GTRNUR

Ok.. a picture... N1 vs stock. And as we all probably know, the RB30/VL pumps resemble a vl pump but without the disc supporting the blades. Flow data is important for a number of reasons. 1. Higher flow reduces hotspots, and temperature differentuals in the engine. 2. Higher flow will pull in cooler water from the radiator more easily and faster into the hot coolant circulating within the engine blocks galeries, of course flow limited and controlled by the thermostat. 3. As a result of 2, higher flow will more quickly result in a stabilised engine temperature when loads change suddenly from light to heavy resulting in more heat. 4. More stable engine temps over varying operating conditions mean that the tune of the engine will not drift as much based on sensor corrections and compensations... so the car will be nicer to drive, run better and make more power more reliably. Ideally you want as much flow as you can possibly get, without pump cavitation, and without robbing too much power from the engine. Coolant flow rates should be matched to the operating speed and maximum working speed of the engine. If we were able to see an actual chart of the pump flow rate, pullies could be sized appropriately to achieve maximum flow at engine redline before cavitation sets in, thereby achiving the highest flow possible at low working speeds. I hope that makes more sense.

Where this thought came from is that I have been experimenting with different pully sizes on my open deck engine (which has the N1 water pump). I am also thinking of putting 3 temp sensors in the spacer plate of my next engine to get a picture of what is happening cooling wise around each of the cylinders. (Ala the Jun super lemon R33.. Too much data is just enough). Im trying to track down some REAL flow data for the RB water pumps. Seems that oil pump data is everyhere to be found, but there is little said about the flow capabilities of the various coolant pumps. The most that seems to be out there is: The VL/RB30 pumps are 6 blade and all RB20/25/26 pumps are 8 blade. N1 is 6 blade with an anti-cavitation disc. Search results have come up with this quote below... about the only moderately *useful* bit of information. Others comments posted claim the N1 pump has higher flow, but do not offer an explanation or any real data other than the belief that N1 = Race car stuff = MORE POWER = MORE COOLING. Also of interest is that the RB20/25/26 pumps are turned at a lower average speed due to the pulley size being larger, compared with the VL/RB30 pumps. Which stands to reason as the skyline engines are designed to rev more. So turning the pump slower will mean less cavitation risk at higher RPM, whilst possibly achiving a lower flow rate. So the thinking is, that a stock pump/pully configuration will actually be more "streetable" for most applications, as it will provide more flow at lower RPM. Resulting in a more even engine temperature (less variation) from the block to the head. It also stands to reason the N1 pumps whilst being able to maintain sufficent coolant flow at 9000 rpm on an RB26 configured engine, may also just barely deliver enough coolant flow at low speeds. Which leads me to think the N1 pump is not at all suitable for a big torque stroker engine, as sufficent coolant flow may not be possible when the engine is operating around 1500-2200 rpm. Especially in very hot climates. But on a smaller displacement engine that typically revs around ~3000+ in typical in traffic driving, the N1 is adequite. There is also the Patrol RB30's to consider. They run a smaller pully size again than the VL's but on the same pump. Granted a big part of the reasoning behind this is to turn the fan faster so the engine will get propper cooling when spinning all 4 weeks and bogged to the axels in mud. Im interested in hearing everyones thoughts, and if you have actual flow data by all means post it up!

I didnt spot you ? Were you in your R33? I only saw 3 other skylines on the drive and none were gtr's. Im using a FC Datalogit for tuning and have never actually used the hand controller for anything other than as a gauge. The EGT sensors in each manifold before the turbo's will be able to be logged using the datalogit as well, once I get around to running the wiring through the firewall that is. I have re-scaled both my RPM scales and load scales to give me more resolution at the cruise RPM (1250-2500 every 250 rpm) and load bands every 500 units in the cruise zone (instead of 1000 unit MAP increments). I also have one extra RPM column placed in the peak torque zone, though I cant actually place that in the perfect RPM point until I run the car on a dyno. For the moment Im just keeping the tune safe but it can certainly go leaner.

Update time. I’ve been playing with the cooling system a little lately, changing pulley sizes so as to restore normal pump/fan speed as my harmonic balancer is an under drive size on the alternator/pump drive. Having switched to an RB30 pulley the car sits comfortably on the thermostat temperature when cruising around town in 30+ degree heat, but still creeps up when stuck in traffic. I am considering changing to a slightly smaller 300ZX pulley next. I have installed an Eboost Street 40, and boost now holds stable to 7000 rpm, which is as high has I've revved it whist under full load so far. So boost control is for the most part sorted, with the exception that the lowest pressure I can get is 1.6 bar. I will be dialing back the pre-load on the actuators this weekend to a 0.6 bar lift off preload (instead of the 1 bar that it is currently at). The actuators are rated at 1.3, so I presume this explains the rather high boost it is achieving. I have just completed a round trip to Townsville in the car, and put another 700+km on the clock. That puts the clock at 4200 on the new engine now. The car performed flawlessly, except for blowing off an intake hose once while overtaking. I was able to fine tune the economy side of the tune during the drive, and managed about 12.3l/100km. Considering that included stopping for roadwork’s 3 times, driving a range, and some rather liberated use of the right foot when overtaking I am pretty happy with that result. The AFR's at the cruise RPM of 2000-2250 are still only 14.7:1, as I still haven’t hooked up my EGT sensors to my data logger yet. I think as low as 10-11 lt/100km may be achievable when I lean back the mixtures a little more. As far as the power side of the tune goes, I still have a few dead spots above 3500 rpm when I drop back a gear. Response from idle is ballistic, but when on boost the car is utterly amazing. I'd go into details but I’ll be incriminating myself! Safe to say the drive back from Townsville was a lot of fun

Does anyone know conclusively what causes the pumps to fail, or is it mostly guesswork and hearsay? The only possibility that comes to mind is that if the crank is wobbling side to side (and up and down) at the pump end, that at a certain point in its rotation the crank drive collar might lean (hammer)on the inner gear with sufficient force that it is striking the outer gear which is hard up against the pump housing. What starts as a hammering eventually creates a crack in the inner gear. So you’d have to be pretty unlucky to have one fail, but what would make the probability that it could happen worse would be loose main bearing clearances combined with a poor balance on the crank, flywheel/clutch and harmonic balancer. To me this also makes sense why the Tomei pumps tend to survive a little better. It wont just be the metalurgy, but also the splined drive in the pump gear allows for a little more movement. It would be interesting to see how tightly the drive spline on a 2JZ holds onto the crank. Im guessing there is a fair amount of play, enough to tolerate ~4 thou of movement. Im really just guessing though...

Do you mean this data from the website: http://www.nitto.com.au/products/oilpump-RB.html?category=engineblock Jun pump data is here: http://www.rhdjapan.com/jun-high-flow-oil-pump-rb26dett-rb20det-rb25det-16702 Tomei information seems to be all over the place. Data varies from 56-57 lt/min at 6000 or 7000 rpm depending on what supplier website your looking at. Or were you chasing actual test data performed by an independant?

Ah.. ok. I stopped reading for a bit there to look at the pictures...

Just curious Matt but how many bonnet's do you have? Ive counted two R tune nismos and a vspec 2 bonnet so far. Add that to your wheel collection and you must have a double bay garage for just storing all the gear to mix and match the appearance of your car! Im hanging out to see your "cleaning out the garage" sale thread in the parts section.

I'm familiar with the costs of R&D, but am to embarised to say what ive spent on my engine projects! $10K .. Thumbs up for having the courage to have a go at pushing the limits a little further. In many peoples eyes its hard to justify costs and effort required to develop something new in case it doesnt work out. But I think the journey of the R&D process is seriously as much fun as the end result of getting to drive the car. If you have the spare cash, the capabilities and backup engineering support to try something new, I highly recommend giving it a go. I can't express how satisfying it is to get behind the wheel and drive my car knowing that its being powered by an engine of my own design, which is probably unique in the world.

My head hurts when I try to read this! On topic though... The other benefit worth considering is that it takes longer to heat up a larger oil capacity. This is useful for sprints where your at consistantly high rpm and not necessarily getting a lot of airflow. Its been my experience that cooling systems dont work well until your above 80km/h (and in a tall gear, not in 2nd and 7000+ RPM, at full load). Below 80 your cooling is predominatly fan derived. Im with Steveo with the higher flow and smaller restrictor option too. I like the idea that my bearings area getting plenty of oil flow to keep them cool. I also like that 7 litres of oil stays cleaner for longer compared to a smaller pump.

Its either got a boost or exhaust leak somewhere on the pressure side, or something is massively wrong. Only 400hp from 20psi with a monster turbo that should make near on 800+ flywheel hp just isnt right. Pressure test the intake from the compressor housing intake and check for air leaks. Examine the exhaust manifold with a microscope looking for signs of carbon. A leak between the head and the turbine housing will cause this. Also check the wastegate-manifold gasket, and make sure the gate is actually closing properly. Pull the radiator and re-set your timing to 0-0. A full tooth out is something like 14 degrees from memory, which is FAR too much of a change. Your luckly you havent killed/bent something already. Check your cat for blockages and upgrade that exhaust. You should have at least a 3.5" on it, but it will need a 4" to come close to reaching the potential of the rest of the setup. And definatly upgrade that intercooler too. While its all apart, compression test it as well, just to get a picture of what the ring seal is like.

I noticed John being a little camera shy in one of your earlier videos. Its amazing watching guys like this work. Reminds me of an old bloke that used to work for an engineering firm that I work for. He trained the majority of the boilermakers in cairns about 20 years ago. He too is a boiler maker by trade, but also a metallurgist. Guys like these have an understanding of metal that current generation boilermakers will never attain. When people say it cant be done, they design and build the tools to do it, and then prove everyone wrong without any display of ego. True craftsman.

Dam, Gandalf would want to be pretty dam sure of the quality of his welds! What pressure was used to inflate the pipe? I'd be terrified to stand near that when its inflated let along bang it with a hammer at the same time. Ive heard too many horror stories of hydraulic fluid at high pressure cutting through skin like a razor, or worse filling a cavity in your body with fluid. The end result is very impressive though. Gandalf is definately a wizard.

Makes a strong argument for running a water/meth injection setup and normal bp98. Though for a 600kw toy fuel economy doesnt really enter into it. I know someone that uses mixed BP98/Martini race fuel mix in his 600kw street car. You can't put a price tag on fun if you have a surplus income.

So long as your old block has no cracks or holes punched through it, why not sleeve the block back to 86mm? Tomei pump? There is no better wet sump pump on the market. Filling an engine with tomei parts is great if you can afford it. But it will turn into an expensive mess if you have a monkey build it. An engine using all stock parts assembled by a pro will be far better than one filled with the tomei catalogue thats built by a monkey. Decide what you want to do, find a good builder and follow their advice. Expertise and experience is everything. Im sure there are many builders in australia that would happily build what you are after, test run it, and then ship it over to you.

You need a collar.

Power FC sold. R34 MFD Map sensor sold. Only the R34 GTR stock injectors still up for grabs.

BUMP R34 GTR Power FC BUY IT NOW!

+1 There has been so much talk of people wanting to try -5's on a 3lt will be great to see some results.

If E85 were everywhere it would be great, but because it isnt it limits your ability to drive any kind of distance with the car. My thoughts are, add a boost controller to give you two specific boost levels. Keep one lower boost level as a 98 octane tune, and run the 2nd boost level a little higher and have it trigger activation of a water/methanol injection system. This provides a power boost and detonation suppression at the same time, so the tune can be made more agressive for more power. If you run out of meth/water you just run the lower boost level. The whole fuel map doesnt need to be re-worked for another fuel either so you save on tune time. It will drive exactly as it does already, but just have more power when its leaned on. No extra fuel system changes need to be made. This is basically what skylinesky has done with his monster 500+kw R34 to keep temps down and allow the engine to be really leaned on. Other bonuses are that it lowers your EGT's and also steam cleans the inside of the combustion chambers, much better than the alcohol would. http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/340632-ultimate-gtr-r34-in-australia/page__p__5594627__fromsearch__1#entry5594627

Shock loading from launching an AWD car, twists the gearbox casing causing the case to crack. A supra will get some wheel spin, and at least some wheel spin reduces torque twisting stresses. Flexing and cracking of the gearbox casing, and also flexing of internal thrust surfaces causes internal parts to go out of alignment when under load. Once that happens its all downhill from there. Look up the RIPS BORG R33 GTR build on gtr.co.uk. They post up pictures of the carnage after a good launch destroys an r34 getrag that had a PPG gearset. My mind still boggles at the thought that these supra drag cars are using "stock" gearboxes too. I think some people's interpertation of stock and others differ somewhat, and the only stock parts might well be the casing and a few bearings. Nobody that races cars that run 7's tells the world precicely how they did it.. so sure, its all stock!

Good to get some feedback about the quality of the various body parts available out there. I was considering these: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1999-2001-Nissan-Skyline-R34-NS-Carbon-Fiber-Fenders-/330539641484?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item4cf5b2aa8c Considering how cheap the USD is now, as well as being carbon, it would be interesting to see what the fitment quality is like. Edit: I'll add... while it might seem pricy. I'd rather pay double than have to pay a body guy to get some substandard quality guards to fit correctly by filling them with bog. 1/2 the time they would never be identical from left to right if they had to be "custom fitted" as well...

From where do you source the kit? The cayenne brakes use a radial mount (mounting holes aligned with the axel), so moving the offset to center the caliper on the disc can be tricky whilst maintaining good material thickness of the caliper adapter. I figured this was why most brake conversion using porsche componentary used the GT3/996/997 axial mounted calipers, so you can use a simple block mount adapter, then drill and tap holes to center the caliper on the disc easily. Pretty wild looking collector there too, now that I can see where the wastegate ports are cut to extract gas from all the header pipes evenly at the colector just before the point of the merge. In theory it should do wonders for maintaining gas flow and decreasing lag between gear shifts, as gas flow is kept even and at maximum velocity right before the turbine. Getting the wastegate flange section to seal to the collector would be an interesting trick because of thermal expansion it will all change shape a little when its getting hot. Unless it gets tig welded on in step 3.

MAP sensor and Toshiba MFD screen sold. Power FC with hand controller and injectors still up for grabs.

I like that... not chasing outright power but instead response. Yet its about a 700hp at the flywheel setup. I see a twin scroll turbine there with possibly a quick spool valve mounted between the turbine and the collector flange. Am I close? Hard to tell from such tiny pictures. Are those Porsche GT3 or cayenne turbo brakes? Ive been contemplating doing the same conversion to my R34 as well.