Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey all

few questions

well i got my fully built 25/30 back a few days back.. trying to get the engine and bow together before could but the whole lot into my cefiro and it just would not go, found out the internal diameter of the spigot bush was to small for the gearbox output shaft. so i removed the spigot bush all together.

but im wondering if it is complete a must to run a spigot bush???

like if i can ust not use one at alll and it should still be alright?

other question is iv dummy fitted my motor on its own and it fouls on the clutch master because of the forward facing plenum..

wondering how people have gone about relocating clutch master?

or at least how you get around this??

its a a31 cefiro with a built rb30det and rb 25t gear box.

be running around 360rwkw once run in and tuned..

cheeers in advance guys

tom

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/256975-rb30det-woes/
Share on other sites

already gone through 2 brand new spigot bushs..

they slide over the input shaft.

but once i tap it into the back of the crank its like they shrink so much that it cant slide in again...

doing my head in..

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/256975-rb30det-woes/#findComment-4425488
Share on other sites

using the soft wooden end of a broom stick to tap the spigot bushs in..

im using standard engine mounts but got a conversion cross member for rb25 box in cefiro off a mate along with the tail shaft needed for it to alll work.

with the gearbox siting on the ground i can slide the spigot bush over the out put shaft fair easyilly and smoothlly.

the fit in the back of the crank is tight as. and yeah once the bush is in its like it squiish's the bush size down so much that it cant let the out put shaft slide threw..

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/256975-rb30det-woes/#findComment-4426474
Share on other sites

i dont have access to a dummy input shaft at the moment. my old man lined the clutch plates up with a half inch driver handle.e we have tried adusting the cltcuh plates.. but thats when we figured out it was hitting the spigot bush instead of sliding into it

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/256975-rb30det-woes/#findComment-4426523
Share on other sites

where abouts did you get a dummy input shaft.

just wreckers or somthing??

we know it was deffinatly the spigot bush as it was being pushed back into the crank further.

If you know someone with a blown RB20 gearbox go take the input shaft out of that, pretty sure SR, CA, VG, FJ and L series can be used as well. Exedy sell them but when i installed my exedy hyper twin i used the one they supplied but it was a bit dodgy, it didn't align the clutch propley and i had to use an input shaft out of a blown gearbox i had.

How far in are you hitting the spigot? Does it look like the one below?

post-1332-1140930868.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/256975-rb30det-woes/#findComment-4427418
Share on other sites

yeah i was tapping my spigot bush in exact same distance into the crank...

hmm its hard where i am because im one of the few people in this town that drive an import.. so i have to travel about an hour and half each way to get to jap import spares in adelaide..

i have thought about getting another brand new spigot bush and cutting a thin slice straight threw on side. dodgy i know... i just wanna get this motor and box together

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/256975-rb30det-woes/#findComment-4428399
Share on other sites

I'll address the clutch master cylinder problem.

I picked myself up a new R33 GTSt clutch master cylinder for when the forward facing plenum and GT35R go on. The 33 item is about an inch shorter, my mate also used one on his 32GTS4 with RB30 and Greddy plenum.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/256975-rb30det-woes/#findComment-4430248
Share on other sites

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...