Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys.

from past knowledge ive always noticed that a safe rev limit for built rb30s was around the 7,000RPM range, but after some research alot of poeple are claiming that the factory crank can do upwards of 9,000RPM. some even 11,000RPM.

i honestly find this amazing but have never tried (or to scared to i should say).

Most of you people know of R.I.P.S the awesome rb30 guys over in N.Z. they are one of the many that support this claim.

if its at all possible i would like to know, my setup consisting of a forged bottom end rb30 spitting out just under 350kw @ the wheels which has been driven quite softly for the last 5-6months (with the occasional punt :D ). what steps/tests would i need to do to insure that my rb30 is up to the task of 9,000RPM or how ever high. its currently got a rb25NEO head but in the next week will be swapped with a rb26 out of a r33.

i have been servicing the car every 4-5000kms. but i am about 2-3000kms late on the latest :P

any information would be GREAT!

Cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/265161-maximum-rev-on-stock-rb30-crank/
Share on other sites

how well was the bottom end balanced when the engine was assembled? was the crank modified in any way? aftermarket harmonic balancer? what kind of valve springs? what cams?

If you have no idea what was done to the engine when it was built don't just go and set the limiter to 9000 as it will probably break something, On the other hand if the bottom end was properly balanced and has all the work done to it, does the head / turbo breathe well enough. It may be a step backwards as the engine cant pump enough air through to keep making power @ 9000 and you are just revving the engine for the sake of saying it revs to 9000.

So is that anDru posting on your account or you asking for him?

Anyhow - if the turbo is still making power (for 350rwkw) @ 9,000rpm i'd be very surprised. Should be well out of flow so there is no point going to 9k.

Other issue is the head, parts and so on. 9k rpm wont hold forever on factory head bits before things start needing serious replacement money spent

Just to clarify a few points.

I agree with the above guys, there is absolutly no point in revving the enigne to 9000rpm unless your still making good power at that point, you will probably find your motor will be falling away at around 7800-8000rpm.

The RB30 in the 240z has a stock crank (with our mods) stock cradle, stock mains bolts, perfect balancing, top class pistons and rods, normal tomei pump, normal wide type oil pump drive, RIPS wet sump and a world class cylinder head built to cope with 11,000-12,000rpm.

We regularaly run 9000-9500rpm and power is still climbing at that point, we hit 10,000+ during the burnout at times and have seen over 11,000rpm over bumps or when sudden wheelspin has occured.

Its not just a matter of putting the above parts together and its going to rev that high, I assure you there is ALOT more to it than that but with correct preperation, blueprinting and very anal assembly we have proven reliable at around 1400hp at those rpm levels.

My advise would be keep the rpm as low as possible to get the power you want.

Robbie.

a stock crank (with our mods)

Not being rude or anything Robbie, but its not really a stocker after you've modified it :thumbsup:

Nice addition to the rb30 results thread yesterday by the way, bring on the new drag car :down:

wat will it take to get an rb26 reving to 11rpm?

eg how much money talkin about for the head work?

and wat kind of balancing and blueprinting for the bottom end?

cheers

bill

Sh!tload. The labour bill alone will probably make you not want to do it.

Head parts dont seem too expensive when you just add cams. But then you get springs. Buckets. Valves. Guides etc.....thats where it costs quite a lot. This still doesnt count porting.

Realistically to do properly it with brand name gear, supporting mods and include all labour the bill will be higher than the value of the GTR it goes into if its an R32 or R33 and possibly R34 depending how far you go with suporting mods. Anyone with a seriously built car on here would agree :thumbsup:

well my main goal is 440awks out of a r34 gtr.

im building up my parts list so far i got

HKS 2.8 step 3 stroker kit

HKS GT-RS turbos

but i want to rev hard and best response. track and drag car.

Not being rude or anything Robbie, but its not really a stocker after you've modified it :bunny:

Nice addition to the rb30 results thread yesterday by the way, bring on the new drag car :D

Sh!tload. The labour bill alone will probably make you not want to do it.

Head parts dont seem too expensive when you just add cams. But then you get springs. Buckets. Valves. Guides etc.....thats where it costs quite a lot. This still doesnt count porting.

Realistically to do properly it with brand name gear, supporting mods and include all labour the bill will be higher than the value of the GTR it goes into if its an R32 or R33 and possibly R34 depending how far you go with suporting mods. Anyone with a seriously built car on here would agree :bunny:

bollocks stevo. i'd be hard pressed to spend 10k on a race prepared 26 head even if i picked all the bee's knees bits. unless ur getting absolutely fooken raped

to set a head up with a 'race port', new seats, custom inner spring seat, 1mm valves both sides, dual springs, ti retainers, nice big cams, cam cap studs & using supertech gear would set u back 6.3k (i have receipts if u want lol)

I think the prices you and i get stuff for must be quite good, cause i can get it for around the same money, but not everyone has those connections ;)

Also i was taking into account the rest of the car which will have to be up to par as you'd know of course :)

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...