Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  Fitzpatrick Speed Works said:
Gibson also rebuilt their engines every race meeting, oh and it was a race car running race fuel, we are talking street cars here that have limited fuel choices.

I got no idea what compression ratio is ideal, but the Group A cars were meant to be running on control Shell fuels. I seem to recall the fuel was not too exotic, actually i dont recall there being any mention of a fuel change when they changed from Grp As to V8s and these days they do run Shell Optimax. What the equivelant back in 90-93 was im not sure, but it wasnt too exotic

why do you want to run such a high C/R anyway? sacrificing reliabilty, my motor is 30/25 i have a C/R of 7:1 as it allows me to run higher boost and then bring my to4e66 turbo into range(round 25psi) allowing it to make good power. 480bhp with standard manifold, standard cams and stock camgears!

The bathurst sierra cosworths ran 5:1 C/R allowing it to run up to 45psi boost to bring the turbos into range!

:(

7.1 holy god, that would be a pig of a car off boost.

I aint heard of that since the VL boys out West and thier "fully sick decomp plate" for 11ty billion psi

You dont need it to be that low at all for 25psi

Stick with the 9:1 it will work well, especially with a set of lumpy sticks.

Problem is there are no on the shelf pistons that get anywhere near that.. 8.6:1 I think is the closest you will get.

Unless CP's run some wierd pinheight, dome config.

it may not need to be that low but as it is my daily driving car on pump fuel with no additives it suits my purpose and i still have full boost by 3000rpm! and i have a mate of mine with a vl that had 9.5:1 c/r making 400bhp on 22psi and he melted 2 pistons as apposed to any mate of mine that has the exact same setup except he was running 7.8:1 c/r making 412bhp on 26psi and hasn't had a drama so imo i'd rather be on the safer side rather than pushing it to the brink! But that's just me :)

One solution is JE forged VG30DETT pistons at 87.5mm . The gudgeon pins are larger so rods need work .

If boost pressure is a measure of resistance to airflow then high boost is a lame excuse to get more air in . If you reduce the resistance to flow then same volume at lower pressure will make everything else easier . High boost pressure needs high fuel rail pressure/expensive pumps/expensive fuels/etc .

The RS500 YBD engine had a dog of a turbo making an unreliable pig of an engine for road or Grp A . You need to look at better examples than this .

Cheers A .

  • 2 weeks later...

I was talking to Mick from Rocket Industries and he emailed me this:

The RB25 head has a a larger combustion chamber than the the RB26.

The dome on the AP332104 is .110" high. The dome on the AP332105 is .155 high. This will give more comp.

I spoke with our RB expert here and he reckons that the AP332105 might be a better option.

I believe the AP332104 are ARIAS pistons that give 8.5:1 CR and AP332105 are pistons that are used for RB26/30 convertion. I was advised to use the AP332105 pistons for RB25/30 convertion. Two questions though:

1. What kind of CR would this give

2. Would the higher piston sit proud of the block requiring thicker metal head gasket

Still... I wouldn't be going by what some one says..

Its much safer to simply measure it all up, you then know what + or - dome required. My Rb25 head cc'd up at 62.2cc's.

The Rb25 and 26 pistons also vary in their Pin height. So this is something also to look at if you want to optimize squish, which why wouldn't you for a little bit of research. :(

Edited by Cubes

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

    • I hadn't thought about the variable power steering assist. Presumably, it will always be the same level of assist as you get in an S14. The R32/3/4 are either helliishly heavy (at low speeds) if the solenoid is not powered at all, or hellishly too light (at high speed) if it is powered all the time. I presume that it is PWM controlled on those cars. I hadn't thought about the S cars not having variable assist. ugh. What crappy plebby cars they must be!  
    • Hmm yeah that is a good point. It looks like it'll just bolt in with no real issue besides maybe the bushings being different. My other concern was that 2 pin plug that I assume is used in some way to control the rack solenoid depending on the speed signal from the ecu. The DMAX rack doesn't even have that plug though so, don't think it'll matter. Might just order the rack and see how it goes. Will update this when I figure something out
    • I'd say it's a fair bet that the feed and return fluid lines will be in different enough spots that you would need to come up with a way to cut the originals short and adapt with new hard line adaption or braided teflon hoses or somesuch. But really, you have the car, you have the photos of the DMAX rack - you should be able to go out there and see for yourself whether they're in the same or different spots.
    • I've been doing some looking around and honestly was just considering throwing a new rack at it. I saw that the dmax silvia rack bolts up into the 33 with the silvia bushings but not sure if the high pressure lines will sit in the correct spot. I believe other version of the 33 rack are the same/similar to the racks that can be opened up without as much fuss so I assume the dmax rack would fit but any ideas?
    • I've never played with one, but I would expect that you are correct. That slot looks like it is intended to be used to unscrew the end, and the flats on the body would be better than grabbing it around the round bit with a pipe wrench. So, yeah, probably unscrews. You'll probably have to make a tool to drive in that slot.
×
×
  • Create New...