crimped on at over 15000psi - significantly better than an AN style compression fitting that bites down on an olive or cuts into the rubber hose at however much pressure you manage to put on it with a shifter... I've had this conversation with so many guys at the track, and they always insist that 'we use this hose all the time and never had any issues' or 'the rep at the hose shop said it would be fine'. And so many times I've seen those cars going home early on a trailer because the power steering hose let go. Take it to a shop, get one made. Hydraulic hoses aren't expensive or hard to make, they just need to be done properly with the right equipment. The guys making those hoses aren't scared of making a power steering hose for a light vehicle, that's a walk in the park.

If NZ is a little closer to home, Franklin Engineering has some dress up stuff for RB's. From memory their bolt kits might only be for the cam covers, but they've got some nice other stuff too.

AN hose and fittings should not be used for hydraulic applications like power steering. Get a proper hydraulic hose made up - it will probably cost less than trying to do it with AN hose and fittings.

Is it a proper 4wd if it isn't diesel though? ??

When you say suspension, which parts of the suspension have you changed? The R34 GT uses an eyelet type mount on the bottom of the rear strut, same as R33 GTST's. The GTT uses a forklet on the bottom of the rear strut. Gearbox is different as mentioned. Because the gearbox is smaller, the driveshaft is shorter. So if you fit a GTT gearbox, you also need the driveshaft and diff. Off the top of my head, the rest is mechanically the same.

The R34 GT (non turbo) gearbox is essentially an RB20 gearbox, very weak and uses a push type clutch. The R34 GTT gearbox is exactly the same as an RB25DET gearbox, but uses a pull type clutch. If you are planning on changing to an R34 GTT gearbox/driveline at any point, then don't upgrade the clutch for your current gearbox - it won't be a direct swap without converting the GTT gearbox to a push type clutch.