HKS Advanced Heritage RB26 Concept

[BK]

Look in all seriousness the HKS stuff MAY have some merit. Will it be worth doing for the almost negligible gains that it may or may not provide, especially for the cost they will ask ?

Absolutely not.

I feel this is more about a marketing exercise to give the perception of HKS being relevant from a development point of view.

[BK]

Which in this day and age they are not.

[UWISSH!]

10 minutes ago, BK said:

Which in this day and age they are not.

The only thing worth using that HKS make is v-cam, their turbos, exhausts, cams, and all the rest are garbage outdated things compared what else is available 

just need to look at all the big hitter gtrs around the world and they are using nitto internals, precision/ BW turbos, hypertune/ plazmaman coolers and so on

[r32-25t]

1 hour ago, joshuaho96 said:

I don't doubt it, but shouldn't we look at what people are doing everywhere and take the best of everything? NIH syndrome is a dangerous thing IMO.

I don't think a spark plug in a chamber with some holes drilled is fundamentally changing what an RB26 is and isn't. Neither is VCAM. There is a ship of Theseus thing going on here but I would say unless you do something radical like GDI retrofit which requires new head castings/CNC heads and a bunch of other crazy stuff it's still an RB engine at the end of the day.

Aussie company’s have put more r&d in to these cars then anyone else in the world, we are so far ahead because we haven’t tried to reinvent the wheel. 

the workshops here know what does and doesn’t work, that’s why Australians have built the fastest gtrs in the world and not just drag cars 

[joshuaho96]

11 minutes ago, r32-25t said:

Aussie company’s have put more r&d in to these cars then anyone else in the world, we are so far ahead because we haven’t tried to reinvent the wheel. 

the workshops here know what does and doesn’t work, that’s why Australians have built the fastest gtrs in the world and not just drag cars 

This is pretty much what American car manufacturers said about foreign competition until Toyota/Honda/Nissan nearly put them out of business, just for different metrics.

[joshuaho96]

2 hours ago, BK said:

Look in all seriousness the HKS stuff MAY have some merit. Will it be worth doing for the almost negligible gains that it may or may not provide, especially for the cost they will ask ?

Absolutely not.

I feel this is more about a marketing exercise to give the perception of HKS being relevant from a development point of view.

Passive TJI working properly is a pretty big deal on its own. We’ll have to see what Mahle achieves on their internal test engines but the claims are really not negligible. I’ve seen journal papers claiming 80% reduction in the standard deviation of IMEP, 10% improvement in BSFC, 50-60% increase in peak cylinder pressure at roughly similar IMEP so CA50 is greatly reduced.

[BK]

It's not a big deal if no one cares to implement it on their RB.

I for one have a care factor of zero about this on an RB26 in a GTR.

[GTSBoy]

3 hours ago, joshuaho96 said:

Presumably the goal is to have a plenum that can be used in an RB26 that has these benefits, as opposed to an Audi plenum that won't fit?

What's the difference between a plenum for a straight 5 cylinder and a straight 6? It's one more, isn't it?

/Nigel Tufnell

[r32-25t]

6 hours ago, joshuaho96 said:

This is pretty much what American car manufacturers said about foreign competition until Toyota/Honda/Nissan nearly put them out of business, just for different metrics.

Ok I’ve tried to be nice, hks and all the other Japanese companies stopped giving a shit about the rb26 power gtrs in 2007 when the r35 came out. The only reason they have made this is they know they will find a couple of stupid Americans that will pay for it just because it has hks written on it 

[animal33]

On 22/01/2021 at 9:19 AM, GTSBoy said:

This is a load of crap.

1. Vertical turbos. Sorry, they ain't vertical. They are no more of an angle than RB26 turbos have been aftermarket mounted for 20 years.

2. TJI as a retrofit? In your dreams bitch.

3. The plenum is very similar to several sketches that I did and can possibly be found posted on peformanceforums about 15 years ago. Granted, I was sketching for a VG30, but it's the same idea had by me and probably 20000 other people.

And the rest of it is nothing that hasn't been done by the rest of the aftermarket industry for years. The ignition mods for example.

The only place where HKS has ever led in this area is the VCAM stuff.

Edited January 23, 2021 by animal33
Miss read post

[GTSBoy]

4 minutes ago, animal33 said:

Pretty handy with computational fluid dynamic software? Or the tooling for trial and error testing/tuning?

As a matter of fact, I am a combustion engineer, aerodynamicst and supervisor of the engineers who do the CFD at my company.

I am comfortably capable, thankyou very much.

[animal33]

3 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

As a matter of fact, I am a combustion engineer, aerodynamicst and supervisor of the engineers who do the CFD at my company.

I am comfortably capable, thankyou very much.

Fair enough. Your sketching might be a little better than most then. Lol. Including mine. 
 

Even more interested in seeing them now. 
 

And I would like to add that I apologise for my comment. I don’t mind eating my words at all when I am wrong.

I wasn’t paying enough attention as I was thinking about the HKS Vcam and misread your comment. I realised immediately after submitting my response and spent next 3 minutes cursing myself out and looking for the delete button. My mistake mate, sorry, didn’t mean any disrespect, was just a very strange thing to read, or think you have read... ✌️

[GTSBoy]

'scool.

[DanGreen006]

On 1/22/2021 at 11:04 PM, joshuaho96 said:

Passive TJI working properly is a pretty big deal on its own. We’ll have to see what Mahle achieves on their internal test engines but the claims are really not negligible. I’ve seen journal papers claiming 80% reduction in the standard deviation of IMEP, 10% improvement in BSFC, 50-60% increase in peak cylinder pressure at roughly similar IMEP so CA50 is greatly reduced.

Made an account just to reply. Yeah its difficult to find any info on this as i think it is only sold with the purchase of the heritage engine i believe. I cant find any pricing or an individual item relating from NGK. I assume its a NGK part as Honda Nissan Toyota etc are all supplied by NGK in regards to TJI

As you said the benefits of running a high CR & high boost on low octane plus a more consistent flame propagation, enhanced turbo efficiency, reduced knock and detonation, leaner AFR and optimised timing and control are all a massive win win

It seems we might have to wait for a video option break down to find out what the part number is before any of us can test it IRL.

HKS are charging AUD $115k for their new RB30, $90k for RB28 and AUD $24,000 for the carbon airbox so it may be a while b4 we see anything lol - All their new turbo range are modified G-Series but i cant find any pricing. 
 
An F1 engineer said one of the biggest factors in achieving over 50% BMEP was due to pre chamber. F1 cars are 1600cc running 19:1 CR, AFR of 30:1 making 850b hp on 55psi and are the most fuel-efficient ICE in the world. I agree with you in the future IT IS going to be a big deal. HKS have also claimed incredible fuel efficiency from their 450 Kw (600bhp) RBs -5L/100km (47mpg)

*TJI as a retrofit in your dreams... nah HKS has cast a new head in secret🤡
this is all for "marketing purposes"

And yes you are right about NIH syndrome not all of us Aussies are like that (my apologies) you were prob speaking to a low iq t@rd with an MSc in Cable TV, (we get pretty sensitive about our fellow countrymen's achievements today (not ours someone else's) in regards to RBs compared to what Japan was doing 22yrs ago if that even makes sense) ie we will get angry if you compare Japans Rb development 20yrs ago with what we are doing today - we'll be angry on behalf of Nitto (who prob doest care btw) that you are comparing HKS parts with Nitto which is made by Jiangsu Songlin Automobile Parts Co., Ltd
Its not like HKS were making F1 engines 30years ago polishing cranks to 1 micron whilst Jiangsu had the world record in....not sure actually but the point is you insulted my fellow countrymen's ego, I dont care if HKS was running 7s in the 90s - in future do NOT discuss any new RB part without first checking on here to gauge our sensitivities if thats ok

We will also get angry if you compare HKS F-ConV with a Motec M150 but not see the irony of not having a Motec crankshaft to compare

Its not all of us

Speaking of secret cast heads Herman from PRP has released x 2 new cast heads for the RBs and said they will never stop revising it so maybe pre chamber & GDI on an RB isnt so unrealistic.
Hermans heads and blocks have been in the talks for years and years and people should get their hands on both this year. Maybe its just a waiting game for the tech to filter down

[GTSBoy]

On 2/18/2024 at 12:30 PM, DanGreen006 said:

*TJI as a retrofit in your dreams... nah HKS has cast a new head in secret🤡
this is all for "marketing purposes"

Could you please express this thought again with some clarity added?

[DanGreen006]

7 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

Could you please express this thought again with some clarity added?

Sure, that person is making the claim that a "TJI as a retrofit in your dreams bitch" would be an impossibility given it wouldn't/couldn't be able to be "retrofitted" on the current Nissan 05u 11040-RHR20 casting.

It must then imply the video/product is a complete fabrication either because they're obv deceitful or it can't be "retrofitted" to the existing head and would require a new cast head.

Something Im sure we would have heard about given the Heritage Program.

So either they're lying or the product does exist but only on a new casting.

Personally, i believe the product does exist and may be as simple as a M12 retrofit - who knows? Herman would

The point is its too early to write this off as overpriced HKS junk, the added precision you have in regards to ignition and combustion stability by precisely controlled ignition allows for a more reliable and consistent combustion process.

Knock/detonation is just uncontrolled combustion, pre-chamber solves this by controlling the combustion process eliminating knock

F1 1600cc V6 E10 CR was 14:1 in 2014, 18:in 2017 Id imagine its close to 19:1 atm if not more, running 50-55psi on a 30:1 AFR -no knock knock jokes, no Uncle Rodney stopping by for a chat -
Isnt that enough to get you moist?

The only negative ive read is that it doesnt work below 0c, which affects no one anywhere in Oz 

I also noticed some issues with the Extreme GTR RB in WTAC, I wonder what it was whether knock or a lean out and how common that is with big hp GTRs on the limit, something PMC/Brad & CRD may know

I just want us to run E85-ish numbers on 98 (with much higher CR) in a perfect world....

my engineer friend suggested using an "interchiller" for the fuel as well. No idea if thats possible or what the pro/cons are

Here'a list of some other benefits - This is a pretty new tech compared to what we're currently using now - lets just wait and hold fire before we pass judgement

Enhanced Lean-Burn Capability: Pre-chambers can improve the engine's ability to operate under lean-burn conditions. This is particularly beneficial in high boost applications where maintaining proper air-fuel ratios can be challenging.

Faster Flame Propagation: The combustion in a pre-chamber can initiate a faster flame front that propagates into the main combustion chamber. This faster flame propagation can result in more complete combustion and improved engine efficiency

Lower Emissions: Efficient combustion facilitated by pre-chambers can lead to lower emissions, including reduced levels of unburned hydrocarbons and particulate matter. This is important for meeting emissions standards in modern engines.

Flexibility in Fuel and Ignition Timing: Pre-chambers allow for greater flexibility in choosing the optimal fuel and ignition timing for different operating conditions. This adaptability is crucial in high boost applications where the engine may experience varying loads and speeds.

Improved Torque and Power Output: The enhanced combustion characteristics provided by pre-chambers can contribute to improved torque and power output. This is especially valuable in high-performance applications where maximizing engine output is a priority.

[GTSBoy]

Yuh, I think my original point (yes, it was me who said "in your dreams bitch") that I'd be extremely unwilling to believe that you could just throw a special plug into a combustion chamber not designed to be fired that way, and expect very much from it. Certainly not to the extent that the technology is claimed to be able to deliver when used in chambers that are actually designed for it.

And hence, not really a "retrofit". If it needs a special head, then it is something much more than just a retrofit.

Edited February 24 by GTSBoy

[DanGreen006]

43 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Yuh, I think my original point (yes, it was me who said "in your dreams bitch") that I'd be extremely unwilling to believe that you could just throw a special plug into a combustion chamber not designed to be fired that way, and expect very much from it. Certainly not to the extent that the technology is claimed to be able to deliver when used in chambers that are actually designed for it.

And hence, not really a "retrofit". If it needs a special head, then it is something much more than just a retrofit.

Well I cant confirm whether HKS have ported the head in a unique esoteric way but assuming its still on a std 05u head which apart form PRP I cant think of another (Bullet promised billet heads a while ago....) head that fits on an RB.

Their google translated material says they've CNC machined combustion chamber, cylinder walls to improve cylinder squish area - it looks like a std head, i think it is

If they did a new head you'd think they would of showcased it with the Heritage line which had new everything.

GDI's vs PFI require different heads thats for sure as PFI requires homogenous mixture before it enters the combustion chamber where as GDI can be stratified or homogenous as needed. Modern piezo GDI for a decent sports car also requires around 5000+ fuel pressure but can also run E60ish stock like G80 M4. This would all def not fit on a std 05u head but the gains are enormous. It helped Audi dominate at LeMans whilst everyone else had port injection

Herman said he will do 30 versions of the head till he gets it right on a HPI video/podcast
or was that the block i cant remember. 

Lets wait and see

There's a guy Craig Williams started a company called Neutron engines their making the KV48 a bespoke v8 with 2 honda K24s with custom heads - really cool stuff.

Anyway prior to starting that he was going to design retrofit cast heads for all our favourite jap cars with batsh1t crazy 1990s' F1 style ports etc. Sounded amazing but i think he's focused on Neutron engines now.

I always thought how cool would the RB one be, what a dream

Cool thing is I see him and PRP have been collaborating on the KV48 so maybe not a dream after all

Spoke to my engineering mate he said for my dream of power on 98 to come true, Id need W2A with an interchiller, interchilled fuel, Pre Chamber and GDI and it still wouldnt  work😥

 

Edited February 24 by DanGreen006

[joshuaho96]

4 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

Yuh, I think my original point (yes, it was me who said "in your dreams bitch") that I'd be extremely unwilling to believe that you could just throw a special plug into a combustion chamber not designed to be fired that way, and expect very much from it. Certainly not to the extent that the technology is claimed to be able to deliver when used in chambers that are actually designed for it.

And hence, not really a "retrofit". If it needs a special head, then it is something much more than just a retrofit.

The passive TJI stuff is supposedly possible to retrofit to existing cylinder heads, the challenge seems to be everything around that. Maserati sidestepped all the idle control/cold start issues with passive TJI by just adding a normal spark plug on the side of the combustion chamber. Mahle claims they've solved all that in their papers but who knows. There's also the other problem of actually exploiting the benefits of it. Can the RB26 even handle diesel-esque peak cylinder pressure? Is there even room in such a cramped engine bay for systems like cooled EGR? When I look at the packaging I'm pretty skeptical.

[GTSBoy]

I work in industrial combustion. The challenges there are very very different to recipro-internal combustion, but there are a wide selection of similarities.

I have to keep telling my upper management, "If wishes were lollies there's be candy shops on every street corner". I have one particular member of upper management who seems to outright believe that just because he wants something to be true, then it must be achievable. You cannot point to the existence of the insulation tiles on the space shuttle and then tell me that it must be possible to insulate an umbilical carrying power, control signals and maybe even fuel while it passes through the 1800°C part of the flame, without giving me at least a suitably sized slice of NASA's budget to achieve it.

And so it is also with any technical development. There are constraints, whether they be physical (ie, available space, material properties, whatever), or physics (ie, kinetics, turbulence, momentum, emergent phenomena, etc), or budget, or other resources that make for an N-dimensional array of compromises to pick from. Some compromises might mean "We can build it, but it won't do anything useful". Others might be "We can build it, but it will cost the earth, moon and half the output of the human race for the next 10000 years to make it happen". And then there's the always wonderful "You need Start Trek level technology to be able to identify specific minerals under the surface at a distance of 1000km" (and yes, I've had to deal with exactly that sort of thing in our other business, which does mineral analysis).

Which is why I poo poo the prospect of successful TJI as a retrofit on RB26 or any similar vintage engine. There might be ways to make it happen, to whatever the limits that it can be realised are. And of course those limits are obviously driven by the fact that it has to be passive TJI to be even close to being described as a "retrofit", and the passive version only yields a tiny fraction of the full potential of the concept. And even the best possibility with passive requires things done (in the way of EGR, etc) that further muddy the possibility of being able to describe it as a "retrofit".

And remember, you're all hoping to be able to do this TJI retrofit with whatever arbitrary combination of turbo and injectors and management and cams and manifolds and pipework and engine capacity and compression and whatever else could possibly be different between enthusiast modified engines some 30 years after they got shipped out of the somewhat low tech assembly line that they were built on. Whereas, any work that the developers of TJI have reported generally lists an extremely long list of extremely tight constraints that they put on it while they fiddled around for thousands of hours in the lab environment to even get it to work.

In my world the equivalent is MILD combustion. This is a pot-of-gold-at-the-end-of-the-rainbow situation where you're firing fuel and oxidant into a chamber (not an engine combustion chamber, a furnace combustion chamber) with certain turbulence properties so that there is massive recirculation of the spent combustion products whizzing around in there and diluting the combustion reaction zone so that it moderates the peak temperatures and minimises NOx. This is a reasonably difficult condition to successfully create in the lab. And the lolly shop on the corner managers want to be able to create MILD combustion in practical combustion chambers with real industrial processes going on inside them (like, calcination, sintering, clinkering, roasting, of lime or analogues, iron ore pellets, raw minerals, acidified minerals, etc). Im-bloody-possible. Never going to happen in the real world. If you manage to get a MILD condition to even be achievable, you'd probably only be able to achieve it for 10 minutes on the 3rd Tuesday after the next cometary close approach. But no-one wants to hear it because they all want their lolly shops.

If you have to put a hundred grand's worth of stuff into an RB engine/bay to be able to achieve TJI, surely it has to be better to just use a better engine? One that's actually designed to do what you need. It is at this point that the existence of people like Herman who are willing to develop castings becomes useful. In the modern world, the "democratisation of production", to coin some sort of phrase, driven by the ability to do decent design work in CAD and get complex stuff 3D printed for dev, for mould/blank production or even for final parts if you're willing to trust metal printers (which I am actually unlikely to put a lot of trust in for parts exposed to combustion and process conditions in my work) , starts to permit people to put some effort into making a head that might allow an RB to successfully work. It could have camless free-valve type stuff to permit the EGR to be internal. Or it might include necessary pathways for moving exhaust gas to the other side of the head to allow an EGR cooler to be placed on the better side under the intake. And it might have more room for a proper TJI injector/chamber. And it might have better port shapes/heights/chamber shape. And it might even have space for a tiny auxiliary spark plug if required, and so on.

But you'd need to expect to be able to sell it to nearly every surviving RB engine to be able to recoup your costs. Or sell it for >$100k per installation, and....you can guess the likelihood of either of those coming off.

Edited February 24 by GTSBoy