Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

im not keeping the motor for long, thats the only reason im not doing it that way. the motor is just to get me around for the time being till i can build a 30/26 which is where my money will be well spent.

and even the way ive done it, you will all see it handle the runs and track days well ;)

im not keeping the motor for long, thats the only reason im not doing it that way. the motor is just to get me around for the time being till i can build a 30/26 which is where my money will be well spent.

and even the way ive done it, you will all see it handle the runs and track days well :)

If you wanted a cheap rebuild you should take the donk out , strip it and carefully check everything then only replace what ever is warn/damaged . You can't just hone it out and hope for the best, the pistons you used ( the second hand ones ) you should have measured them to make ure the piston to bore clearance is not to big .

Just because they came out of an rb25 don't think they are the same, don't forget they are graded so they do vary a bit, then you hone it as well .

You can't realy clean the bore after honing on the car you have to scrub it with soapy water to make sure you don't leave any honing stuff there that will wear the bore very quick . You can't measure the bearing clearances on the car the crank has to come out put on the lathe to check the runout to make sure its within specs .

If as you say the bearings were like new you would have been better of to leave them rather than change them and not check how much clearance you have there .You left the old pistons there and it was pinging so why not the old bearings? You should have at least pulled the oil pump appart to check for scoremarls and wear .

Feel free to pm if you want but this time do it the right way, believe me you can't cut corners and don't forget you will need a new gasket set and a new h/gasket dont use the old one again .

Some people do everything right and they still have problems, imagine when you try to cut corners !

Good luck with it ..

the pistons i used were the same dia as the ones ive got in there, the bore didnt increase in dia. by much at all, not even half a mm.

we did wash the bores out then blowed them out thoroughly. same with the crank.

the 4/6 pistons were replaced.

anyways, im leaving all decisions to my bro in law.

the matter is now closed.

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

    • My understanding is that UV tends to accelerate the aging process. If the car has been garaged, then you could probably get away with extending beyond 10 years. FWIW, in 2015, I had tyres on my 180B SSS that had a 3-digit code (2 for week, 1 for decade), ending in 0, so could have been more than 30 years old, but still worked fine. I did replaced them very quickly, though, once I discovered what the code meant!
    • But we haven't even gotten to the point of talking about stateless controllers or any of the good stuff yet!
    • You guys need to take this discussion to another thread if you want to continue it, most of the last 2 pages has nothing to do with OP's questions and situation
    • And this, is just ONE major issue for closed loop control, particularly using PID. One such issue that is created right here, is integrator wind up. But you know GTSBoy, "it's just a simple PID controller"...  
    • Nah. For something like boost control I wouldn't start my design with PID. I'd go with something that originates in the fuzzy logic world and use an emergency function or similar concept. PID can and does work, but at its fundamental level it is not suited to quick action. I'd be reasonably sure that the Profecs et al all transitioned to a fuzzy algorithm back in the 90s. Keep in mind also that where and when I have previously talked about using a Profec, I'm usually talking about only doing an open loop system anyway. All this talk of PID and other algorithms only comes into play when you're talking closed loop boost control, and in the context of what the OP needs and wants, we're probably actually in the realm of open loop anyway. Closed loop boost control has always bothered me, because if you sense the process value (ie the boost measurement that you want to control) in the plenum (after the throttle), then boost control to achieve a target is only desirable at WOT. When you are not WOT, you do not want the the boost to be as high as it can be (ie 100% of target). That's why you do not have the throttle at WO. You're attempting to not go as fast as you can. If the process variable is measured upstream of the throttle (ie in an RB26 plenum, or the cold side pipework in others) then yeah, sure, run the boost controller closed loop to hit a target boost there, and then the throttle does what it is supposed to do. Just for utter clarity.... an old Profec B Spec II (or whatever it is called, and I've got one, and I never look at it, so I can't remember!) and similar might have a MAP sensor, and it might show you the actual boost in the plenum (when the MAP sensor is connected to the plenum) but it does not use that value to decide what it is doing to control the boost, except to control the gating effect (where it stops holding the gate closed on the boost ramp). It's not closed loop at all. Once the gate is released, it's just the solenoid flailing away at whatever duty cycle was configured when it was set up. I'm sure that there are many people who do not understand the above points and wonder wtf is going on.  
×
×
  • Create New...