GTRNUR

I have investigated the carbon clutches. Some the GTR UK forum guys love them. They slip a little when cold aparently which makes them streetable, but the down side is when really taxed the head has caused some of the components to weld. Same for the ATS carbon clutches. Pass on having it rebuilt. I wasn't overly happy with the pedal feel anyway compared to other nismo/exeedy's ive driven .Time for something new and improved!

It was a Nismo gmax red cover which I believe is an early competition model version or some sort of higher power model. It was new when the engine went in about 18,000km ago. Its never been right from the start though, so Im not too concerned. On first startup I couldnt get it to dis-engage and had to alter the slave cylinder piston size to get more throw. I didn't install the clutch myself. It was put in by the mechanics that fitted the engine for me, so they may have done something wrong. Maybe a disc is in backwards perhaps... Or the clutch could have been a dud too. Such is cars...

Yes the sleeves are a touch over 3mm at their thinnest, which is 0.5mm thicker than the cast in cylinders are in a normal block (at their thinnest). The version 3 design has keyed sleeves like an OS engine. At their thickest they are 5mm. It shares a few similarities with how the modular deck works on a 4B11T evo X engine, excepted that the RB26 still needs a spacer to pull this off. Its the bug. The new motor is now 2.7lt twin turbo. I've upped the compression and changed to nickel-silicon-carbide cylinders, Should be interesting with the twin t517z's on it. Aiming for a startup next weekend. I managed to destroy the clutch in the gtr on the way back from Proserpine today. The clutch doesn't hold at all with the revs over 4500 anymore. Im looking at an exedy competition D twin plate clutch as an alternative to a nismo twim plate at the moment. They are lighter, which will allow me to get some better response down low without losing as much torque fighting intertia in the flywheel.

Not much new to report really. I've been playing with cam timing a little and have found the motor responds very well to more lobe seperation as well as much more advance on the exhaust cam. It feels like the gtrs shuffle issue is nearly completely eliminated. Cam timing changes have moved the low end torque up a little further and reduced fuel economy a little (8.75/100km now), but the torque band is a lot wider and doesn't drop as sharply after 6500 rpm. It also lowered EGT's significantly and has improved the accuracy of the wideband readings as a result. The reading at the dump is now a lot closer to the reading at the end of the pipe. There is nearly 18,000km on engine now so it has proven itself to be reliable. More dyno time is in the pipe line when Im back home and have the time for it. Im building another engine at the moment too which is pretty much entirely custom (not an RB), and thats absorbing all my spare time. Yes a version 3 is next, and all the design work is finished. It will be a very different engine to this one, as the block is converted to a wet sleeve setup. It will be able to support a 90x90 bore/stroke making 3.4lt. It will be a 23mm spacer plate which will still fit with no radical modifications to the car. The first variation will be 89x90, Nitto internals, ported head with a set of step 1 springs and some 260/10mm cams and most likely a pair of GTX28's.

Hi Rockabilly, how did you go with the linear actuator control of the valve? If your still playing with this, the actuator that is used on the factory 2JZ twin turbo sequential setup would probably be large enough to operate it. Thats if you have the room to fit it. The actuator operates a valve that enables the second turbo on the 2jz's. It has a lot more throw than a conventional actuator too, so its size combined with leverage could solve your problem. See the pic. http://www.rx7club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=434889&stc=1&d=1309825673

Your air-fuel ratio's will play a big part in your success or failure here. If your fuel ratio's are dipping deep into and past the 11's, then 0.8 won't be enough. Aim for 12:1. Transitions can be tricky with big injectors too. Really for that power you only need 550cc's. Plug gapping to fix this is really just a bandaid to cover up the fact the tune is too rich. 6 heat range is fine for 320kw too, there is no benefit in going to 7's or super cold race plugs. In fact a hotter plug will foul less.

What size cams did you have in that old setup? 280/10.5's? I was making 80kw more at 4000 rpm with stock cams, no porting and GTRS's. I still agree with you that they aren't a great turbo though. I can't help but think HKS originally intended them to be used on drag only cars that wanted low mounts to pass as a standard looking. What have you built Steve? Tell us of this new setup!

Post up a dyno sheet. How does the boost curve look in top end. Is it dropping off and your boost controller is having to compensate a lot more in top end or are you using a flat rate duty cycle and it holds boost well across the entire rev range?

My dyno sheets have had both so far.. but the sheets I am aiming to compare too don't. And while 4th gear vs 5th gear results should produce very similar power figures, the torque and boost response curves are completely different. On the street I'll get full boost at 4500, but on a dyno the car wants off the rollers if it is loaded up at 12km/second to achieve the same response curve.

Yeah Ive seen that method before. I'll have to see if the shop I use have ancors on the floor behind the doors. True, but I've noticed that a lot of the other R34 dyno sheets in circulation (from known tuners like Racepace and RIPS) seem to be done in 4th. The only reason I want to use 4th is for comparison purposes. Roller speed maxes out around 200km/h in 4th at about 7500 rpm from memory.

Is there a thread discussing tie down methods to hold gtr's onto the dyno properly? I will be booking more dyno time soon and want to do all the tuning in 4th so I can compare my results to what everyone else does.

There is a time and place to share results. And that time is when the owner is happy with the results. A lot of time and effort goes into safely tuning a high power engine too. These are things not to be rushed, that is unless you happen to have endless bags of money to replace all the things you break along the way.

Odd...? I noticed that the Racepace built GTTRKT RB28 vcam R34 and the Midori R34 both ran external drains to the drivers side sump from washer bottle mounted catch cans. I suppose if you meant dedicated circuit though, very small restrictors could be used as revs are always up high which would ensure the head gets enough, but not too much oil. Such a restrictor might not be a good idea in a street car though. I believe it was Steve telling me that some of the racepace cars were using a 0.9mm restrictor. Is this what you meant?

Get a -16 size fitting welded to the top/right side of the sump when your at it, forward as far as you can put it. Your catch can will have an oil return to that location.

Coil charge/dischage settings.. or dwell settings.... Over-driving the coils with too much current will run them too hot, and that can cause a miss. The issue will then get worse with heat. The coils themselves handle the heat, but the ignitor module gets upset and will cause miss-fires. I can't be 100% sure, but from memory a maximum charge time of 1.2ms and a min of 0.8ms worked well for me with a wolf, but I wasn't anywhere near that power level with the engine that I was experimenting with this. Sorry if this is useless information for the vipec. I've never played with one yet. Other vipec tuned RB owners might be able to share their ignition value settings...

Im guessing your using one of these crank pulley's... They are absolutely worthless. The only way you can possibly get away with them is to use an external belt drive pump, and even then it will be a race use only. Any kind of decent miles put on the engine will cause bearing damage. Throw it in the bin and buy a Ross or ATI balancer. http://www.ebay.com/...ssories&vxp=mtr You need to check the crank isn't bent, the main tunnel isn't align bored off center, and that the oil pump locator dowels are all correct. To do this is very simple, and its all done with the same test. 1. Remove both camshafts, so you don't break anything when rotating the engine without a timing belt. 2. Get your new pump, whatever brand, and pop out the front seal. 3. Install the pump on the engine, with gasket, and torque bolts to spec. 4. Rotate engine by hand to TDC. (note key way position) 5. Measure the clearences each side of the pump with a feeler gauge, and document as position 1. 6. Rotate the engine clockwise 45 degrees, and re-measure again. Document as position 2 measurements. 7. Repeat steps until you have 8 measurements. Measurements are taken with a feeler gauge, inserted through the front of the pump to measure the gap each side of the flats. Interperting the results. 1. If your crank is bent, or the oil pump drive colar is installed off-center, you will see a trend where the larger clearence follows the rotation of the crank around. 2. If your pump dowels are not centering the pump dead-center on the crank (or align bore is out), (( AND YOUR CRANK IS OK)) , then you will see the same clearences in the same positions at position 1-4 and its 180 degree position. Ideally, clearences should be the same each side of the pump gear, and close to identical through a 360 degree rotation of the crank. Once you have taken these measurements post up the results. You can also measure the crank to see if it is bent using a dial indicator. Set it up mounted to the front of the block, and poisition the dial indicator on the round end of the crank snout. 0 the gauge and rotate the crank slowly to measure the crank for straightness. Look for any deviation on the gauge, and note the deviation that is the largest. Reset the gauge to 0, and then rotate it till you can measure the total throw on the end of the crank. You should see 0 if it is perfect.

Holy CRAP! http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/NEW-Set-2-Front-Carbon-Ceramic-Rotors-CCM-F430-Part-240531-/220889728465?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item336e0dc5d1

In the concentrations you'd be burning it, nitric acid production wouldn't be an issue. Also consider that its going in with water and a whole lot of fuel so it blows out the exhaust pretty quickly and at high temperatures. Its not as though its a top fuel car running a 90% nitro mix. No where near as bad as a diesel with sulphuric acid eating its exhaust. Considering the quality of the oils we use and how regularly we change them compared to a diesel, polutants don't stay in the engine very long. I've been meaning to post this link too: 760whp skyline with direct port water injection. There is a stack of information skyline specific in this thread. Dyno sheets, before/afters etc.. http://www.aquamist....ht=nitromethane

So you let your car actually get dirty enough that you use the washers? I think ive used the washer bottle perhaps twice in my life. Water/meth tank makes much more sense to me. And yes you can use it to wash your windows with too. Have you never cleaned glass with metho and a newspaper?

Out of that thread you should read ATCO and R.I.P.S NZ's posts. You can break anything if you try hard enough but with Tomei and Nitto you have to try pretty darn hard!

Either Nitto or Tomei are good. I can't say ive ever heard of either of these failing. If you bought one of these first, you probably wouldn't have had to start this thread. Having said that... if you are using a solid billet pully instead of a propper ballencer like a Ross or ATI (or even a factory one), then your asking for trouble... and may well be the first to break a top end pump because of it.

Add a drop of blue food colouring to the 5lt mix and you can call it windex injection. You can actually use some kinds of industrial glass cleaners too, as they contain up to 25% methanol. Also this is something else that I find interesting... http://www.hobbyparts.com.au/store/item/nitro004l/fuelnitromethane/ 5-10% nitro is considered safe. Higher concentrations can fall out of suspension, but would probably remain in solution better if mixed with methanol first. There is quite a few threads on the waterinjection info forum about this.

Precicely.

Load switched based on Manifold vacuum, not RPM was my idea. And having re-thought how it could be done, the back flow valves can be eliminated if the fuel supply is fed from a three way 3/8" solenoid (same as a boost control solenoid, but fuel rated). This would eliminate any cross-fuel system contamination.

Good point. The NEO heads are essentially the apex of the development of the RB platform. For the most part all that was done with the Rb26 heads since 1989 was camshaft development. Forget about 1000hp cars too. Every 1000hp RB out there tends to break either itself or everything else around it when they are driven. Try 500-600, becase that at least will be reliable enough to be daily driven, and not an utter bitch to drive in traffic. Most of the KM's I do in my car are done below 2500 rpm. This is where most of my fuel is consomed. Factor in an 8.2:1 compression ratio and there is no reason 91 octane won't work just fine. The motor doesn't start to run at 0 vacuum until about 110 in 6th, which is about 2400 rpm. And thats perhaps 2/5th throttle, so not even close to full load.