Rb34 On Sale

[yogibear]

that looks like a pig too drive

[SimonR32]

How so?

Edited December 2, 2010 by SimonR32

[yogibear]

because it does , my to4z on 2.6 is fairly lagy also

[bigmikespec]

because it does , my to4z on 2.6 is fairly lagy also

Lol... great reasoning

[waxracing]

I dont think the price is bad at all.

5500 and you get a crank rods and pistons. If your looking at building a rb30det then your up for alot of that anyway.

Im not interested in the peak power, peak power is for spanking of with your friends with. Look at the area under the curve and see if thats bigger.

Power makes you a hero at the pub, torque makes you a hero at the lights.

This thing will be very nice to drive on the street with heaps of grunt

[zebra]

5,500 + Block machining, which isnt much really, but to rev it to 8,000rpm you would need the billet caps and girdle, So no idea how much that is, + head work to be able to take advantage of the extra 400cc + cams + larger Valves + springs/retainers.

Just buying the rotating assembly is one thing, actually using it effectively is another.

Eg I was looking at building a 408cube stroker out of the cleveland I have, but ive decided against it because I want to use the standard cast iron heads etc, so there is no point to having an engine that big if the heads cant flow enough to take advantage.

A little different when a turbo is involved but the same basic gist still applies.

[[200]]

I dont think the price is bad at all.

5500 and you get a crank rods and pistons. If your looking at building a rb30det then your up for alot of that anyway.

Im not interested in the peak power, peak power is for spanking of with your friends with. Look at the area under the curve and see if thats bigger.

Power makes you a hero at the pub, torque makes you a hero at the lights.

This thing will be very nice to drive on the street with heaps of grunt

I have to agree with you on that. Also considering what other companies charge I think the price is more than reasonable and very well priced compared to the competition.

[waxracing]

Eg I was looking at building a 408cube stroker out of the cleveland I have, but ive decided against it because I want to use the standard cast iron heads etc, so there is no point to having an engine that big if the heads cant flow enough to take advantage.

A little different when a turbo is involved but the same basic gist still applies.

Not really In the case of the cleveland yes money is better spent elsewhere on that engine if your using the stock head.

But flow is a direct connection to the pressure drop across the valve. if you move more air under the valve the pressure drop across the valve is higher and thus flows more. thats why heads are measured in airflow at a set vaccum. if you crank up the vaccum the head flows more

[FineLine]

I have to agree with you on that. Also considering what other companies charge I think the price is more than reasonable and very well priced compared to the competition.

Taking in to consideration the lack of a counterweighted crank shaft I dont think it would hold up as value if it were any more expensive,

[zebra]

Not really In the case of the cleveland yes money is better spent elsewhere on that engine if your using the stock head.

But flow is a direct connection to the pressure drop across the valve. if you move more air under the valve the pressure drop across the valve is higher and thus flows more. thats why heads are measured in airflow at a set vaccum. if you crank up the vaccum the head flows more

Yeah thats fair enough, but if the ports simple cant flow any more air at 351cubes, than it sure as hell wont flow enough for 408, sure it will make more torque in the midrange and off idle, but past 5000rpm the power curve will nose dive like a possessed kamakazi pilot.

[waxracing]

Your right it will hit the point where the gain in flow even with the increases capcity ( pressure drop across the valve)will be very minimal and no longer worth it.

[r33_racer]

5,500 + Block machining, which isnt much really, but to rev it to 8,000rpm you would need the billet caps and girdle, So no idea how much that is, + head work to be able to take advantage of the extra 400cc + cams + larger Valves + springs/retainers.

Just buying the rotating assembly is one thing, actually using it effectively is another.

Eg I was looking at building a 408cube stroker out of the cleveland I have, but ive decided against it because I want to use the standard cast iron heads etc, so there is no point to having an engine that big if the heads cant flow enough to take advantage.

A little different when a turbo is involved but the same basic gist still applies.

Really depends on the application you want it for....Just like anything else. Seeing how sweet the improvement is in the midrange, its ideal for a circuit engine. Actually its ideal for pretty well everything if you have the money. More cubes can only help, no matter how you best utilise it.

[r33_racer]

Taking in to consideration the lack of a counterweighted crank shaft I dont think it would hold up as value if it were any more expensive,

Noel I believe he is looking at making fully counterweighted items later on. Though honestly thats really of no concern to most of us unless you are aiming for sky high revs.

[zebra]

Really depends on the application you want it for....Just like anything else. Seeing how sweet the improvement is in the midrange, its ideal for a circuit engine. Actually its ideal for pretty well everything if you have the money. More cubes can only help, no matter how you best utilise it.

I 100% agree that It will be better for a circuit or street engine, I think most people buying them will be all "omg I could heaps spool 2x T51R-Spl turbos at 3000rpm" and make 5000hp.

If I were building a solid RB street/track engine I would go for one of these for sure.

But With out seeing long term high rpm use without the fancy pants girdle I will remain a non fan boy of the setup, but will wait with open eyes and ears for independent results of these kits.

[WHITER33GTS-T]

I am a fan of the 3.4. Extra cubes and still a 8000rpm rev limit would suit me fine.

Will be interesting to see how this goes after a few track days and test its reliability.

[FineLine]

Noel I believe he is looking at making fully counterweighted items later on. Though honestly thats really of no concern to most of us unless you are aiming for sky high revs.

Agreed 100% Mike. My comment was not deregatory in any way. Merely pointing out that if it was any more expensive then the 3.2 option from nitto with the counter weighted crank would start to look attractive. Particulalry for those wanting to rev it hard.

Something you wouldnt have to do with 3.4 litres on board.

[waxracing]

The non billet girdle and the non counterweighted crank dont seem to be holding back rips at all

[GTRNUR]

I still want to know the rod length and pin height, My guess is the rods are around the 5.8-5.9" mark (maybe standard 25/26 length?), I dont think there is room to raise the pin heights for standard 6" rods and a 9mm stroke increase

You can pull the pin heights for an RB30 piston from 32mm (stock) back to 27mm with a custom piston height and a stock 21mm gudgen. Then you can use common 6" rods on the 95mm crank. That would be my choice to keep the rod ratio up. The other option is to use a custom piston with a less agressive pin height change (say 28mm) and then use old "school approach" with a thicker gasket (1.5mm) to accomodate a positive deck and achieve a good 1mm deck height.

I think many of you are missing the point of the stroker engine. The whole point is that you dont have to rev them, so frankly who cares if it cant rev past 8000 rpm. Look at what the R35's rev too. Displacement really does make a huge difference. And not just in when a turbo starts to respond, or hit wastegate boost. The off boost drive is much better. Throttle response is much quicker.

Also matching a head and cam configuration to the added displacement to "optimise" the package for peak power or torque isnt necessarily the ideal goal anymore. This is the conventional thinking with a stock displacement Rb25/26, to try and ring every last kw/nm out of the displacement. However suppose you can reach your power goal without having to run crazy cam and port head porting. The result will be an engine that has street manners. It will be easier to drive than an identically powered smaller engine because it will idle like stock, and produce usable torque below 1500 rpm.

[Marko R1]

i know that my torque increase from 2.6ltr to 3.0ltr was a difference of 150nm (although, my 3.0ltr has larger profile cams & head porting).

where is the torque graph to this 3.4ltr

[BoostdR]

About 140kw ahead @ 4000rpm.....crickey