Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

ive got a 409 rwkw rb25det on stock cams with a gt3582 at 2 bar built cp pistons tomei rods greddy intake manifold its also port n polished how much would i gain with some poncams havent found any information on the search engine soo i guess i have to ask heh its either that or n2o i wouldlike the cams but just dont know how much those crapy 256 8.9 lift cams will give me

  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

got to be honest, that is massive power mate, can't be on pump fuel?

i would be looking bigger then the 256 type deals.

the biggest advantage should be the way the car drives, instead of the standard cams falling over (may not feel like it), bigger cams would extend the power band where you want it, which is high rpm with a turbo that size on the 2.5l engine.

from higher power band will come higher power since it's basically a derivative of torque vs rpm, make torque at higher rpm and more power is the result, bearing in mind turbine back pressure, that also increases with rpm, depending on how much you are pushing it.

just remember rod loads go up rather fast as soon as you extend the power band by any significant amount and will have a greater chance of breakages. also keep in mind the hydraulic lifters, if it was a neo head with solid lifters, you would only need to worry about the bottom end.

in saying that 8000rpm still keeps the piston speed just under 4000ft/min and lifters should be ok at that rpm.

as always cams will detract from low rpm drivability if you go too big, just depends on what the purpose is meant to be.

if you only want more power for dyno days, just get a bigger turbo, if you want to track it, big cams might be the better alternative, if it's a street car a mild cam upgrade might be best with a nos system as an extra.

never an exact science, mostly trail and error, which can be a reason to copy other peoples successful results if you can obtain them.

Edited by RB30-POWER
got to be honest, that is massive power mate, can't be on pump fuel?

i would be looking bigger then the 256 type deals.

the biggest advantage should be the way the car drives, instead of the standard cams falling over (may not feel like it), bigger cams would extend the power band where you want it, which is high rpm with a turbo that size on the 2.5l engine.

from higher power band will come higher power since it's basically a derivative of torque vs rpm, make torque at higher rpm and more power is the result, bearing in mind turbine back pressure also that increases with rpm, depending on how much you are pushing it.

just remember rod loads go rather fast as soon as you extend the power band by any significant amount and will have a greater chance of breakages. also keep in mind the hydraulic lifters, if it was a neo head with solid lifters, you would only need to worry about the bottom end.

in saying that 8000rpm still keeps the piston speed just under 4000ft/min and lifters should be ok at that rpm.

as always cams will detract from low rpm drivability if you go too big, just depends on what the purpose is meant to be.

if you only want more power for dyno days, just get a bigger turbo, if you want to track it, big cams might be the better alternative, if it's a street car a mild cam upgrade might be best with a nos system as an extra.

never an exact science, mostly trail and error, which can be a reason to copy other peoples successful results if you can obtain them.

i do run those numbers on pump gas actualy but with meth injection, ive ran 11.1 ona full weight car with a 165 kilo driver(im heavy) on unpreped runway with a portable 1/4 mile timing system, its my daily driver though and i want more power but id be using vp race fuels i need to gain about 110 more kw's at the fly i really want to run a mid 10 this febuary just looking at my options i guess im goin to go with gas and 2.5 bar on the gt3582

The biggest gains i found was off boost driving. Not much throttle was needed to get around town, more torque everywhere.

But in you situation once boosts hits you will feel little difference if any.

I would go 260-270 something.

i do run those numbers on pump gas actualy but with meth injection, ive ran 11.1 ona full weight car with a 165 kilo driver(im heavy) on unpreped runway with a portable 1/4 mile timing system, its my daily driver though and i want more power but id be using vp race fuels i need to gain about 110 more kw's at the fly i really want to run a mid 10 this febuary just looking at my options i guess im goin to go with gas and 2.5 bar on the gt3582

Get it tuned in E85! :)

I'm pretty sure that the GT3582 is at it absolute peak anyway, and won't be able to make any more power.

You'll find if you upgrade your cams, you're increasing flow in the head, but the turbo won't be able to keep up anymore.

So to get the gain that you want, you'll need to upgrade cams and the turbo. Get a T04Z, or something a bit bigger?

I'm pretty sure that the GT3582 is at it absolute peak anyway, and won't be able to make any more power.

You'll find if you upgrade your cams, you're increasing flow in the head, but the turbo won't be able to keep up anymore.

So to get the gain that you want, you'll need to upgrade cams and the turbo. Get a T04Z, or something a bit bigger?

tell me how the ams evo's in the states do 600-650awhp with a gt3582r? on a smaller engine im pretty sure the gt3582r can get to 700 crank horsepower on my rb25

For 270 degree cams your usually looking at 10mm lift or more, for that you'll definetely need to go solid lifters. However im pretty sure you can get HKS step one cams in 272 with only 8.7mm lift. For the amount of power your pushing, you'd be stupid not to go solid lifters with some big cams if drag racing is what you want the car for with that turbo.

eh i got 2 bar at 4200 rpms im red lining 8k the problem is that inbetween solid lifters springs cams and gears its like 2500 usd its a big chunk of change, and its my daily driver i dont want to go with very extreme cams either

Edited by ReganGTS25T
eh i got 2 bar at 4200 rpms im red lining 8k the problem is that inbetween solid lifters springs cams and gears its like 2500 usd its a big chunk of change, and its my daily driver i dont want to go with very extreme cams either

Go hks 264's then mate. They'll drop straight in. U should be able to make the same power on 1.5 bar with them which is more in the efficiency range of the turbo. Should hit a lot harder in the midrange too.

Edited by bradsm87

Who said anything about lifters being a problem? Cams are one of the first upgrades that should be considered. Usually long before rebuilds, porting and way before n2o. Just stick in some hks step 1 264 cams and you're done. Don't worry about gears or anything. That along with turning boost down to about 1.7 to get it into the turbo's more efficient range should giv u a lot more midrange and more power too.

i wouldnt really call it 'highly modified' if the heads pretty much stock

to see any reasonable gains its a head off job and convert to solid lifters and oversize valves

or for a better way to go, buy dirtgarage's built rb26 head for 3800 and save urself about 3k :banana:

P.S what mph was that 11.1 run at?

i wouldnt really call it 'highly modified' if the heads pretty much stock

to see any reasonable gains its a head off job and convert to solid lifters.

or for a better way to go, buy dirtgarage's built rb26 head for 3800 and save urself about 3k :banana:

P.S what mph was that 11.1 run at?

can i just bolt on an rb26 head to my rb25 block? it was at 132 mph eh well compared to most rb25's on this forum its pretty well modified atleast brought to the limits of some parts

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

    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
×
×
  • Create New...