R33 non turbo performance

[dondesoto]

I have an r33 rb25de head on my rb30 ( na of course ). cams and head stock , xf falcon t/b , 10.5 compression , extractors . 3.7 diff non lsd . kw unknown . best 1/4 mile 14.7 @ 92 mph . weight i think is about 1360 kg ( 1987 r31 skyline wagon )

[DaGr81]

S13 Silvia

ENGINE   WEIGHT  POWER  TORQUE  (0-100km/h) (0-400m)

CA18DE   1090kg  97kW      162Nm       9s               16.9s

SR20DE   1110kg  105kW    188Nm       8.6s            16.6s

CA18DET 1120kg  130kW    225Nm       7s                15s

SR20DET 1170kg  153kW    274Nm       6.2s            14.5s

R33 Skyline

RB25DE     ??        140kW    230Nm       8.1s            16.21s

RB25DET 1370kg  184kW    294Nm       6.21s          14.4s

R32 Skyline

RB20DE     ??        116kW    184Nm       7.63s          15.76s

RB25DE     ??        142kW    231Nm       7.1s            15.0s

RB20DET 1290kg  160kW    263Nm       6.9s            14.8s

Does anyone know if those are correct?

According to that an RB20DE (Non-turbo) R32 is quicker than an RB25DE (Non-turbo) R33??

I know the 33's are a bit heavier than the 32's but I thought the extra power in the RB25DE would still make the R33 quicker?

Does anyone have accurate times and power figures for these cars?

not accurate the rb25de is 147kw @ 6000 rpm and the 1/4 mile time is quicker than 16.21 im pretty sure it was around 16 and high 15s but theres no way a r32 rb20de is faster than a r33 rb25de , the r32 rb20de doesnt even make 90kw at the wheels...

[DennisRB30]

All this is makeing my 15.9 R31 sound pretty quick in terms of NA skylines. Who would have thought the least sportiest of the skylines could be one of the fastest.

[paully_tee]

All this is makeing my 15.9 R31 sound pretty quick in terms of NA skylines.  Who would have thought the least sportiest of the skylines could be one of the fastest.

Thats because in my opinion, the RB is nissans best line up of engines ever. anyone care to disagree??? :wassup:

[sproosy]

R33 GTS25 - 147kw (200hp)/1470kg (stock) - what's the VL RB30E engine rated at stock?

IMHO the GTS25 is not a bad buy if you want a simple cruiser without the hassles of a turbo. Just avoid the 2L GTS model, though I don't think there are many of those in Aussie.

i got this off rbforums.com

RB30E

Capacity - 2.960L

Induction - EFI NA

Valve Train - Single Overhead Cam

Bore x Stroke - 86.0 x 85.0 mm

Compression Ratio - 9.0:1

Maximum Power - 114kW @ 5600rpm

Maximum Torque - 247Nm @ 4000rpm

RB25DE

Capacity - 2.498L

Induction - EFI NA

Valve Train - Double Overhead Cam

Bore x Stroke - 86 x 71.7mm

Compression Ratio - 10.0:1

Maximum Power - 140kW @ 5600rpm

Maximum Torque - 230Nm @ 4800rpm

The VL has more torque (obiously, bigger displacement). I reckon it would be a close run but i guess it would all come down to driver ability......

[NA_R33]

Thats because in my opinion, the RB is nissans best line up of engines ever. anyone care to disagree??? :wassup:  

VH-VK series is hands down the best... many other engines capable of making up to and over 1000hp NA... oh they just love boost too :headspin:

edit: on pump gas, daily driven

[dayne]

nah i own heaps of things with my Little 2 L its a lot faster then i thought it wood b  

I can't see a Rb20de Beating me But the r32 Rb25 wood go Hard i think  

Man your cars auto, i've absolutly spanked an auto sr20de silvia in my non turbo R33 manual RB20E!!!!!!

Thats a 2L single overhead cam Rb

So i'd hate to see how your auto sr20de would go against an rb25de, or even an rb20de.. they'd rape u

A good rb25de will be able to run a stockish silivia ca18det..

[TimmyC]

my rb25 from and r32 made 105 rwkw which is the same as a bone stock rb 20det so its not that bad

105rwkw for a stock 20det ??

I thought it was a tad more than that

not much, but a tad...

[boston]

rb25de r33 auto..

spank silvias on a daily basis..

can level peg it with an ef xr6 falcon (manual) off the lights.. cos first gear is really short with the 5 speed auto so it gets off the line reasonable

[Kor'axis]

What's the differnec between a type S and type M r33?

[Ant]

What's the differnec between a type S and type M r33?

Type M applies to turbo models - R32 type M's had better brakes and few extra goodies. In the R33 series all turbo's are Type M.

Type S applies to non-turbo's, not sure about the difference in the R32 series but for R33's (GTS25 only) you get 10 extra HP, standard HICAS (I think) and a few other extras.

Have a look here for more info:

http://english.auto.vl.ru/catalog/nissan/skyline/

[Cubes]

Timmays old R31 5speed GTS stocker ran a 15.1 sec 1/4.

Not a bad effort, watching the run was quite funny, really hard chirps in to 2nd and 3rd.

Almost as if he was going to rip the shifter out.

Don't let peak power fool you ppls.

Its the area under the curve and torque that accelerates a car.

[meggala]

105rwkw for a stock 20det ??

I thought it was a tad more than that

not much, but a tad...

not when you run them through a stock exhaust at stock boost

[Cubes]

Clean those damn oil leaks up in your sig Meggala.

They always catch my eye and I end up looking at them. lol

[DennisRB30]

15.1 That is amazing. Poeple on other forums are laughing at anyone who say thier R31 can beat a stock auto VN commodore.

[Guest jimmyd17]

15.1     That is amazing.   Poeple on other forums are laughing at anyone who say thier R31 can beat a stock auto VN commodore.

i do believe he said it was a GTS skyline.. so depending on if its a SI/II or SIII from memory i think they have 130kw and 140kw compared with the 118kw of the normal R31.. so yes, a GTS R31 should beat a VN commodore u would hope. having said that, i have a VN berlina auto wagon and it leaves my mum's GXE R31 5 speed for dead.. both are stock. VN wagon: 0-100 best: 7.94 (timed with stopwatch accurately) on a cold night (makes almost a second difference compared to a warm day).. 3/4 tank normal unleaded and able to get consistent mid 8's.. with the 7.94 i got heaps of traction with the auto stalled up (good road surface)

both the R31 and the VN seem to have quite similar power in high revs despite being totally different engines.. they both pull about the same up top.. but the low down torque of the VN gets it moving up to the top revs a hell of a lot faster. but the RB30 is so much smoother compared with the old buick rattler lol. :wassup:

[Munna]

i do believe he said it was a GTS skyline.. so depending on if its a SI/II or SIII from memory i think they have 130kw and 140kw compared with the 118kw of the normal R31.. so yes, a GTS R31 should beat a VN commodore u would hope. having said that, i have a VN berlina auto wagon and it leaves my mum's GXE R31 5 speed for dead.. both are stock. VN wagon: 0-100 best: 7.94 (timed with stopwatch accurately) on a cold night (makes almost a second difference compared to a warm day).. 3/4 tank normal unleaded and able to get consistent mid 8's.. with the 7.94 i got heaps of traction with the auto stalled up (good road surface)

both the R31 and the VN seem to have quite similar power in high revs despite being totally different engines.. they both pull about the same up top.. but the low down torque of the VN gets it moving up to the top revs a hell of a lot faster. but the RB30 is so much smoother compared with the old buick rattler lol.  :wassup:

I use to have a VN manual V6 these are probably the fastest of the the V6 commodore range the VS's-VT's couldnt get near it. I had Extractors, twin cats into a 2 1/2 exhaust, pod and a powerchip gold 98 chip. It used to fly for what it was I miss the rattly old beast.

We timed it at 7 flat from 0-100 traction being the main problem no LSD so 8s and 8.5s wearnt uncommon.

[Guest jimmyd17]

yes i agree.. i think the VN's would be right up there in terms of the fastest V6 commodores. i would be interested to see how the VN lined up against a new VZ alloytec 175kw in a 0-100 test. i reckon it would definately give one a run.

here is a quote from AutoWeb doing a review on a VZ acclaim wagon:

"The 0-100 km/h time we gained (car unladen, one person, low fuel) was about 9.3 seconds 0-100 – certainly nothing to write home about. But more important than the bare number is that on the road, the car never feels particularly punchy. The new engine has a very flat torque curve (ie there’s higher than usual power available at all revs), but the absolute torque output isn’t very great."

source: http://autoweb.drive.com.au/cms/A_2391/article.html

i worked out that the VN wagon has 8nm of torque more PER TONNE, than the VZ alloytec wagon.

so one would have to guess the good old VN wouldnt have too many problems leaving behind a VZ auto wagon considering the approximate tested figures are over a second in favour of the VN. but what would come out on top if it were a VZ SV6, 6 speed manual 190kw?

here is a quote Drive doing a review on a VZ SV6, 6 speed sedan:

"The SV6 can't match the Falcon's off-idle grunt but it pulls well from about 2000rpm, cruises easily and with great economy on the highway limit at only 1800rpm in sixth. The zero-100kmh trip takes 8.3 seconds - slower than the Falcon, but fast enough."

source: http://www.drive.com.au/editorial/article....px?id=8916&vf=1

i guess all the newer commodores have progressively gotten heavier and i reckon slower lol.

[slow_r31]

timmy's car wasnt a gts, and he only had extractors/exhuast/intake

[Cubes]

hrmm I'm pretty sure it was, the Timmay in Adelaide, Red R31 that he has now sold?

My other half just said it wasn't.

I'll have to check the vid.

With regards to the VN's I've found it to be like this....

VN Auto - Slower than a VS II Auto

VN Manual - Faster than a VS II Manual.

The VS's manual gearing sucks.

I had a VL Commodore with a 2.5" & extractors. It was quite a bit quicker than a friends VN that had a 2.25" and also quicker but only slightly than a friends VS II.

The VS series 2 ecotec's really got up and moved, well for what they are.