Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i think i have found a potential restriction to airflow in a series 2 stagea (manual). here are some pics of the gaskets from a series 2 Stagea and an R34 GT-t. this seems to indicate that the runners for the Stagea are smaller and i am guessing but possibly the cams are different (not verified yet) contrary to most information i had found previously. the plenum visually appears smaller. i am guessing this has been done to improve down low performance on the heavier car sacrificing some top-end!?!?

thoughts anyone?

post-5777-1154786389.jpgpost-5777-1154786408.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/128983-series-2-stagea-plenum/
Share on other sites

I thought that the general idea was that the Skyline/Stagea motors were the same in all these major aspects, whereas what you've seen here indicates what I'd call a pretty big difference. Shows you shouldn't make assumptions on these things, Nissan seem to be willing to customise their engines for various cars in quite major ways looking at that manifold difference! And obviously consider the Skyline somewhat more performance orientated, not that its a surprise I guess..

On power figures alone, the stagea s2 doesn't appear to be detuned compared to the r34GT-T.

But the findings above show that there are clearly differences between them and I'd agree with the point about more low-down power in the stagea, sacrificing some top-end. My S2 stagea (completely stock) is good off the line but runs out of puff at about 3000-3500rpm after which its a slow climb up through the revs.

Great discovery wolverine!

i think the part numbers are different. some one with FAST will be handy here (hint anyone).

i just got the car back and it has been a huge head scratcher why we were running out of puff. everything was checked or changed unfortunately that left the factory parts like cams and plenum (which we thought would be the same as an R34). we struggled to get much over 210-215 rwkw without screwing in a whole lot of boost so there was clearly a restriction.

the car finally made 237rwkw with a GT-RS turbo (with all the appropriate fruit attached to the car).

anyway i hope the next person to modify can add/confirm some of the details above.

Ah, I wondered whose car it was that John was calling me about, now I know it was yours. Big head scratch that one, my guess was cams, which I hope to confirm shortly. I didn't think of inlet differences.

post-5777-1154786389_thumb.jpg

The top gasket in that picture looks like an RB25DET NON NEO one.

If so, it still wouldn't explain the low power, R33GTST's easily exceed that. So my guess is still with the cams.

:thumbsup: cheers :P

Edited by Sydneykid

SK the top one is the neo stagea gasket as it was explained to me. the other one was from an R34 GT-t (unless i have my wires crossed).

we compared prank's plenum (S1) and it is substantially larger (visually).

UAS spoke to nissan and confirmed the cams are the same but i still have my doubts.

Edited by wolverine

Any updates?

Anyone know what the R34 GTT cams are compared to the Neo Stagea?

Whether the cams are the issue or not, which Tomie Poncams would suit the best

Type A 252 duration 9.15mm lift

Type B 252 duration 9.15mm lift

Turbo rated at 450hp

Street use

SK?

What you have there is; top, a neo gasket, bottom a non neo, r33, series one stagea, whatever gasket.

It's the neos that have the smaller runners. Previous models had bigger ones. Doesn't seem to restrict at all. I think it would help having smaller ones to keep air velocity. Ie; I think the air would expand a little in the plenum and inlet manifold then compress again going into the ports with the bigger one but with the smaller one (neo) it would keep the air more compressed all the to the ports thus requiring less effort to recompress and being ultimately less restrictive.

I've been travelling, or I would have already commented..:(

Given I have both a R34 GTX turbo and a Stagea RS4S I can say that -

a) they appear to be absolutely identical (NEO) engines - at least from the outside.

b) I don't run out of puff in the stagea at 3000-3500 revs! (as someone suggested above)

c) taking into account the 200kg difference, the engines seem to have the same power. Though the stagea is of course more grippy because of the weight, and the four wheel drive, so I think it makes up for the weight difference quite a bit by getting more power to the ground some times... They both move well when you want them to..

d) the only slight difference I had been finding was that the R34 was going on boost faster. But that has recently been tracked down to a leaky hose, so I'll see what it is like in the next few weeks…

If the engines are different in any major way I'll be a bit surprised..

Hope that helps someone.. :D

Ian

Stagea neo Rb25DET cam spec's

Inlet 236 deg 8.4 mm lift

Exhaust 232 deg 7.0mm lift

What are R34 neo spec's?

Just found the R34 spec's

Inlet 236 deg 8.4 mm lift

Exhaust 232 deg 8.7mm lift

So would the difference in the R34 exhaust cam lift be reason for the different power levels?

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

    • Porous blocks are a known issue on something like a Porsche M96, it's not really something I've ever heard of on an RB26. It's possible what people thought was a "porous block" was really a cracked block that they just didn't spot the crack on.
    • This is a controversial subject really, the whole power vs fun thing I mean And this is the main reason I got back into a MX5 Of the last few notable daily cars I've owned whilst I have frequented SAU R33 GTS-t: fun, but because I'm a idiot I modified well past a reliable fun car and ended up hating it, although that was my fault because I tried to have a daily cruiser and race car all in one, the family called it the sometimes car, because sometimes it was working, sometimes it was broken, gladly sold it NB MX5: brilliant car, thrashed the Bejebus out of it, but, again, was stupid and deleted the air con, power steering and stripped the interior out, whilst still fun, and reliable, and super cheap on consumables, it was not a fun place to be going on long cruises, I did love it, but basically every family member hated going anywhere in it, sadly sold it 2015 WRX STI: soulless thing that looked like your average Kia sedan and had that horrible boxer engine with glass ringlands, the family did like it though, that thing was one of my stupidest purchases and I still regret it 2017 Toyota 86: 😪 if I didn't crash it, I would probably still have it, it was a fun little thing, even with that horrible boxer engine, the family did like it, the only reason I didn't get another 86, or, BRZ was the boxer engine, I should have learnt after owning the STI, but I'm a idiot VX SS: great cruiser, fits the whole family, and was fast as.....in a straight line, but a big fat thing, so no enjoyment throwing it around corners, the family was unimpressed with the whole boganness of if, but they did admit it was a comfy place to sit on long cruises As for the NC, I feel it is perfect for what I want, or need out of of a car, whether I'm cruising the Hwy, back roads, twisties or peak hour traffic, the Mrs doesn't mind driving it either, or cruising in it as well, although she does bump her head of the roof nearly every time she gets in, which is farking hilarious, and the kids love taking it for a thrash as well So basically, I've had constantly more fun, and way less headache and heartache, both on the track and on the street, in low powered cars,  go figure.....LOL One thing though, the Mrs has stated that the cams have made the exhaust sound much louder, which they have, but it doesn't bother me, in fact, I actually like it, but, to negate any future comments from the Minister for War and Finances I may look at some changes to the rear muffler set-up to drop the volume down a tad to appease her when we are out and about in it
    • You will need to extend the turbo inlet pipe somehow, which could/might be done with silicone/rubber pipe, but might need steelwork, depending on your intake. And you will need to change the pipework on the outlet in teh same way, but this is more likely to need steelwork.
    • I see... Any idea how much fab work is required? I note the Hygear megathread but its like 900 pages
    • I should try the experiment you're talking about, the throttle switch is still there carried over from the R32 and it's still all wired up but after I did the whole intake manifold refurb and had to recalibrate the TPS I managed to somehow get the idle switch reporting activation at 0.22V, then when I adjusted it to 0.45V for idle it decided the engine was permanently no longer idling which caused some very weird behavior, closed loop idle was disabled so it would basically be at the whims of the cold start valve and whatever the base timing table was at. Then just unplugging/replugging the TPS with the ECU live caused it to relearn the idle TPS position and decide 0.45V was idle. Presumably there's nothing in the TPS that allows for the throttle switch to "recalibrate" like that, not easily at least.
×
×
  • Create New...