Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I keep comapring all results to Sydney kids original rb30 engine.

475hp on engine dyno, using old t04e and standard everything on 1 bar boost..

anyway.. great results.

Some numbers to think about;

475 bhp = 355 kw

less 60 kw for losses = 295 rwkw

The engine dyno room is airconditioned at 21C , no radiator, oil cooler etc so you don't get as much heat soak as you do in the engine bay of a car on a roller dyno. The intercooler sits in a tub of water (no ice), so the temp is pretty constant. Plus we tuned the ever living crap out of it, spent 3 days on getting the maps absolutely perfect. There might be 15-20 kw advantage in all of that.

So I reckon 297 rwkw at 17 psi is damn fine effort OFENSV, well done.:D

Through a RB25DET 5 speed.

I found it quite interestering the before and after...

No doubt air temps and dyno differences make a difference. But non the less it was interestering to note.

I can't remember exactly how much boost, it was running but it was somewhere around the mid 20's.

For those interestered I went for a little drive and did a complete map trace.

Lots of light load cruise and a bit of spirited driving through the hills.

A few WOT's to 6000rpm also.

RB20DET PFC, RB30DET, Stock RB20DET Turbo that initially hits 12psi then tails off to 8-9psi rather quickly.

interesting piece of trivia:

the 152-tooth Dayco 94407 timing belt is the same as that used on the Audi (Passat?) 1.8 litre twin turbo engines in their newer model cars. it is, however, much more expensive to buy it from an Audi dealer, trust me!

Cubes i have NFI what that 5hit means.

also: the 94407 is 25mm wide, but in the DIYrb30DET guide it says that it is 30mm wide. can anyone confirm that theirs is 30mm?

RPM points are the X axis every 400rpm, starting from 400rpm.

Load points are the Y Axis.

I didn't actually measure my belt. It did however fill up the complete cam gear with only a mm or two to spare, so what ever the cam gear width is is pretty much what the 94407 belt is.

interesting - the RB30 crankshaft drive cog for the cam belt is 25.4mm wide, the same as the RB30 timing belt and the belt i just bought from the audi.

the RB25 cam gears are 30mm wide, as are the RB30. i assume this is to allow for a bit of belt movement as there is no lip to guide it on to these.

are you guys using RB25 harmonic balancers and timing belt drive cogs, or are you using RB30 drive cogs? the 25 ones could be wider?

with my RB30 drive cog there is no way i could get a 30mm timing belt on there, that's all.

yep i'd say the DIY guide is a bit misleading in that regard, all the RB series timing belts are 25.4mm i would suggest.

a 30mm belt would NOT fit on any of the drive cogs, which are just barely the width of the belt. if the belt is enough for a 1.8L quad cam twin turbo it should be good enough for me, using standard cams and springs in addition keeps the loads down on the belt.

i have an R33 DE head - i believe the cams and springs are the same as the DET, only difference is injectors.

I've just had a look at the guide and it doesn't state anywhere the width of the 94407 belt.

It does state that the gates belt has been cut down from 30mm to 25mm in the factory.

I don't really know I used that information from some one else so it's only hearsay.

I'll find that rb20det belt and measure the sucker. :rofl:

hi guys just a quick question about head gaskets. i don't under stand squish zones. i have a rb30 with a r32 25de head, i am going to use stock pistons. which head gasket would be best, what thickness as well?

sorry if this has been covered before.

thanks

interesting piece of trivia:  

the 152-tooth Dayco 94407 timing belt is the same as that used on the Audi (Passat?) 1.8 litre twin turbo engines in their newer model cars. it is, however, much more expensive to buy it from an Audi dealer, trust me!

Yes that's right, it suits the 1.8L motor used in VW passats and Audi A4's. Going by engine codes they would be the same motor.

The belts costs approx $40 from most auto parts shops.

I'd check my 94407 belt but its stored among the other parts.

well that's sorted - also the front-on picture given in the guide which shows the measurements where the tensioner hole needs to be drilled are spot on cubes, i put mine there and it will tension perfectly once i've tapped the hole.

did anyone use return springs on their two tensioners?

yeah they are locking, i wonder why there's a return spring on the RB30 tensioners, they're the same as the 25 ones i'm 99% sure? anyway i'm using two RB30 tensioners on mine and a friend's 25/30 doesn't use return springs either.

p.s. where do you get new studs for them from? they have two different threads on each end :confused: which is weird, i imagine they'd have to come from nissan..... i shudder to think of the price

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

    • I'd be installing 2x widebands and using the NB simulation outputs to the ECU.
    • Nah, it's different across different engines and as the years went on. R32 era RB20, and hence also RB26, the TPS SWITCH is the idle command. The variable resistor is only for the TCU, as you say. On R33 era RB25 and onwards (but probably not RB26, as they still used the same basic ECU from the R32 era), the idle command is a voltage output of close to 0.45V from the variable resistor.
    • It's actually one of the worst bits of Nissan nomenclature (also compounded by wiring diagrams when the TCU is incorporated in ECU, or, ECU has a passthru to a standalone TCU).... the gripe ~ they call it the TPS, but with an A/T it's actually a combined unit ...TPS (throttle position switch) + TPS (throttle position sensor).... ..by the looks of it (and considering car is A/T) you have this unit... https://www.amayama.com/en/part/nissan/2262002u11 The connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit, is the TPS (throttle position sensor) ...only the TCU reads this. The connector on the unit body, is the TPS (throttle position switch) ...ECU reads this. It has 3 possible values -- throttle closed (idle control contact), open (both contacts open, ECU controls engine...'run' mode), and WOT (full throttle contact closed, ECU changes mapping). When the throttle is closed (idle control contact), this activates what the patent describes as the 'anti stall system' ~ this has the ECU keep the engine at idling speed, regardless of additional load/variances (alternator load mostly, along with engine temp), and drives the IACV solenoid with PWM signal to adjust the idle air admittance to do this. This is actually a specific ECCS software mode, that only gets utilized when the idle control contact is closed. When you rotate the TPS unit as shown, you're opening the idle control contact, which puts ECCS into 'run' mode (no idle control), which obviously is a non-sequitur without the engine started/running ; if the buzzing is coming from the IACV solenoid, then likely ECCS is freaking out, and trying to raise engine rpm 'any way it can'...so it's likely pulling the valve wide open....this is prolly what's going on there. The signal from the connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit (for the TCU), should be around 0.4volts with the throttle closed (idle position) ~ although this does effect low throttle shift points if set wrong, the primary purpose here is to tell TCU engine is at idle (no throttle demand), and in response lower the A/T line pressure ... this is often described as how much 'creep' you get with shifter in D at idle. The way the TPS unit is setup (physically), ensures the idle control contact closes with a high margin on the TPSensor signal wire, so you can rotate the unit on the adjustment slots, to achieve 0.4v whilst knowing the idle control contact is definitely closed. The IACV solenoid is powered by battery voltage via a fuse, and ground switched (PWM) by the ECU. When I check them, I typically remove the harness plug, feed the solenoid battery voltage and switch it to ground via a 5watt bulb test probe ; thing should click wide open, and idle rpm should increase... ...that said though, if it starts & idles with the TPS unit disconnected, and it still stalls when it gets up to operating temperature, it won't be the IACV because it's unused, which would infer something else is winking out...  
    • In the context of cam 'upgrader' I mean generally people who upgrade headers/cams - not my specific change. I mean it makes sense that if I had a bigger cam, I may get more false lean readings. So if I went smaller, I'd get less false lean readings. To a point where perhaps stock.. I'd have no false lean readings, according to the ECU. But I'm way richer than stock. My bigger than normal cam in the past also was giving false rich leanings. It's rather odd and doesn't add up or pass the pub test. Realistically what I want is the narrowbands to effectively work as closed loop fuel control and keep my AFR around 14.7 on light sections of the map. Which is of course the purpose of narrowband CL fuel control. So if I can change the switch points so the NB's target 14.7 (as read by my WB) then this should be fine. Haven't actually tested to see what the changed switchpoints actually result in - car needs to be in a position it can idle for awhile to do that. I suspect it will be a troublesome 15 min drive home with lots of stalling and way too rich/lean transient nightmare bucking away for that first drive at 2am or whevener it ends up being. Hopefully it's all tune-able. Realistically it should be. This is a very mild cam.
    • Messing with narrowband switchovers is a terrible bandaid. I don't want to think about it. You are a cam "upgrader" only in concept. As you said, your new cam is actually smaller, so it's technically a downgrade. OK, likely a very small downgrade, but nevertheless. But the big thing that will be the most likely suspect is the change of the advance angle. That change could be equivalent to a substantial decrease in cam lobe duration. I haven't gone to the effort of trying to think about what your change would actually cause. But until someone (you, me (unlikely), Matt, someone else) does so and comes to a conclusion about the effect, it remains a possibility that that is the change that is causing what you're seeing.
×
×
  • Create New...