Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

The crank is lined up EXACTLY with the mark on the oil pump... i used a mirror to make sure it lined up properly.... even turned the engine a million and one times to get all three white marks on the belt to line up too!!!

post-42272-1256337715_thumb.jpg

I posted the pics of the balancer also.... what do u think of its condition???

That mark is not perfectly lined up.

Turn it another degree clockwise.

If you are really worried about it why don't you use a dial indicator and check when you piston is at TDC to verify your marks etc? then you may be able to adjust your marks on your front cover to suit exactly.

No need for all that.

I PM'd Smell a while back to find TDC via a piston stopper and remove all this balancer guesswork.

Time to move on.

how about posting that info here?

Not really the right section but....

A piston stopper is nothing more than a means of stopping No 1 piston before TDC, usually a modified spark plug or similar.

Take the usual precautions regarding cleanlines etc.

Rotate the crank until the piston touches the stopper and mark the balancer (or your degree wheel) against a fixed point.

Rotate the crank the opposite direction until the piston touches the stopper and mark the balancer against that same fixed point.

TDC for No 1 will be halfway between those two marks.

The larger diameter of your degree wheel improves your accuracy but even the balancer's diameter is better than the tiny crank gear.

Well guys some new info on this.....

I fabricated and used the piston stop as grigor suggested and i must say it worked a treat!.... so much so that i realized that my balancer has NOT rotated and the orange 0* mark lines up at TDC mark on the backing plate when the engine is in fact at TDC.

So now if i use the orange 0* mark on the balancer to get the engine to TDC none of the marks, ie. crank neither cams line up with their respective marks on the backing plate.... they are all just a tad too much clockwise.

I don't' have pics of the crank, but the reason why i say it would be a tad too much clockwise is because when all three dots line up perfectly including the three white marks on the belt and when i slide on the bal it reads about 4-5* advance , so obviously when i now turn the bal to get it back to the 0* mark all three gears would have rotated clockwise some.

Have a look at these pics with the balancer set to 0*

Notice the mark on the backing plate is just off the tooth of the gear and not dead center

Intake

post-42272-1256949696_thumb.jpg

Exhaust

post-42272-1256949837_thumb.jpg

TDC

post-42272-1256949967_thumb.jpg

I even took it to a mechanic and he was puzzled as well to see when he lined up all three marks and put the bal back on it read 4-5* advance..... so i know i'm not crazy!!!

Yeah and the backing plate is mounted on rubber inserts so it could be off too. And the lower timing cover could be off as well as it's in rubber washers too.

You should go and buy all new parts and fit them, that way you can find out that you are making a huge deal over nothing and none of it will matter when the engine is running.

Also, take the shot of the cam gear from front on, not at an angle. Make sure it's parallel. Taking shots from an angle distorts the ability to view it for every degree it's off. Considering you are chasing 2-3 degrees then this is very important

I am definitely not a mechanic but all rbs i've changed timing belts on before had all timing marks lined up spot on and the bal on 0* at TDC ..... i mean Nissan would not have but those marks there if they didnt intend on you to use it would they????

My thoughts, as sent to Smell, are that he’s now reached manufacturing tolerances and anything closer will require adjustable cam wheels.

Obvious stuff like a decked block or shaved head have been eliminated as the cams would have retarded not advanced.

A thicker than factory head gasket also seems unlikely.

Can’t recognize the marks on the cambelt but I don’t like thicker than factory aftermarket cambelts as they advance cam timing due to the extra thickness over the idler.

I dug out a few Nissan belts and the root of tooth to back of belt is constant at approx 2.3mm

However the top of tooth to back of belt varies from 5.2 to 5.6mm.

15thou mightn’t sound like much but it doesn’t take much extra at the idler to advance the cams.

Gates belts are another story.

post-13483-1256960496_thumb.jpg

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

    • Pretty much what you'd expect at that power level. Hypergear turbo, long list of supporting mods, full Haltech catalogue, etc.  I'd say this goes for most drivers, suspension is still a dark art for most people. And it's really hard to convince someone how much better their setup could be...  
    • They are what I will be installing. 640s for me.
    • Hmm... From my experience you get about 0.25° camber change per mm of RUCA length change. So, to correct from -2.5 up to less than -1° (or, more than -1° if you look at the world as a mathematician does) then you'd be making 6-8mm of length change on the RUCA. From a stock length of 308mm, that's 2-2.5% difference in RUCA length. My RUCAs are currently very close to stock length - certainly only 2-3mm different from stock. I had to adjust my tension arms by 6mm to minimise the bump steer. That's 6mm out of 210, which is 2.8%. That's a 2.8% change on those, compared to a <1% change on the RUCAs. So the stock geometry already has worse bump steer than is possible - you can improve it even if you don't change the RUCA length. If you lengthen the RUCAs at all, then you will definitely be adding bump steer. Again, with my car, I recently had an unpleasant amount of bump steer, stemming from a number of things that happened one after another without me having an opportunity to correct for them. I only had to change the tension arm lengths by 1mm to minimise the resulting bump steer. (Granted, I also had to dial out a lot of extra toe-in in the rear, and excessive rear toe-in will make bump steer behaviour worse). Relatively tiny little adjustments having been made - the car is now completely different. Was horrifying how much it wanted to steer from the rear on any significant single wheel bump/dip. And it was even bad on expansion joints on long sweepers on freeway entry/exits, which are notionally hitting both rear wheels at the same time. My point is, the crappy Nissan multilink is quite sensitive to these things (unlike the very nice Toyota suspension!). And I think 99.75% of Skyline owners are blissfully ignorant of what they are driving around on. Sadly, it is a non-trivial exercise to set up to measure and correct bump steer. I am happy to show my rig, which involves nasty chunks of wood bolted to the hub, mirrors, lasers, graph paper targets and other horrors. Just in case anyone wants to see how it is done. I'll just have to set it up to take the photos.
    • What do you have in that bad boy ? Ill go with the 725cc since I'll be going with Nistune ( would definitely like more engine protection but Haltech is too far out of reach at the moment... plus, Ill probably have a pretty safe tune as its a daily, not gonna be chasing peak power 24/7 ahahah ). Are Xspurt a safe choice?  Pete's great. He didnt mention anything about traction arm length so I reckon it may be good. When I get some new wheels/tire later down the road I'll ask him about it and get his opinion on em. I heard from Gary that you've got the bilsteins too, are you running the sway bars too? and what other suspension goodies do you have installed or would recommend?
    • In true Gregging style...  
×
×
  • Create New...