Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

We've just pulled down my motor to re-ring it and while we are there I want to lift the compression as much as we can.

Plan A is to shave some more off the head and block, fit a thinner head gasket and re-ring.

Plan B if there are any bump top pistons out there we can use instead? Has anyone come across these?

The engine is an N/A RB20DE fitted with ITB's. Has cams and head work etc. Has to stay 2ltr.

The motor has been going well for the last five years racing, but after 20+ years the rings are finally too worn to put up with. We want to get the best out of it while it is out because it's so damn reliable it'll be a while until next time.

Also, does anyone know about new/better cam followers for them too?

Cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/373878-racerally-engine-rebuild/
Share on other sites

is it dedicated track? if so remove 0.350" off the counter weights in a lathe, and knife edge the front of the counter weights with an angle grinder. Then have it re balanced. The positive effects of this will reduce unsprung weight, the negative effects is it will effect the "throw" of the crank and will give you a really laggy take off from stationary which is not benifitial for a road car

do you know the current piston dome/ dish/ valve releif volumes? or alternatively you could speak with nitto and they could organise a set of JE customer designed pistons (or custom for short)

comp ratio, look in n/a mods explained, ive posted up the formular on how to work out your static compression ratio

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/362638-na-modifications-explained/

how much lift does the current cams have? too much lift with high compression will increase the risk of pistons hitting the valves due to bigger domes, or large amounts ground of block and head

also the pistons can get fly cut or have valve relieves machined into them to help increase piston to valve clearance but they add more volume which will lower your comp ratio then you'd have to shave more off, fly cut again, etc becomes a limit to a point when you'd end up chasing your tail

I'd be verry tempted to just run another bottomend from a wrecker... Just buy a couple of bottomends.

Take as much off the head as you can, thin head gasket etc. Then just use the head on cheap wrecker motors ... pop and slot.

Or have a look at late model motorcycle pistons?? short skirt, good ring spacing, designed for high rpm and cheap etc?

Actually, have a look at stock rb turbo pistons... depending on the pin height you might be able to cut the edge of the piston crown down to be 0 deck, while the center 'bump' will come up higher into the combustion chamber= more static CR.. etc

I'd try and keep as much weight in the crank as you can though... rb20's suffers from lack of torque as it is.. I'm guessing on dirt you need some grunt to get you out of a hole.

Good luck

Justin

The car is used in rallys and rallysprints, predominatly gravel, but also runs tarmac.

As far as aiming for a power output? I can't, because no one has built an RB20 with ITB's and no turbo. Think I'm the first somehow. Has been running this setup for the last four years and it's been going well. Was last dyno'd making 135rwkw on a stock bottom end with 230,000km on it.

The car got stolen and thrashed cold, so we've pulled it down and found some damage, hence the rebuild.

Won't be knife edging the crank or doing anything to loose torque, it's really important that the car launches hard off the start line as being rwd you can loose seconds easily.

Cams have about 1mm more lift than standard, but still has a stack of clearance when checked with no head gasket. Pistons are standard RB20DE with the valve relief. On measuring yesterday, we should gain a heap of compression the block decked and the piston sitting a tad proud. Plus a little taken off the head.

Don't think I'm going to have time to get into modifying pistons, has to be running again in a couple of weeks.

Cheers for the thoughts guys.

I'd definitely run a thinner HG and deck the block if possible instead of shaving the head as it yields both better quench and reduced combustion temps due to less heat soak on compression stroke (as I was once told by an old mechanical engineer when building my N/A).

Do you have adjustable intake and exhaust cam gears? An issue I has with shaving/thin HG was throwing the cam timing out a few degrees, which shifted power more than you would expect, 2 gears adjusted on the dyno afterwards would be quite useful for getting delivery and the best peak power/torque figures where you want them.

wer/torque figures where you want them.

At this stage we are doing all three, a little off the head, deck the block and a thin head gasket. Should get the compression over 11:1, but doesn't look like we can get much more going this way. Yes it is running adjustable cam gears.

Found some bump top pistons in the US, just wont have time to get them here, bore the block and run in and tune before the next event, so will stick to the shaving for now.

More competitive than you might think! BDA's are $100,000 cars out here, so can't compare.

Weight split is pretty good with at least 40% rearward and the lead weight of an engine helps generate good corner speed. Usually I am competing for 1st 2WD at most events against a Fiesta Cup car, that on gravel can be upto a second a km faster than me. Rotaries, turbo KE70 Corollas, A886's, and the odd WRX have been put to shame.

Just so you know I'm not lying...

http://www.mbop.org.nz/images/stories/results/2011/2011%20rallysprint%20series%20rnd%201.pdf

http://www.mbop.org.nz/images/stories/results/2011/rcc%20rallysprint%20series%20rnd%202.pdf

http://www.mbop.org.nz/images/stories/results/2011/2011%20old%20coach%20rd%20results.pdf

End of the day it comes down to knowing your car and how it will respond in any given condition.

It's not a world beater by any means, just a hell of a lot of fun!

great vids. it's kind of hard to see but is there a cage in the front of it? bit scary if not!!

either way, it puts on some good pace for a lil NA 2L 6. and some nice driving too. :)

Yep fully caged, just painted black and fitted tight to the pillars because I don't want to see it when driving.

We found a heap of internal engine damage when we pulled it down, so much so would wouldn't expect it to start, let along run as good as it did in those videos. Had a slight fuel issue in a Targa where we couldn't get enough 10% ethanol fuel, causing some bad detonation. Then the car got stolen and thrashed cold a month ago, just to put the icing on the cake. So there better be a good performance jump once we are done...

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

    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
    • Yup but for me its the HR ! Cut my teeth on the old holden 6s in the day ! And here's me thinking in the day it was also the 300ZX and the Mitsubishi GT3000 ! All, as well had good lines, but always seemed to need finishing off, style wise.
×
×
  • Create New...