Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi peps,

I have seen the tomei 2.8 stroker kit and was pretty impressed with bigger capacity yet it has a shorter stroke than std, which in my limited experience would equal more torque with less strain on bearings?

There is a few different piston sizes available in both a normal and "cooling channel" varient... i have no clue what the "ccoling channel" is what it offers and if its a benefit or not?

any input is appreciated

cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201707-tomei-28-stroker/
Share on other sites

yeah thats how they add the extra capacity....more stroke

Hey Trav,

Getting another GTR... thats a ellenbrook secret mate!!! :)

My bad before... obviously there is more stroke to produce bigger capacity and therefore more torque... i ment the rods are shorter than std and therefore less strain on bearings... i have heard that the longer the rods the higher the load on the bearings, so a stroker kit with shorter rods kind of gives the best of both worlds???

anyway... if anyone knows about the cooling channel i would like to know for my secret!!!

Hot one out in ellenbrook tonight eh? seabreeze howling in woodvale :)

Mums the word lol

hmmm i would have thought from a physics point of view that the load on the bearings would be irrelevant since the force is parallel to the rod. Its not like the force is a shearing type

Hot one out in ellenbrook tonight eh? seabreeze howling in woodvale ;)

Mums the word lol

hmmm i would have thought from a physics point of view that the load on the bearings would be irrelevant since the force is parallel to the rod. Its not like the force is a shearing type

rotating force is ment to increase by the square of the RPM or something like that... so even a small increase in rod length might not seem much at low RPM, but rev her up to 8000 RPM and you can have a whole load of extra rotational force being laid out onto the bearings.

so yeah... to keep on track of this thread... cooling channel anyone... what is it, is it better, whats the advantage??? :)

cooling channel aids cooling of the top of the piston crown by some say 40 deg c around about n e way. i was led to believe that there slightly smaller pistons than the typical JE or the likes forge ones on the market today and longer stroke?? confirm?

They only use shorter rods because they have to to fit it all in a stock block. Stock GTR rod/stroke ratio is below optimum, as the rod is on a larger angle to the cylinder, especially when it is a right angle to the crank(where it produces max torque)this results in higher frictional losses. It does have the side effect of reducing detonation, but increases piston accelleration around TDC and BDC

Cooling channel is just a channel that runs under the piston crown that is in line with the oil squirter so some of the oil that squirts under the piston runs thru the channel and helps cool. This is old diesel tech. The 26 has a less than ideal rod/stroke ratio standard and making it shorter speeds up the piston thru the top even more making the combustion process even faster and can lower the peak hp/rpm although the extra stroke would increase hp. The shorter rods can also slow the piston thru the area of max valve lift again reducing the ability to make hp. The rb26 does a lot of things wrong in theory but still seems to make plenty of hp and loves to rev but i would like to see how a 26 crank in a giken/30 long block would go with some long conrods.

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've got the rear ones, they're certainly beefy. I need to take them to my driveshaft guru to check over, he's very fussy about the quality of components so I'll let you know if they are made of cheese by a blind man.   Are you in Australia? A mate just had a set of EN26 shafts made for his K20 Lotus by our fabricator which were quite cheap (compared to Driveshaft Shop) so if you can procure the CV's and draw what you need he'd make them for ~$800 for the pair.
    • Had I known the diff between R32 and R33 suspension I would have R33 suspension. That ship has sailed so I'm doing my best to replicate a drop spindle without spending $4k on a Billet one.
    • OEM suspension starts to bind as soon as the car gets away from stock height. I locked in the caster and camber before cutting off the kingpin. I then let the upright down in a natural (unbound) state before re-attaching it. Now it moves freely in bump and droop relative to the new ride height. My plan is to add GKTech arms before the car is finished so I can dial camber and caster further. It will be fine. This isn't rocket science. Caster looks good, camber is good, upper arm doesn't cause crazy gain and it is now closer to the stock angle and bump steer checks out. Send it.
    • Pay careful attention to the kinematics of that upper arm. The bloody things don't work properly even on a normal stock height R32. Nissan really screwed the pooch on that one. The fixes have included changing the hole locations on the bracket to change the angle of the inner pivot (which was fairly successful but usually makes it impossible to install or remove the arm without unbolting the bracket from the tower, which sucks) and various swivelling upper arm designs. ALL the swivelling upper arm designs that look like a capital I (with serifs) suck. All of them. Some of them are in fact terribly unsafe. Even the best one of them (the old UAS design) shat itself in short order on my car. The only upper arm that works as advertised and is pretty safe is the GKTech one. But it is high maintenance on a street car. I'm guessing that a 600HP car as (stupidly, IMO) low as you are going is not going to be a regular driver. So the maintenance issues on suspension parts are probably not going to be a problem. But you really must make sure that however your fairly drastically modded suspension ends up, that the upper arms swing through an arc that wants to keep the inner and outer bolts parallel. If the outer end travels through an arc that makes that end's bolt want to skew away from parallel with the inner bolt, you will build up enormous binding and compressing forces in the bushes, chew them out and hate life. The suspension compliance can actually be dominated by the bush binding, not the spring rate! It may be the case that even something like the GKTech arm won't work if your suspension kinematics become too weird, courtesy of all the cut and shut going on. Although you at least say there's no binding now, so maybe you're OK. Seeing as you're in the build phase, you could consider using R33/4 type upper arms (either that actual arm, OEM or aftermarket) or any similar wishbone designed to suit your available space, so alleviate the silliness of the R32 design. Then you can locate your inner pivots to provide the correct kinematics (camber gain on compression, etc).
    • The frontend wouldn't go low enough because the coilover was max low and the upper control arm would collapse into itself and potentially bottom out in the strut tower. I made a brace and cut off the kingpin and then moved the upright down 1.25" and welded. i still have to finish but this gives an idea. Now I can have a normal 3.25" of shock travel and things aren't binding. I'm also dropping the lower arm and tie rod 1.25".
×
×
  • Create New...