# Who changed from RB26 to RB30



## Sniper1st (Mar 25, 2006)

Hi folks,

Just wanted to hear from you people who have used both RB26 and RB30, what is your impressions about RB30, does it worth the slow revving by gaining more torque in low rpm ( as most people claim).

and why most of RB30's I’ve seen in are using gas, are they don't feel fast!

this cuz I'm building my RB26 bottom end anyway and looking at RB30 and what pros and cons

my application is
800whp+ ,Q16 , no gas
street race car
no ZERO launch races 'll be like rolling by 3-50km/h in 4-500 meters


so let me know what you think guys.


notes:
1-forget about head and supporting mods, we're talking about performance in between these two bottom ends.
2-I've done a lot of searches didn't see anybody talking based on his own experience, some are just saying what they hear, so don't just jump and say do a search.:chairshot


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

Is 9000rpm slow revving? All things be equal rb30 beats a 26 everywhere. 800hp is easy too.


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

Mark Berry's Advan R34 is RB30 and that doesn't seem to be a slow revving car. Talk to Rockabilly, he's got an RB30 in his R33 which is for sale at the moment.


----------



## godzirra (Sep 16, 2009)

I have changed from rb26 to rb30. 

Slow revving is a MYTH. They rev the same.

Lots more torque and much better spool. Lots more fuel consumption I find.
And worked out cheaper over here where I am in Asia. Rb30 blocks are less than half price of a rb26.


----------



## rockabilly (Oct 15, 2003)

as said above, they rev very freely and very crisp. fuel consumption is the only issue i can see. i have really enjoyed mine, went from a rb26 with 25/30,s to a rb30 with a gt35r then a gt4094r. the 4094r makes 640 at all 4 hubs and is a mental turbo. its on full boost 1.5 bar by 4500 rpm..


----------



## Jakobsen (Dec 19, 2007)

What mods are needed to build an RB30 that would be glad to rev to 8000-9000RPM ? The easy way of an RB30 Engine would be rebuilding an Stock engine, giving it an overhaul bearings and rings ?? But limited power 6000 - 7200Rpm ??


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

Products from Rotorua Import Pro Shop R.I.P.S

Easy, just buy one already built, Rob will send all around the world.


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

RB30 =

More response through gears due to higher torque figuers, as well as less turbo lag which again results in more responsiveness, reaching boost at a lower rpm, and widenning the rev curve as it were in relation to power delivery.


----------



## .::TopSky::. (Nov 4, 2010)

More displacement means a more over-squared engine wich means more torque and better response. 

When talking turbo, you get less lagg and more power.

I`ve driven a RB30 with 26 head and Garrett To4Z, slow revving? Not at all!


----------



## adamsaiyad (Aug 23, 2006)

more displacement means more power, i wouldnt say slow revving as there are a few 3 litre examples around not only in the nissans that make good power and rev nicely .
Or did you mean to ask is the rev limit lower ? Rob can make engines that rev to infinity but the power is all low down so no need ive asked this question many a time.
I would be keen to try it on my next build as the blocks are easily had here in africa from the old skyline 
When im better trained i will venture down this road but its a killer motor for sure will eat alot of other worked cars for less $$$$ and thats what counts.
Speak to RIPS


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

I went from a 2.6 to a 3.0 with s T51r etc etc.
I found that my peak power was 6900 rpm, so why rev so high?


----------



## black bnr32 (Jan 20, 2011)

R32 Combat said:


> I found that my peak power was 6900 rpm, so why rev so high?


for higher average power


----------



## Sniper1st (Mar 25, 2006)

thanks allll for your inputs and experience sharing, I'm going to have my RB30 block suited to rev 9000rpm, but not gonna rev above 8500rpms.

what cams do you guys suggest as you are already have idea how is this RB30 perform.

I'm looking at 270 lift 10.25, what do you think? go higher? lift or duration!!


----------



## peatough (Oct 6, 2001)

*Rb30*

Hi


My rb30 engine just installed in my 33 gtr.

Cams are tomei 280 I/0 with 10.8 mm lift on a ported polished 26 head. Running a T51 kai low mount.

From what I've seen and read with the 30s they are great motors but revs kill them so will set rev limit around 7000 rpm which will be around max hp anyways.

I'm after torque and reliability.

Regards

Pete


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

I ran Jun 272 in/exh with a very ported head.
Rev the pants off it if you like, but there is probably no point.


----------



## .::TopSky::. (Nov 4, 2010)

Rob, when you go with a higher displacement do you have to have higher degree cams?

What cams do you run in the stealth bomber?


----------



## Glen (Jan 21, 2011)

Whats the point in making it rev to 9000rpm where as others max power is at 7k with a high power output? Why rev the extra 2000? just so you can say it revs to 9k ?


----------



## adamsaiyad (Aug 23, 2006)

To be honest its a young boy syndrome, you have to remember that the gtr revs higher then most other cars, and some like that fact, and want to keep that fact and some dont understand that its pointless as the power falls off badly at that rpm and you actually loosing time/power, i learnt this later on in life after asking many a question and getting flamed for it .
Now if you had a turbo spec'd to flow even at 10 000rpm then it would make sense ?
But how many of us want those bad revs  they kill engines fact and not fiction .. hence the reason the RB30 makes more torque low down so you dont have to rev the Tits of it ...


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

It depends what the application is and the turbo size. If the combo stops making power at x rpm then there is no point going further. If the combo continues to make power way up in rpm and you are chasing hp then you rev it harder. Nothing to do with the displacement. Its all about the whole package.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

My T51r @ 1.5 bar peaked at 6900rpm with my cam timing. Peak torque was 4500rpm.
Yeh, I could have reved it to 9000, but the head doesn't really have the capacity for that.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

We rev my RB30 to at least 9500rpm and power isn't falling away at that point, but my motor has serious head work, a big turbo and Nitrous etc.

In this video its around 10,000rpm through the finish line:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb7Y6X1kMkA

For the 650-800hp street RB30s we usually find power is starting to fall away from around 8000, we usually set rev limiter to 8250 and advise the driver to aim to change gear at 7800-8000rpm.

All things being equal, the RB30 is more responsive, makes more torque and power, revs faster and beats the 26 everywhere.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> All things being equal, the RB30 is more responsive, makes more torque and power, revs faster and beats the 26 everywhere.


LOL, hence the MASSIVE RB30 scene in Japan...


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> LOL, hence the MASSIVE RB30 scene in Japan...


Here we go....you been drinking again? lol.......The japs never got the RB30 in their market, the OSG RB30 is well, lets not go there, and they have just tended to stick to 26s or strokers in the 26 block, its just much easier for them, that doesn't mean there isn't a different and possibly better option out there  and if you can disprove a single thing in the bit you've quoted from me, go right ahead :thumbsup:


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Briefly, a short stroke engine IS more responsive and revs faster, physics proves that. This is not a topic for discussion. 
If you don't understand why, speak to your local college physics tutor. He'll know.


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

R32 Combat said:


> Briefly, a short stroke engine IS more responsive and revs faster, physics proves that. This is not a topic for discussion.
> If you don't understand why, speak to your local college physics tutor. He'll know.


A short stroke engine with all other things being equal may have a low MOI however there are things being overlooked:

- The RB30 also generates more twisting force
- The engine is attached by a series of parts to wheels which have to move an entire car. You don't free rev the engine, you move a car with it... which torquier/more powerful engines do better. Fact.

Don't get caught up in Japanese tuning myths about RB26s being more awesome than they are, the Mines GTR vs Amuse Supra BMI video which I am sure you have seen by stuff you are saying has a lot to answer for in terms of misleading the masses - that clip shows a well setup car versus a shit setup car (the diff wasn't even working properly on the Supra FFS), not that a 2.6 responds better than a 3litre.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

I hear you Lith.

I'm just sick of the constant bleating on that the RB30 is sooooo much better than the RB26.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> I hear you Lith.
> 
> I'm just sick of the constant bleating on that the RB30 is sooooo much better than the RB26.


But if its true its hardly bleating is it, there are several people on here who have given their first hand accounts of going from a 26 to a 30 and not 1 has ever said they'd go back, you have to ask yourself why.

Sorry mate, no disrespect, but you tend to type before you think about it properly, In neutral you may well be right, the shorter stroke engine may well rev faster but operation, all other things being equal, the RB30 car will accellerate faster, therefore the engine will be revving faster and THAT is what is not open for discussion, its a fact :thumbsup:


----------



## Darren-mac (May 13, 2009)

You do realise you've got cocaine written on the side of your car don't you? LOL


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Just what we need, another awesome inspiring thread about the inconsequential RB26
vs the completely dominating RB30....


----------



## black bnr32 (Jan 20, 2011)

rb30r34;1549706 If the combo stops making power at x rpm then there is no point going further.[/QUOTE said:


> yes, there is - to end up at a higher power after you shift. higher average power is faster, not higher peak.


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

black bnr32 said:


> yes, there is - to end up at a higher power after you shift. higher average power is faster, not higher peak.


Shorten you power band while revving your engine faster than needed. Good one.....


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

rb30r34 said:


> Shorten you power band while revving your engine faster than needed. Good one.....


No, he's actually quite right - I usually aim to make sure a car can be taken at least 500rpm past peak power depending on how bad the drop off is after peak. Peak power is just another part of the power band, and is relatively inconsequential all by itself. 

Staying in a gear longer results in more speed accumulating versus someone who lifts off the throttle, and then when you change into the next gear you also will have substantially more power available to transfer to the tyres when you hit the next gear - the more acceleration you can have available at all times is better. If you can do it early, then all the more power to you as to keep up the "other guy" has to not just make up the extra speed you got over them... but also the distance you gained.


----------



## black bnr32 (Jan 20, 2011)

let me help you with that:

Google


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> Just what we need, another awesome inspiring thread about the inconsequential RB26
> vs the completely dominating RB30....


Sorry Glenn.

Anyway, when I built my RB30, the only thing different to my RB26 was the bottom end. So, I had a good back to back comparison.
It is my personal opinion a RB26 is on no way inferior to the RB30. 
There is lots of dumb terminology used around the RB30, like unquantifiable responsivness, revs like hell, loads of torque and HP etc. (Please bear in mind that you only actually measure power in torque)
In engineering talk, and thats the real world, it's very much six and two threes.

Peace and porridge.


----------



## Little Nismo (May 31, 2002)

Righto, seems to be that everyone thinks the RB30 is better, and those who don't are simply wrong because those who prefer the RB30 say they are. Anyone who attempts to bring physics into the discussion is roundly chastised and the RB30 brigade gets very loud and shrill about it. Kill the infidel! they shout.

Now really I don't care who is right except that i am interested to know if there is a tangible benefit to one or the other or if it is strokes for folks... (pun intended).

I've heard tuners talk up the low down torque, ease of launching, ability to spool larger turbos and general power making ability of the 30. Equally i've heard tuners say they wouldn't build them because they think of them as old tech, made for trucks originally. They worry about the high loading on the internals due to the longer stroke and antiquated design of the upie downie bits. Or that they believe the inability to rev or the large drop off above peak power makes for inferior real world performance, ie you drop to far below peak power after a gear change. Some tuners with this opinion advocate the 28 as the compromise.

I was in fact talking to one last week who said "if RB 30's are so good, why do they get beat on the track by the 26's and 28's?" Now he wasn't specific about the track or the cars but his point was they flatter to deceive...

Here is the one thing though, why did nissan not use the Rb30 in the GTR if it was such a good option? Is there some regulatory reason? Or economy. Or did they just not wise up to it being better? Or did they see it as a truck motor? I mean the Supras have 3ltr donks...

Can someone please go get a nissan engineer and clear this one up.


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

Care to share dyno charts from both, R32 Combat?

Little Nismo - yes, there was class rules meaning 2.6 litres was the go if I understand correctly. I for one didn't blindly decide I preferred the RB30, I chose to because of logic and experience. RB30s have been used to great success in drag AND track - the fastest track Skylines in NZ use RB30s, and the same for Australia. The countries that don't have RB30s dominating in their classes are ones which have hardly had the chance or inclination to use them, ie Japan.

Here is a couple of clips of one of the NZ ones running an RB30, holds a few lap records iirc:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GznzSK-uTIA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cEbKl03XVE


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

Little Nismo said:


> I was in fact talking to one last week who said "if RB 30's are so good, why do they get beat on the track by the 26's and 28's?" Now he wasn't specific about the track or the cars but his point was they flatter to deceive...
> 
> Here is the one thing though, why did nissan not use the Rb30 in the GTR if it was such a good option? Is there some regulatory reason? Or economy. Or did they just not wise up to it being better? Or did they see it as a truck motor? I mean the Supras have 3ltr donks...
> 
> Can someone please go get a nissan engineer and clear this one up.


There is a lot more too a fast track car that the size of the engine. In my experience the skylines that are by far the fastest trackcars that are actively campaigned are all rb30. They are the fastest locally by a long way.

Nissan used the rb26 to allow the car to be raced in certain classes. It was as big as they could go and still be allegeable.

Also, remember all rb's are a 20+ year old design. Its all old tech now.


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

Lith said:


> No, he's actually quite right - I usually aim to make sure a car can be taken at least 500rpm past peak power depending on how bad the drop off is after peak. Peak power is just another part of the power band, and is relatively inconsequential all by itself.
> 
> Staying in a gear longer results in more speed accumulating versus someone who lifts off the throttle, and then when you change into the next gear you also will have substantially more power available to transfer to the tyres when you hit the next gear - the more acceleration you can have available at all times is better. If you can do it early, then all the more power to you as to keep up the "other guy" has to not just make up the extra speed you got over them... but also the distance you gained.


Seems logical. I stand corrected.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Little Nismo said:


> Righto, seems to be that everyone thinks the RB30 is better, and those who don't are simply wrong because those who prefer the RB30 say they are. Anyone who attempts to bring physics into the discussion is roundly chastised and the RB30 brigade gets very loud and shrill about it. Kill the infidel! they shout.
> 
> Now really I don't care who is right except that i am interested to know if there is a tangible benefit to one or the other or if it is strokes for folks... (pun intended).
> 
> ...


Here's a scenario for you.

Formula one team, for example McLaren 2600cc Straight six Single Turbo.

Formula one team, for example McLaren 3000cc Straight six Single Turbo.


Which one will be fastest


----------



## DrGtr (Jul 18, 2009)

I was in the same thoughts 2 years ago , why did I ended up choosing to go custom crank 2.8?
It's still close to rb30 torque inbetween the 2.
I will retain the original block which had a lot of study from Nissan 
Be " legal" block is registered
And use shorter gears to make the difference
Then I will challenge the persons here with the rb30 and tell you how behind they are even with my smaller turbos.
I believe is more to the whole set up filosophy and drivers skills than revs

But still I don't accept from anyone to tell me that the rb30 is superior all engines have their positives and negatives.
Just use what you feel like and not what you hear others tell you.


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

Can anyone dig out a race video where RB30 and RB26 producing similar power are put to the test? 

Would be interesting to see the difference in various sectors of the track.


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

^Anything you do with gear ratios on your car can also be done with an RB30. The amount extra torque you have over an RB26 is the amount an RB30 will have over your RB28, if the first 200cc were worth it then why wouldn't the next 200cc be? The only point you raise which makes sense to me is the sticking with the original block if you have that preference, or requirement.


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

DrGtr said:


> I was in the same thoughts 2 years ago , why did I ended up choosing to go custom crank 2.8?
> It's still close to rb30 torque inbetween the 2.
> I will retain the original block which had a lot of study from Nissan
> Be " legal" block is registered
> ...


:nervous:

Registered block and the legality side of it? 

How significant is that? I wonder if anyone cares tbh.

You might find that with your smaller turbos, you'd probably fall behind.

Driver skills mean sh|te if your car hasn't got the power to match it, and your a$$ gets beaten, simple as.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Out of interest, which is the most efficient method to increase cc, by stroke or by bore?


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

Stroke I "guess",

I have the HKS 2.8 stroker.

but I dunno about the how effeceint it is as apposed to bore :nervous:


----------



## Cris (Sep 17, 2007)

MIKEGTR said:


> Out of interest, which is the most efficient method to increase cc, by stroke or by bore?


In an ideal world bore. That assumes your efficiency refers to the engines ability to produce power rather than MPG.

More bore means bigger valves and lower piston speeds. Also 1mm of bore is worth more capacity than 1mm of stroke.

Applying either to an existing engine is different of course. Bore spacing etc can be a problem.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Nigel-Power said:


> Stroke I "guess", I have the HKS 2.8 stroker. but I dunno about the how effeceint it is as apposed to bore :nervous:


I thought stroking was a compromise, as in not having sufficient wall thickness to bore? And that boreing is preferable? I may be wrong


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

MIKEGTR said:


> Out of interest, which is the most efficient method to increase cc, by stroke or by bore?


It's got to be cheaper to bore a block than to buy a stroked crank?

Anyway, why are people surprised that a larger capacity engine has better overall capabilities? There's never been a substitute for CC's, the only reason for choosing a high powered, lower capacity engine would be to save weight, then you're into the longevity argument. It's got to be down to personal preference at the end of the day, I could not be bothered to argue all the time over 400cc difference in engine displacement.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

TAZZMAXX said:


> It's got to be cheaper to bore a block than to buy a stroked crank? Anyway, why are people surprised that a larger capacity engine has better overall capabilities? There's never been a substitute for CC's, the only reason for choosing a high powered, lower capacity engine would be to save weight, then you're into the longevity argument. It's got to be down to personal preference at the end of the day, I could not be bothered to argue all the time over 400cc difference in engine displacement.


I agree. I'm sure this arguement would be mute if someone was saying that their 1200cc engine is potentially quicker than an equivilent 1600cc engine


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

MIKEGTR said:


> I thought stroking was a compromise, as in not having sufficient wall thickness to bore?


That's correct.

That's how it was evolved.

Stroking is easier than bore'ing also., to increase displacemet


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

TAZZMAXX said:


> Anyway, why are people surprised that a larger capacity engine has better overall capabilities? .


Because an 8000cc Viper is slower than a 3800cc GTR


Not always. A car's performance capability doesn't always have to do with how big the engine is.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Nigel-Power said:


> Because an 8000cc Viper is slower than a 3800cc GTR Not always. A car's performance capability doesn't always have to do with how big the engine is.


Not the best example. Go back to my analogy of a formula one team. Mclaren have a 3.8 to play with and also a 8.0, which will they make quicker???


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Nigel-Power said:


> Because an 8000cc Viper is slower than a 3800cc GTR Not always. A car's performance capability doesn't always have to do with how big the engine is.


Also perhaps we should question why nissan moved away from the 2.6??


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

MIKEGTR said:


> Also perhaps we should question why nissan moved away from the 2.6??


The new 35 GTR produced 480hp from a 3.8L engine

How about the Z-tune R34 which produced 500hp in the hands of Nissan themselves.

Did they really need to go for a 3.8L engine for the New GTR to achieve big power?

Nissan had othere reasons, they found the VR38 V6 to be more effecient in terms of producing less emissions, so that their new car can be a glabal success and pass the emission laws.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

We're going off tangent here. Some american 8000cc cars made only 150bhp, but thats not what we're talking about, we're taling about a like for like replacement but simply changing the block for a larger cc and retaining all other parts the same

Ok answer my question using the formula one example above


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

We are not talking formula one though Mike, that's a completely different area of extreme performance. The know how of F1 is different to that of a mass production car manufacturer.

We have already established that bigger capacity does mean bigger power (of course), but not always; as it has been shown that big power can also be achieved from a smaller capacity engine.

A good example of that would be the Pikes peak Toyot Celica producing 1000bhp from a 2.0L engine


Though of course with bigger capacity there is the potetial to squeeze far more power. Not disputing that.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Nigel-Power said:


> Though of course with bigger capacity there is the potetial to squeeze far more power. Not disputing that.


I've never doubted that small capacity doesn't mean it can't make big power. Renault were producing 1500bhp from a 1.5 in the 80's

So if we were to tune a 2.6 to its max and then swap every single part onto a 3.0, would we agree that the 3.0 is going to make more power (in theory)?


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

Most definitely.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Nigel-Power said:


> Most definitely.


Lol and we're there :thumbsup:


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

Why do you think I have opt'd for a 2.8 stroker myself? lol

Applying the same formula, more capacity=more power/torque

The reason I mentioned the comparison of engine size in relation to power is, because of what little Nismo said, in that RB26 could match the same power figures of a RB30 so why go RB30, if it's the power figure you're after that seems achievable from RB26 anyway, ignoring the potentiality.

but case settled. 

I think I need to get enshiu to help me out here and join the discussion.


----------



## DrGtr (Jul 18, 2009)

I will put it this way bring me any rb30 with gtrs to test it  there is one in Cy i will try to find him once i am ready and he is and then i will tell you. to me rb30 its a way of making transplant without any worth or benefit from it. So its worthless compare to any rb28 now to compare it to rb26 yes then ok, now if you tell me to use rb30 block and go with spool 3.4l then i will tell you agreed all the way to do it. 
Dont get me wrong here all of them are good as long as you choose what is best for you desire. For me is rb28 then rb34 then rb30 then rb26 this is how i choose the like scale for someone could be different way.
But anyway cause i want to be fair the thread is about rb26 and rb30 so if i would choose from these 2 i would go for rb30 but again not because is a better engine cause it has more torque.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Good god, we're back to square one again


----------



## DrGtr (Jul 18, 2009)

Nigel-Power said:


> :nervous:
> 
> Registered block and the legality side of it?
> 
> ...


Yes it is cause the number place on both blocks is not the same, the customs are not stupid anymore IF which is VERY VERY POSSIBLE to find out for example if you kill someone by crashing him and they find out that you have a different engine you are f......d, my friend.
well smaller in size turbos but not internally cause are modded so i might have the same hp. 
As for the drivers skills trust me it does matter not that i am the best driver ever.

Why did you go for a 2.8 instead of a 3.0l?


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

because an RB30 wasn't necessary for the power figures I was after plus it costs 3 times as much. 900 is enough from my 2.8


----------



## infamous_t (Jul 9, 2007)

Nigel-Power said:


> because an RB30 wasn't necessary for the power figures I was after plus it costs 3 times as much. 900 is enough from my 2.8


Strange, if had to cost up buying a bottom end from RIPS or building locally versus buying a 2.8L stoker kit and building a block up I'd be paying at least double for the 2.8L stroker.


----------



## godzirra (Sep 16, 2009)

Little Nismo said:


> Here is the one thing though, why did nissan not use the Rb30 in the GTR if it was such a good option?


From Wikipedia (LOL)

Originally the R32 GT-R was planned to have a 2.4L RB24DETT, and compete in the 4000 cc class (*in Group A rules, the displacement is multiplied by 1.7 if the engine is turbocharged*). This was when Nismo was going through the process of designing the R32 GT-R to be a Group A race car. But when the engineers added the AWD system, it would make the car heavy and less competitive. *Nismo made the decision to make the engine a 2.6L twin turbo, and compete in the 4500 cc class, resulting in the RB26DETT known today*.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Intersting conversation guys.
Unfortunatly, I no-longer have my dyno prints for my RB26 and RB30 back to back engines.
I do know the peak power was 8100 on the 2.6 and 6950 on the 3.0.


----------



## Little Nismo (May 31, 2002)

MIKEGTR said:


> Here's a scenario for you.
> 
> Formula one team, for example McLaren 2600cc Straight six Single Turbo.
> 
> ...


Yes well all things being equal... so are you telling me all things are equal?

RB30 block designed primarily for single over head cam low revving truck motors is the same metalurgically [sp?] and design wise as the RB26 made for a balls out halo car? 
I suppose there is no reason why not, but then again there are reasons why not.

Ok so that being the case and your displacement theory being linear at what point does it break down? Of i stroke an RB26 out to 4litre do i still see gains? what about that 8000 you talked about could Mclaren stroke to that?

If there is a limit what is it and why? Simply physical dimensions under the hood or is it piston velocity in order to rev sufficiently and the acceleration forces that would create?


----------



## Little Nismo (May 31, 2002)

godzirra said:


> From Wikipedia (LOL)
> 
> Originally the R32 GT-R was planned to have a 2.4L RB24DETT, and compete in the 4000 cc class (*in Group A rules, the displacement is multiplied by 1.7 if the engine is turbocharged*). This was when Nismo was going through the process of designing the R32 GT-R to be a Group A race car. But when the engineers added the AWD system, it would make the car heavy and less competitive. *Nismo made the decision to make the engine a 2.6L twin turbo, and compete in the 4500 cc class, resulting in the RB26DETT known today*.


Well done that man! Wiki to the rescue. So it was about the rule book and not physics then!


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

I do hope that the OP finds this useful reading and will be able to make a clearer judgement based on all the expert advice given


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Little Nismo said:


> Well done that man! Wiki to the rescue. So it was about the rule book and not physics then!


Well hang on, by using that arguement alone, the rb26 is a compromise. It is the biggest engine allowed to enter under those rules.

Furthermore as it is deemed 1.7 times more effiecient than a 4500cc could we therefore assume that a turbo'd 4500 would be 1.7 times better than a 2.6?


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

infamous_t said:


> Strange, if had to cost up buying a bottom end from RIPS or building locally versus buying a 2.8L stoker kit and building a block up I'd be paying at least double for the 2.8L stroker.



:nervous:

Ok, you tell me how much a 900hp RB30 build from rips cost then, go on .


----------



## Kenneth-A (Nov 15, 2011)

Nigel-Power said:


> :nervous:
> 
> Ok, you tell me how much a 900hp RB30 build from rips cost then, go on .


Just a quick look on rips site shows their complete 4wd adapted short block with forged pistons, billet rods, extended sump etc. at 16,250nzd which is around £8000. I'm guessing thats built up and ready to drop in. Rip out your bottom end and sell it for £1,000~ assuming it was stock and you've spent £7,000

I really don't see how you can do a stroker kit that is capable of equal power for that price when the hks strokers start at £2,600 for the base power kit


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

Pricewise, ive spent more money on my strooker 2.8 then rob takes for his rb30 assembled...

if im going to make an other car, im deffonetly going to buy one from Rips!


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Um, a RB30 doesn't have to come from RIPS. You can build your own.
Mine RB30 about £3k for the bottom end. And that was a 'cough' 1000hp fully forged short engine that could rev to 9K


----------



## Kenneth-A (Nov 15, 2011)

No you don't have to go to rips and spend that much (although I can think of a lot of reasons why you would), however what did your 3k bottom end come with?

The point being made was that its significantly cheaper to build a big power rb30 than it is to stroke an rb26 and achieve a similar power.


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

at 4300 pounds for a shortblock at rips, i woulden bother assembeling it my self.

Ron


----------



## Jakobsen (Dec 19, 2007)

Isn't the 4300 Pounds RIPS Short block just an stock rebuild engine ? 600HP-7000rpm ? i still think you would need 4WD adapter and oil pickup right ?


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

Forged RB30 shortblock suit 1400hp/9000rpm nzd8750, be quick!

straight from Robs "name"


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Wonder if Hytech or Tony Marsh has built more RB30's than Rob ?

I thought the discussion was who has experience in going from the weak ineffective unreliable Rb26 to the all conquering should never be arued with Rb30...

How could you guys not already know it was a class limit engine originally ?


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

Kenneth-A said:


> Just a quick look on rips site shows their complete 4wd adapted short block with forged pistons, billet rods, extended sump etc. at 16,250nzd which is around £8000. I'm guessing thats built up and ready to drop in. Rip out your bottom end and sell it for £1,000~ assuming it was stock and you've spent £7,000
> 
> I really don't see how you can do a stroker kit that is capable of equal power for that price when the hks strokers start at £2,600 for the base power kit


No price wars...

That's a brilliant deal by rips, you should get it done, specially that you can save another £1000 and not paying no labour, brilliant deal.

Ok, let's not start a price war here or Rob is gonna be here filling pages.

His RB30 offer is fantastic value for money. 

Dont forget rips is not the only one doing RB30, OS Giken RB30 coversion costs 20K


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> I thought the discussion was who has experience in going from the weak ineffective unreliable Rb26 to the all conquering should never be arued with Rb30...


It is, but be carefull, your starting to sound like the "elite" boys with your carefully worded sarcasim 

Here is a back to back comparison with NOTHING changed except a RB26 bottom end to one of my RB30 bottom ends.

Same head spec, same cams, same turbo's (-5s), same fuel system, same fuel, same boost, same tuner (not us) same everything.

On a 4wd hub dyno it gained 104ftlb and 65whp.

The owner of the car uses it for track racing, Targa endurance road racing and on the street, in his words "its performed really well with a large noticeable increase in low down torque. I can run a higher gear everywhere on the track now reducing the number of shifts and pulling hard out of corners giving me a definite improvement in lap times."

The printout says it all.


Obviously the turbo's are really small for this engine but he wasn't after big power or rpm, just response, torque and a little more power than he had with the 26.

After running the Targa rally he called to say it was a transformed car, a massive improvement and well worth the change.

Rob


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Jakobsen said:


> Isn't the 4300 Pounds RIPS Short block just an stock rebuild engine ? 600HP-7000rpm ?


What your talking about there is 1600 pounds. :thumbsup:


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

how reliable is the Rips RB30? 

:nervous:

can it match OSG and HKS quality ?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Overall reliability is a million times more down to the set up, tune and the driver, the best built motor in the world can easily be destroyed by factors introduced well after the engine has been built weather it be OGS, HKS, RIPS or anyone elses.

As far as mechanical reliability or strength or being able to cope with big power and rpm when set up and tuned correctly, factory blocked and cranked RB30's (built by many different places) have been extreemly reliable at very high power levels, you just have to have a look at what blocks are being used in some of the quickest street, track and drag GTRs all over the world.


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

Nigel-Power said:


> how reliable is the Rips RB30?


Show of hands those who have had RIPS "forged" RB30s fail, please?


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

Don't know mate, only asking a q u e s t i o n.

Rob answered it already.


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

Little Nismo said:


> RB30 block designed primarily for single over head cam low revving truck motors is the same metalurgically [sp?] and design wise as the RB26 made for a balls out halo car?
> I suppose there is no reason why not, but then again there are reasons why not.
> 
> If there is a limit what is it and why? Simply physical dimensions under the hood or is it piston velocity in order to rev sufficiently and the acceleration forces that would create?


I'd say space is a big thing. In terms of the block being designed for low revving truck motors, well we know RB30s cop a lot of punishment - seem to be at least comparable with RB26 ones which as you venture over 650hp you start quickly moving into "whens it going to ventilate itself" territory.

It confounds me that people treat the RB30 as though they are long stroke truck spec motors, its actually the other way around - RB26 are stupidly short stroke. RB30s bore vs stroke is square, which seems to be (comparably to RB26) *much* more in the proven territory to work well for road/race style car setups which need a good balance of torque, rpm, power and reliability. The same goes for the rod/stroke ratio RB30s run - their measurements are all better by the typical lines of thought. 

Particularly those who are all tied up about piston speeds/the ability of something of that stroke to rev - an RB30 has a shorter stroke than a Honda B18C-R, used in Type-R Integras (factory peak power @ over 8000rpm). I'd hope that puts things into perspective...


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Lith said:


> Show of hands those who have had RIPS "forged" RB30s fail, please?


Ooh ooh, I've had one!!! 

One let go in my dragster, when the oil filter collapsed and it threw a rod, data logger clearly showed what went wrong.

1 other had damaged the rear side of thrust bearings from external loading.

When there is a problem its usually easy enough to establish whats gone wrong and in 22 years of building engines I've never had a problem relating to machining or assembly etc and my total pay out on warranty claims is nzd200, I'm more than comfortable with that.

Building the motor correctly is the easy bit once you know how, getting it in the car, set up and tuned right is by far the harder part, there's so much more that could go wrong.


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

there you go Lith, rob has again answered the question.

They do break if not rightly tuned and set up, just like any other engine.


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

I heard one of the members on here Pupsy had a continueous problem with his one.

if I remeber correctly.

did he have rb30? not sure


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Nigel-Power said:


> I heard one of the members on here Pupsy had a continueous problem with his one.
> 
> if I remeber correctly.
> 
> did he have rb30? not sure


Yes he did and without starting anything totally un-neccessary please read the last 2 paragraphs in post #89.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Im actually quite open minded about it Rob,

If I did want to build the demon engine I would very likely build a stroked Rb30, maybe with the 3.4 kit.
I remember talking about the advantages of the 3litre supra engine over the rb26 about 10 years ago, and discussing dropping one into a gtr.

At the end of the day, if you are comparing RACE engines then , as much as it pains me to admit it, there no substitute for cubes (which is a saying I have always hated - especially racing rotangs and escorts agains v8's)

But, if you are going to all the drama of boring, porting, "forging" (wtf) the internals etc: bigger cams , bla bla: then you might as well go straight to a 25% larger engine ....

The terminal speed of the internals and the engine speed at which maximum torque and power is made can be predetermined in the build & cost.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Glenn, what do you think of the 26 V 30 dyno plot I posted earlier.

It pretty much sums up what the OP was wanting to know I'd say.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

I cant read it correctly.

The LHS is the 30 and reads 500hp @ 5.5k / 400foot pound @ 6k Correct ?
The RHS says 580 hp @ 6.2k / Whats the torque ?
They have different scales /


----------



## Nexen (Jul 19, 2009)

I have a question about both motors . Rb26 has oil squitters at the bottom of the bore which I've been told helps with lubrication on bores and helps cooling of pistons . Now as far as I know and could be wrong the Rb30 does not have these oil squitters . Now if we take the Rb30 and turbo it would the reliability of such a engine be decreased ? As far as I know they are ther for a reason . I'm not saying the Rb30 is not a good engine but would a Rb26 not be a bit more reliable ?


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Forged pistons are pretty strong, a lot more engines dont run oil squirters than do.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

I'd think that the oil squirters are very good in theory. But with big PBC forged pistons, you don't really need them.

There have been a number of ill fated RB30 outcomes, but arn't there will all engines?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> I cant read it correctly.
> 
> The LHS is the 30 and reads 500hp @ 5.5k / 400foot pound @ 6k Correct ?
> The RHS says 580 hp @ 6.2k / Whats the torque ?
> They have different scales /


The LHS is torque, RB26 399lbft @ 6100rpm, the RB30 503lbft @ 5584rpm
The RHS is power, RB26 509whp @ 6997rpm, the RB30 574whp @ 6398rpm

Green = 26
Yellow = 30


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Nexen said:


> I have a question about both motors . Rb26 has oil squitters at the bottom of the bore which I've been told helps with lubrication on bores and helps cooling of pistons . Now as far as I know and could be wrong the Rb30 does not have these oil squitters . Now if we take the Rb30 and turbo it would the reliability of such a engine be decreased ? As far as I know they are ther for a reason . I'm not saying the Rb30 is not a good engine but would a Rb26 not be a bit more reliable ?


I never use oil squirters in RB30s with cast or forged pistons.

With the cast pistons we are usually using stock rods, they have a squirter for the thrust skirt of the piston/thrust side of the bore, when using forged pistons I am usually using billet rods, they do not have a squirter, in either case the pistons have always come out in beautiful condition.

Rob


----------



## Nexen (Jul 19, 2009)

But not everyone is running Forged pistons in there Rb30's . The Idea of power is great but with myself not being some sort of engine genius I would think nissan put them on turbo engines for a reason . 
I think this is one of the few reasons stopping me from doing this .


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Nexen said:


> But not everyone is running Forged pistons in there Rb30's . The Idea of power is great but with myself not being some sort of engine genius I would think nissan put them on turbo engines for a reason .
> I think this is one of the few reasons stopping me from doing this .


see above^^^^^^


----------



## Nexen (Jul 19, 2009)

Cheers Rob that helps answer some questions I have 

Ashley


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Ok got it, 
Thats a bloodie good comparison of all things being equal ( if its what you say it is )
Literally a lower end swap and nothing else
60odd hp @ 600 rpm less etc:
Good to see real figures
Ta


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> Ok got it,
> Thats a bloodie good comparison of all things being equal ( if its what you say it is )
> Literally a lower end swap and nothing else
> 60odd hp @ 600 rpm less etc:
> ...


Yep, motor came here as a 26 and left as a 30 with all the same bolt ons, the motor went back to Ch Ch, was installed in the car, I went down to help out doing final checks and to be there while it was run in and tuned etc.

It was re-tuned by the same guys as it had always been and they were very impressed by the difference.

Its a great unbiased, back to back comparison because its not my car and I didn't have anything to do with tuning it.

Rob


----------



## black bnr32 (Jan 20, 2011)

how many rb30s have you built and sold now rob? just curious.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

I havn't got an exact number because I've lost one of my very early build books but for quite a while there I was doing 1 or 2 a week, its slower now but I've been doing pretty much nothing but RB30s for 7-8 years.


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

Thats a heap of RB30s!


----------



## simon tompkins (Aug 14, 2005)

there's no replacement for displacement


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

simon tompkins said:


> there's no replacement for displacement


there's V-cam 






but no there ain't.


Rob, with the RB30 package, the one for nzd16000, what sort of power do you think is an ideal output with twin HKS 2835R's

In the Borg you squeezed 950 with a T04Z so I pressume it's more likey to be 1000+ with 2835's ?

Some Supras seem to have that figure with same turbos.

.


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

Nigel-Power said:


> there is, there's stroker and there's V-cam
> 
> .


Stroker is displacement


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

of course it IS


got carried away with RB30 thing going on and the alternatives to it.


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

Vcam isn't an alternative to, its a compliment to displacement


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

oh really?

thought th V-cam adds another 800cc to the displacement

ok, thanks for clearing that up.

We do need smart F1 technicians like you on site, it helps.


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Yep, motor came here as a 26 and left as a 30 with all the same bolt ons, the motor went back to Ch Ch, was installed in the car, I went down to help out doing final checks and to be there while it was run in and tuned etc.
> 
> It was re-tuned by the same guys as it had always been and they were very impressed by the difference.
> 
> ...



That was actually what i was looking for, theres quite a big difference in mapping car, if had a bad map, and then you made a good one, ofc you would gain some good numbers, but the graph tells it all.

this is properly the first time someone actually did this 26vs30 test?

was it at the same dyno aswell=?

Ron


----------



## Sniper1st (Mar 25, 2006)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> It is, but be carefull, your starting to sound like the "elite" boys with your carefully worded sarcasim
> 
> Here is a back to back comparison with NOTHING changed except a RB26 bottom end to one of my RB30 bottom ends.
> 
> ...


OMG RB30 f*cks RB26 everywhere specially in torque, that is impressive
you hit the nail on the head:thumbsup: :clap:

Thank you guys you covered and cleared many subjects, and had an effective discussion. :thumbsup:

but still one thing hadn't been answered


> thanks allll for your inputs and sharing experience, I'm going to have my RB30 block suited to rev 9000rpm, but not gonna rev above 8500rpms.
> 
> what cams do you guys suggest as you are already have idea how is this RB30 perform.
> 
> I'm looking at Tomei 270 lift 10.25, what do you think? go higher? lift or duration!!


changed my mind will be revving in the 8200rpms
Head will be built with:
Supertech dual springs with retainers
Supertech 1mm over size valves
Supertech valve guides
Tomei valve lifters (if needed)


----------



## Corsa1 (Sep 8, 2003)

You got to love a dyno LOL


----------



## adamsaiyad (Aug 23, 2006)

there's no replacement for displacement !!!!


----------



## adamsaiyad (Aug 23, 2006)

Rob please post a price for a rb30 build with stock internals and a stock head for this gent... im also keen to know how cheap they are as they are good performers ...
So stock crank, block, rods, pistons, and head with stock cams and buckets and springs and what Hp can this type of motor take and what Rpm ...
Ps ive lost all my emails from you so have no pricing to revert back to !!!


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

> So stock crank, block, rods, pistons, and head with stock cams and buckets and springs and what Hp can this type of motor take and what Rpm ...


Groan........


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

adamsaiyad said:


> buckets and springs and what Hp can this type of motor take and what Rpm ...
> Ps ive lost all my emails from you so have no pricing to revert back to !!!


I'm not sure buckets make that much difference if swapped for some made from unobtainium or something similar.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

RonniNielsen said:


> That was actually what i was looking for, theres quite a big difference in mapping car, if had a bad map, and then you made a good one, ofc you would gain some good numbers, but the graph tells it all.
> 
> this is properly the first time someone actually did this 26vs30 test?
> 
> ...


The car had a good reliable tune with the 26 and the guy had raced it for quite some time, he needed more torque, response and a little more power so I did him a new bottom end and swapped everything over.

The motor went back to the owner, was installed in the car and it went back to the same tuner on the same dyno, given the same "state of tune" ie boost, ignition etc, its on the same fuel etc, all thats changed is the bottom end and I had no input into the previous tune or the current one so its a perfect back to back comparison.

The graphs show the exact overlay of 30 over 26 under the same conditions.

Rob


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

adamsaiyad said:


> Rob please post a price for a rb30 build with stock internals and a stock head for this gent... im also keen to know how cheap they are as they are good performers ...
> So stock crank, block, rods, pistons, and head with stock cams and buckets and springs and what Hp can this type of motor take and what Rpm ...
> Ps ive lost all my emails from you so have no pricing to revert back to !!!


Its all on my website in the products section and the 100% stock internal motors (including the head, cams and springs etc) we have run reliably to low 10s in 4wd skylines.

Rob


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Nigel-Power said:


> Rob, with the RB30 package, the one for nzd16000, what sort of power do you think is an ideal output with twin HKS 2835R's
> 
> In the Borg you squeezed 950 with a T04Z so I pressume it's more likey to be 1000+ with 2835's ?
> 
> ...


The bottom end has almost nothing to do with how much power you will make, its mearly a pump, the RB30 is just a bigger pump than a 26, the power is made from the head gasket up.

With the complete 4wd bottom end 750-1200hp has been proven reliable many times and the parts used are actually the same as I use in my own 1400hp RB30 so the power you could make with 2835s will depend on your own setup and tune etc and if its right, the mechanicals I supply are up to coping with that no problem.


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> The car had a good reliable tune with the 26 and the guy had raced it for quite some time, he needed more torque, response and a little more power so I did him a new bottom end and swapped everything over.
> 
> The motor went back to the owner, was installed in the car and it went back to the same tuner on the same dyno, given the same "state of tune" ie boost, ignition etc, its on the same fuel etc, all thats changed is the bottom end and I had no input into the previous tune or the current one so its a perfect back to back comparison.
> 
> ...



:clap::clap: about time some "facts" came around... im actually quite amazed how mutch it gained.

Ron


----------



## adamsaiyad (Aug 23, 2006)

+1 for ronni


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

> unobtainium


Clearly its easier to find in the northern hemisphere


----------



## DrGtr (Jul 18, 2009)

Rob why dont you make rb34 as spool so we can have a big reason to come and get one from you? Rb30 make a lot of people not to choose in place of rb28.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

DrGtr said:


> Rob why dont you make rb34 as spool so we can have a big reason to come and get one from you? Rb30 make a lot of people not to choose in place of rb28.


If you want a RB32, RB33, RB34 or maybe even a RB35 thats no problem, I already have the means to do them.

Just send the money and it will happen. :thumbsup:


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Just send the money and it will happen. :thumbsup:


....Anything is possible, It just depends how much moola you want to throw at it!


----------



## infamous_t (Jul 9, 2007)

DrGtr said:


> Rob why dont you make rb34 as spool so we can have a big reason to come and get one from you? Rb30 make a lot of people not to choose in place of rb28.


Close enough?
http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/101521-world-first-genuine-rb33-build-up-diary.html


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> You got to love a dyno LOL


Give me a cheater bar and I reckon I can make more torque than a RB30


----------



## gavman (Apr 12, 2006)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> The japs never got the RB30 in their market, the OSG RB30 is well, lets not go there, and they have just tended to stick to 26s or strokers in the 26 block, its just much easier for them, that doesn't mean there isn't a different and possibly better option out there  and if you can disprove a single thing in the bit you've quoted from me, go right ahead :thumbsup:


what have you got against the osg rb30...?
other than cost with the current rate of exchange,
or being your competitor...


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

gavman said:


> what have you got against the osg rb30...?
> other than cost with the current rate of exchange,
> or being your competitor...


I'm not concerned about them as a competitor, never have been.

There's many things I PERSONALLY don't like about an OSG and IN MY OPINION they are very expensive and totally un-neccessary when you know what can be done with a genuine RB30 block and crank for a small fraction of the cost.

I'm also yet to see an OSG RB30 do anything special, (not saying they havn't) but if they were superior to a stock RB30 block and crank all the fast RB30 guys would surely be using them when as far as I know, none are.

Anyway, I'm sure you wern't baiting me up for a OSG V Nissan RB30 battle and I'm not interested in that either, its been done before getting no-one anywhere, people have a choice and they are welcome to make whatever choice they like, but if you do have information or links/video's to an OSG RB30 car doing well at a HIGH power level with reliability feel free to post the infomation, I'd be happy to see it,

Rob


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

The only advantage with the OSG RB30 it superior quality rods and crankshaft. Superior than standard, but then they will be.
There are a number of other 'tuners' who have adopted the sleeved/spacered block apporach over the stock RB30 with great effect. Why they have done this, I don't know, but they will have there reasons.


----------



## torra (Mar 11, 2008)

Hi R.I.PS NZ...you commented on a build that I have which you rightly Questioned, as the block does not have them...... (Oil squirters in a RB30 block)
One question, as I have a few people concerned about this.
Is there any need for them and do you need to have them fitted for High Powered blocks.
Jim





R.I.P.S NZ said:


> I'm not concerned about them as a competitor, never have been.
> 
> There's many things I PERSONALLY don't like about an OSG and IN MY OPINION they are very expensive and totally un-neccessary when you know what can be done with a genuine RB30 block and crank for a small fraction of the cost.
> 
> ...


----------



## neilo (Nov 17, 2004)

Sub Boy said:


> ....Anything is possible, It just depends how much moola you want to throw at it!


That's right mate it's all down to the moola!!! :thumbsup:


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> The only advantage with the OSG RB30 it superior quality rods and crankshaft. Superior than standard, but then they will be.


I'm really on the fence about that too with regards to it being an "advantage", the OSG rods are a very nice looking unit but there's plenty of good rods available for a RB30 now days that will easily cope with 1200-1500hp for a fraction of the cost of OSG rods.

Same with the cranks, they look nice and probably are a nice unit, are they needed for 1000-1400hp? absolutly not, in fact the only crank we've ever had crack was an aftermarket billet crank that I believe was made by the same place that does OSG and HKS cranks and the tests we've done have confirmed (for us) we're better off with a stock crank. 




R32 Combat said:


> There are a number of other 'tuners' who have adopted the sleeved/spacered block apporach over the stock RB30 with great effect. Why they have done this, I don't know, but they will have there reasons.


For sure they'll have their reasons, maybe its availability of RB30 blocks, maybe they want to do somehting different for themselves, maybe they want to have the head around 10mm lower than it is with a RB30 block, maybe they think they need liners and a billet crank for strength, there's a number of things as you say but with nothing against any of them, I'm still yet to see any of the "beefed up" liner/spacer RB30s keep up with, let alone out perform what is regularly done with totally stock RB30 blocks and cranks.

The way I look at it is, if the factory stuff is more than up to what 99.99% of people could ever want/need and its readily available at a better price why re-invent the wheel?

If the stock stuff gave trouble at say 900-1000hp but the liner/spacer motors were proving rock solid at 1200-1500hp that would be a totally different story and people would be happy to pay the extra for the extra strength and reliability, but that simply isn't the case.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

torra said:


> Hi R.I.PS NZ...you commented on a build that I have which you rightly Questioned, as the block does not have them...... (Oil squirters in a RB30 block)
> One question, as I have a few people concerned about this.
> Is there any need for them and do you need to have them fitted for High Powered blocks.
> Jim


No.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Without stating the obvious,
The os Rb30 is a kit consisting of a custom crank /rods/ pistons to transform the Rb26 into a stroker / bored engine
You cant and shouldnt compare it to a vL Rb30 which is a bone stock oem 3L
They are two completely different things, and the only thing they have in common is their capacity.

A true comparison would be a vL Rb30 with a custom crank / rods / pistons ....

Os developed the 3L kit because they didnt have hundreds of vL commodores driving around at the time.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> A true comparison would be a vL Rb30 with a custom crank / rods / pistons ....


Yep, done that.



GT-R Glenn said:


> Os developed the 3L kit because they didnt have hundreds of vL commodores driving around at the time.


Exactly.


----------



## Spency1983 (Feb 19, 2011)

anyone know why people put oil squirters under the pistons of an RB30 block and is it needed?


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

Spency1983 said:


> anyone know why people put oil squirters under the pistons of an RB30 block and is it needed?


No engine builders that I have spoken to in NZ and Aussie (10 that i can remember) that are known for RB's, bother to fit oil squirters.


----------



## Spency1983 (Feb 19, 2011)

interesting, i suppose the way you can tell a rb30 turbo block to a non is the original turbo feed and return holes on the side?


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

Spency1983 said:


> interesting, i suppose the way you can tell a rb30 turbo block to a non is the original turbo feed and return holes on the side?


I'm not entirely sure on this, I was always under the impression that series 1 blocks were available in a turbo and NA version (with and without oil feeds) and that the series 2 blocks all has the oil feeds.


----------



## Spency1983 (Feb 19, 2011)

thanks, anyway that you know of how to know if its series 1 or 2 block?


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

Spency1983 said:


> thanks, anyway that you know of how to know if its series 1 or 2 block?


Again, don't quote me on this (Rob would be better answering these) but IIRC the series 1 block doesn't have the flat section above he water pump mount, where as the series 2 does. The lack of he flat section makes it harder to mount the cambelt tensioner.


----------



## Spency1983 (Feb 19, 2011)

ah ok i know what you mean, on the series 2 its flat and the hole is already there for tensioner pin?


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

Spency1983 said:


> ah ok i know what you mean, on the series 2 its flat and the hole is already there for tensioner pin?


No, you will need to drill the hole, there is plenty of info as far as measurements as to where to drill on the RB30 section on the Aussie Skyline site.


----------



## mwebster (Aug 18, 2005)

torra said:


> Hi R.I.PS NZ...you commented on a build that I have which you rightly Questioned, as the block does not have them...... (Oil squirters in a RB30 block)
> One question, as I have a few people concerned about this.
> Is there any need for them and do you need to have them fitted for High Powered blocks.
> Jim


Jaguar spent a vast amount of money trying to get rid of the oil sprays on their Supercharged engines and failed to make them reliable enough without. I know to a certain extent it can be tuned around but for me this is enough to make me stick with a block that has them.

Remember torque is a function of RPM, cc and cylnder pressure

I believe this is the correct equation
BMEP(in N/m2) = 12.566 x Torque(in Nm) / (Engine size in litres / 1000)

if you divide that by 100,000 and you will get Pressure in Bar.

Normal production cars run 
Nat asp petrol 8.5 to 10.5 bar.
Turbo petrol 12 to 17 bar.

calculate your own engine and see how much stresss you're putting on std components then decide how many stock parts you would be prepared to run!


----------



## Kenneth-A (Nov 15, 2011)

The vast majority of cars do not run with oil squirters and there are plenty of high power rb30 blocks that run reliably for long periods without them.

Doing some extremely basic calcs isn't going to shine light on anything new.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Kenneth-A said:


> The vast majority of cars do not run with oil squirters and there are plenty of high power rb30 blocks that run reliably for long periods without them.
> 
> Doing some extremely basic calcs isn't going to shine light on anything new.


Soo, why would the RB26 have them and not the RB30?

'High power RB30 blocks' are not tested under the same conditions as a mass produced engine that HAS to last a good number of years and miles.

To delete them would be a step back wouldn't it?


----------



## Kenneth-A (Nov 15, 2011)

Well for a start, a high powered engine will likely be running forged pistons which cool faster than cast anyway. High powered engines will be running uprated cooling mods elsewhere, such as bigger intercooler, extended sumps etc.

Removing/not having squirters will mean a higher oil pressure across the rest of the engine.

Comparing a high powered rb30 to a stock rb26 seems fairly pointless (you can get rid of squirters on a 26 too if you make it up elsewhere). If you engine temps are ok at your desired power level then you don't need squirters.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Kenneth-A said:


> Well for a start, a high powered engine will likely be running forged pistons which cool faster than cast anyway.


High silicon aluminium has better thermal conductivity than low silicon aluminium. Cast pistons have a higher silicon content, usually 12-18%.

So I'm unsure if your statement in correct.

It's worth noting that the RB26 engine has to be able to run at maximum power for quite some time in high ambient temperatures.
I'd like to see a high power RB30 run for 10 mins flat out. I just don't think it would last that long.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Do rb20 / 25 ca18 / Supra 3L , run oil squirters ?


----------



## Simonh (May 24, 2002)

the rb25det runs oil squirters.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> It's worth noting that the RB26 engine has to be able to run at maximum power for quite some time in high ambient temperatures.
> I'd like to see a high power RB30 run for 10 mins flat out. I just don't think it would last that long.


Whats your definition of "flat out"?

So if we get a stock RB26 and put it on a dyno and run it continually at say 400hp/7000rpm and we get a RB30 bottom end, put the same stock 26 head and turbo's and everything else on it and run it at 400hp/7000rpm your saying the 30 would blow up first?

Or are you saying the guys who have ENDURANCE track GTRs (not just 5-6 laps at a time) with RB30s with no squirters have to come in every 5-10 minutes and let the engine cool down while the guys with 26s can keep going without issue?


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Whats your definition of "flat out"?
> 
> Are you saying the guys who have ENDURANCE track GTRs (not just 5-6 laps at a time) with RB30s with no squirters have to come in every 5-10 minutes and let the engine cool down while the guys with 26s can keep going without issue?


Ok, let me say this again. 

Why did nissan choose the RB26 engine? Was it to race? 

I have been to an engine dyno facility where they run engines for long periods of time at full power. And when I say a long time, there was a 3 litre truck engine that had been running for 8 weeks continously at full power.

What do the oil squirters do? Cool the area of the piston that initiates detonation? The oil pump can obviously cope this the required capacity.

I appreciate that you guys think that they are not required. Thats fine. Obviously nissan think they are. 
I'd be inclined to think nissan know best.

There guys have also got it wrong?

PISTON


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> Do rb20 / 25 ca18 / Supra 3L , run oil squirters ?


Dunno, do they?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> I appreciate that you guys think that they are not required. Thats fine. Obviously nissan think they are.


For sure in a production car situation where they have to cover their a$$ as much as possible.

With modern pistons, modern fuels, modern tuning, modern oils etc the 30s without squirters have no issue's even under race conditions so especially seeing as it is not a 5 minute, simple job to add them, I don't see any need to worry about it.

Its kind of like guys who think they need to fit forged pistons in a 500hp RB, or guys who think they need a billet crank over 1000hp etc, what your told, or what may appear neccessary might not be once real world testing has been done.

Rob


----------



## Kenneth-A (Nov 15, 2011)

I don't see how running an engine for 8 weeks flat will tell you anything that running a 2-3 hour race won't in regards to the cooling benefits from squirters. You can monitor your engine temps/knock and tune the engine within the parameters of the package you are using.

Thats not to say I'm sure you can't gain something by testing an engine for that period of time, but the pistons will be reaching peak temperature long before the end of an endurance race.

Supras are a good example as I believe the GTE block does use squirters but due to the price difference many big power builds have used GT blocks which don't come with squirters. Many that have used GTE blocks have blocked the squirters off because its thought they become a danger to the engine at higher cylinder and piston temps brought about by tuning/modification.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

I agree. As I said previously, Nissan made the RB26 as reliable as they could. They also intended the engine to be raced.
Whilst for many applications they could be construde as not required (my RB30 didn't have them), Nissan obviously thought they were a requirement.

There are many good reason to run an engine till destruction. That is why the Rolls Royce Merlin engine ended up so darn good. Being at war helps accelerate development.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

If anyone is interested, here's some pistons from a 5 year old RB30 race engine that was driven HARD every time it was running.

This is exactly as they came out, no cleaning as such, just a quick rince in petrol to get the oil off, note there is no discolouration on the underside of the piston.







As long as parts keep comming out looking like this I'll be in no hurry to add squirters.

Rob


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Why would you get discolouration under the piston?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

If it was getting too hot and burning the lubrication oil?

Or what would you expect to see on the piston if you didn't have squirters and it turns out you needed them?


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

How does the oil get under the piston?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> How does the oil get under the piston?


Through holes in the piston and a little splash, the rods do not have a thrust squirter either and factory rods do, as you can see the piston skirts are also in perfect condition.

What would you expect to see on the underside of the piston if you didn't have squirters and it turns out you needed them?


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Through holes in the piston and a little splash, the rods do not have a thrust squirter either.


What do the holes in the piston do?




R.I.P.S NZ said:


> What would you expect to see on the underside of the piston if you didn't have squirters and it turns out you needed them?


Nothing. You are not cooling the underside of the piston.


----------



## Kenneth-A (Nov 15, 2011)

What rob is saying, is that if you needed squirters but didn't have any, any oil that found its way onto the bottom of the piston would be baked off and leave behind a deposit that you couldn't clean off with a quick petrol wipe.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> What do the holes in the piston do?


Direct oil to the underside of the piston.



R32 Combat said:


> Nothing. You are not cooling the underside of the piston.


The factory oil squirter sprays oil on the underside of the piston, how is that NOT cooling the underside?

Maybe you should check the pictures in your own link again 

http://www.tomei-p.co.jp/_2003web-catalogue/e050-051_piston.html


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Kenneth-A said:


> What rob is saying, is that if you needed squirters but didn't have any, any oil that found its way onto the bottom of the piston would be baked off and leave behind a deposit that you couldn't clean off with a quick petrol wipe.


Correct, you clearly have not been drinking fosters this evening


----------



## Kenneth-A (Nov 15, 2011)

I prefer to keep a clear head, so I've been on the Stella instead.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Sorry Rob, Perhaps I was unclear.

You asked


R.I.P.S NZ said:


> What would you expect to see on the underside of the piston if you didn't have squirters and it turns out you needed them?


My response was 'nothing'

Meaning, that you probably wouldn't know because oil was not being used as a cooling medium on the underside of the piston, thus no reside would be left behind.

Have you digested in information presented on the TOMEI website?

Also, what do the holes in the piston do, you mentioned them earlier.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Kenneth-A said:


> I prefer to keep a clear head, so I've been on the Stella instead.


Ah, the trusty wife beater...


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> Sorry Rob, Perhaps I was unclear.
> 
> You asked
> 
> ...


:nervous: So your now saying the oil squirters are NOT there to cool the underside of the piston but to lubricate it?

If not what exactly ARE you saying you think the oil squirters Nissan felt neccessary are there for?



R32 Combat said:


> Also, what do the holes in the piston do, you mentioned them earlier.


Allow oil to flow away from behind the oil control rings.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

FFS Rob, what are YOU drink, DEISEL!!!!

I'll put this in uppercase in the hope it sinks in.

I AM SUGGESTING THAT YOU WOULD PROBABLY NOT GET ANY DISCOLOURING ON THE UNDERSIDE OF A PISTON WITHOUT OIL SQUIRTERS BECAUSE THE VOLUME OF OIL IN CONTACT WITH THE UNDERSIDE OF THE PISTON IS UNSUFFICIENT.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

woah, clam down chap, re-read your posts, you havn't made alot of sense or been clear about what your trying to say for quite some time now.


Lets try this then.......After the strip down of an engine without squirters, how would you suggest one would know if one should have had them fitted?

What would you expect to see exactly?


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

I don't think YOU would know whether you would need them. I certainly wouldn't.

This is my point. I do not design engines, not do you. I can assemble parts as well as the next man.
Nissan would have done thousands of hours of engine development on the RB26DETT engine, and they concluded that oil squirters were required.
Why do you think RB26 uses them?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> Why do you think RB26 uses them?


Because at the time they decided they wanted to use them.

Thrust squirters in rods are there to spray oil on the thrust side of the bore to help lubricate/cool the piston skirt.

I sometimes use rods with them but I mostly use rods without them, the pistons that come out of the motors without the squirters look no worse for wear than the ones that did have the squirters. WTF? 

Nissan chose to put these thrust squirters on their rods, are they neccessary with with a well tuned and maintained engine with a good modern oil etc? It would appear not, its much the same thing with piston cooling squirters IMO.


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Nissan chose to put these thrust squirters on their rods, are they neccessary with with a well tuned and maintained engine with a good modern oil etc? It would appear not, its much the same thing with piston cooling squirters IMO.


Plenum and now engine designer extraordinaire! :clap:


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

bigmikespec said:


> Plenum and now engine designer extraordinaire! :clap:


Hahaha, hardly and never claimed to be, all I do is go by my own results and the condition of the parts I check after many hours of abuse.

What others chose to do, for their own reasons is entirely up to them.

Use piston and bore squirters and a nismo plenim if thats what floats your boat mate :thumbsup:


----------



## infamous_t (Jul 9, 2007)

Would oil squirters be a beneficial feature on the RB30. Yes.
Does it need them to be reliable. No.
Can you put oil squirters into an RB30 if you really want to. Yes.

Plenty of high power SOHC & DOHC RB30s getting around in the last 15 years or so, let alone the tens of thousands of VLs and R31 skylines in turbo & non turbo form, most already past 200K on the odo.
Plenty of good heat cycled blocks for fodder ey Robbie! :thumbsup:


----------



## godzirra (Sep 16, 2009)

If Nissan was so good at designing the rb26 in the first place, why did they design a weak oil pump in the first rb26s?

Lots of water under the bridge since then.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

> Nissan chose to put these thrust squirters on their rods, are they neccessary with with a well tuned and maintained engine with a good modern oil etc? It would appear not, its much the same thing with piston cooling squirters *IMO*.


Whats the matter with that ?
IMO In My Opinion ...

He's not saying its is so because I said so.


Anyway ....


----------



## Glen (Jan 21, 2011)

**** sakes you english boys can talk bullshit. Must be have a go at rob day.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Its also an Aussie thats having a go, obviously my own years of testing and my own OPINION mean nothing because I'm going against what nissan chose to do 23 years ago.

How dare I!!!


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

infamous_t said:


> Plenty of good heat cycled blocks for fodder ey Robbie! :thumbsup:


I tried dilling into an old VL block the other day so I could tap a thread where a frost plug once was and man they are hard!!


----------



## Glen (Jan 21, 2011)

Oh an aussie. Explains. Ultimate E-Warrior.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

So Nissan designed with prob 500bhp in mind, yet rob has taken them to 1500bhp. I think we can be fairly sure his method works. How many of the haters have actually done what he has managed and if someone can show any of robs fabrication that isn't a1 standard then I'd like to see it. 

I'm not saying that just because rob does something it's right but he seems to be pushing the envelope in trying different things more than anyone else is


----------



## mambastu (Feb 13, 2002)

Glen said:


> **** sakes you english boys can talk bullshit. Must be have a go at rob day.


Let me guess...another RIPS fanboy from NZ ? Why do you guys have to treat the RB30 like some national treasure and any negative comments about it like some national slur ? Grow up ffs. We had it over here in the 80's in a 90hp SOHC carbed Nissan Patrol. Nissan also used it here in forklift trucks. It's not hugely rare, I have two RB30 blocks sitting in my garage. 

Personally I respect RIPS engineering and manufacturing ability, I have some RIPS RB26 dump pipes on my current engine which he made for me about 6 years ago when the exchange rate was better. Very well made, certainly rival anything I've seen come out of Japan. Why is it though that every RB30 thread seems to turn into a RIPS promotional thread ? It's getting pretty tiresome. 

It used to be said that bragging was the Australian national sport...apparently its a little further south....


----------



## infamous_t (Jul 9, 2007)

mambastu said:


> It used to be said that bragging was the Australian national sport...apparently its a little further south....


In Antarctica? Bloody penguins and their RB30s


----------



## Nexen (Jul 19, 2009)

I'm happy to see people go against the grain and have success . I was just uncertain to what happens without the squitters and so far we've been shown its ok without .


----------



## mambastu (Feb 13, 2002)

infamous_t said:


> In Antarctica? Bloody penguins and their RB30s


Lol, bloody geography let's me down again ! I meant east as you very well know


----------



## Glen (Jan 21, 2011)

Last time i checked im not a RIPS fan boy. Although, he has made quite a few nice motors.

Why is it that people have to be spoon fed instead of making up their own mind about what motor setup they should go with. Would make things a bit more simple. Search button also helps.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

godzirra said:


> If Nissan was so good at designing the rb26 in the first place, why did they design a weak oil pump in the first rb26s?
> 
> Lots of water under the bridge since then.


It's called development.

It's the difference between the Veyron 1000hp engine and the RB 1000hp engines. Which one will last longer?
1000hp on a dyno is one thing, 1000hp that can be used for long period is another.

It's certainly a bold statement to say they are not required when one doesn't really know why they are there.

Interesting conversation all the same. Tons of crap as usual.


----------



## Corsa1 (Sep 8, 2003)

Rob if it was a old design oil squirters why do F1 engines use them and sometimes 2 per cylinder? as I believe they are to cool the under side of the piston crown to take some of the heat away from the rings to get better sealing to the bore.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> Rob if it was a old design oil squirters why do F1 engines use them and sometimes 2 per cylinder? as I believe they are to cool the under side of the piston crown to take some of the heat away from the rings to get better sealing to the bore.


Most, if not all endurance deisels and most high performance petrol forced induction engines use them for that reason. 
Performance and endurance. In many cases, oil cooling failure leads to piston failure.

It dosen't mean that if you build an engine you need them, you can compensate with huge PTB clearence. This works ok, but it's not ideal.


----------



## Corsa1 (Sep 8, 2003)

I would only use them on a turbo engine. but I have built engines with out them using turbos, the bike engines that I have built with turbos have not used them but they are a smaller bore size so don't see the heat.


----------



## Kenneth-A (Nov 15, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> Rob if it was a old design oil squirters why do F1 engines use them and sometimes 2 per cylinder? as I believe they are to cool the under side of the piston crown to take some of the heat away from the rings to get better sealing to the bore.


Formula 1 engines rev up to 20k and use billet/titanium pistons. Its a whole different kettle of fish.

I haven't seen anyone say oil squirters don't help. They just aren't necessary as proved by the large number of rb30s around the world that have done many miles and been ragged around without failure.


----------



## Corsa1 (Sep 8, 2003)

Billet/ titanium pistons what?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

FFS, I go to bed and wake up to this, lol.

This is not a RIPS promotional thread and RB30 threads don't turn into them at all, I just answer questions based on what I have found and my comments just get picked to bits mostly by guys who have done F%^K ALL. (note the mostly please so there's no missunderstanding for the less than sharp ones out there)

I answer questions asked in the thread (its not like I randomly start spouting off about anything just for the heck of it) and the answer given has been based on what I have found with my own engines, nothing more.

People are welcome to read whatever they like and then decide what they want to do and I'll continue to do motors they way I want to do them, hell I might even build one with only 5 pistons and rods and smash a piece of unobtainium in the spare crank oil feed and bore.

The RB30 blocks I use don't have oil squirters, it is possible, but not particularly easy to add them, our first RB30s were around 600hp and we have worked up from there, every time we have had an engine apart the pistons and bores look mint and the engines have always delivered the results we were after, so I should now add them just because some people on here say they'd be better with them or because F1 engines have them?

Tui add right there.

Just imagine if I added a nismo plenim, oil squirters and whatever other stuff I "SHOULD HAVE" because the "way I do it is wrong or not as good as it could be", Man I'd be running 4s by now.

I prefere win races and go quicker than any of you keyboard warriors have ever gone with something I know is crap, makes it even more satisfying then aye:thumbsup:.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Man I'd be running 4s by now.


LOL.


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

R32 Combat said:


> LOL.


Dont worry if he did you would see it in the signature.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

bigmikespec said:


> Dont worry if he did you would see it in the signature.


No, you'd hear me screaming from here "thank you Mike, that nismo plenim made all the difference, I couldn't have done it without your expert guidance" :clap:


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

bigmikespec said:


> Dont worry if he did you would see it in the signature.


It would be a great achievement.

In my experiance, corners are more fun, but you need squirters for them.


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

You would not need to thank me, just the guys who spent most of their life in R&D, simulation and real world testing that got you there  

The Nismo is just one example of good design and finished product.

^^^agreed, OEMs put oil squirters in high performance engines for good reason. There is no way I would run a dry sump RB engine with no oil squirters especially if you were expecting to run any vacuum.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> In my experiance, corners are more fun, but you need squirters for them.


Shit I better recall all my track engines then 

Try 0-70+mph in 1 second then guide a pointy stick thats trying to crash to the end, then have -5g after that and tell me its not good fun.

If the car tries to kill you bad enough there are almost corners in drag racing, hahaha. but yes, a nice quick car on a track is good fun too.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

bigmikespec said:


> There is no way I would run a dry sump RB engine with no oil squirters especially if you were expecting to run any vacuum.


Of course you may want squirters and thats cool.

I have done a dry sump drag engine that ran a fair amount of vaccum and a drysumped endurance track RB with a good amount of vaccum thats done 1000s of HARD miles, neither run squirters, the drag engine was mint on strip down after alot of abuse for 2 1/2 years, the endurance motor is still running beautifully and its been untouched.

I'll be interested to see what the pistons look like when that ever comes apart.

Once again it comes down to if you did actually have an engine dyno to load a motor for long periods of time having squirters may well show advantages/gains over not having them but there certainbly arn't "non squirter" motors dropping like flies or giving indication that its a must they be added.


----------



## mattysupra (Oct 31, 2008)

would anyone like to see my willy?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

No, but you can all lick my B^&ls.

Isn't it funny how I get PMs asking for help from the very guys who have no problem in giving me shit on here, interesting.


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

Just a question....
Oil squirters are to cool the pistons to avoid ring/piston damage yes?
Has anyone seen a RB30, track or drag have ring damage with good aftermarket pistons?(that isn't det damage from poor tuning)
Surely with the extra strength of forged pistons, this is a next to no failure rate now?
I'm not a RIPS fan boy (hell I live in NZ and got someone else to build my RB30) but there are plenty of competitive track RB30s getting around making large numbers, doing 6 hr endurance races, dry and wet sumped, and I watch ALOT of Motorsport (especially the ones with RBs in them) and I've never seen one go pop.....
The guy that built my engine has done 3 seasons on the same motor without even pulling it down, it's about 700hp, and has won the S/I Saloon class for the last 5 years in a row.....no squirters.

......I think we'll be fine without them, or maybe it works different in the northern hemisphere?


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

I think this will go on for ever...

I'm sure it will be the source of a few giggles...


----------



## mattysupra (Oct 31, 2008)

Robby, dont know why every one pick's on you on here. Maybe they are jealous of your results? End of the day you do produce the numbers and your engine's prove themselves over and over again. 

I should not worry about it .


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> No, but you can all lick my B^&ls.
> 
> Isn't it funny how I get PMs asking for help from the very guys who have no problem in giving me shit on here, interesting.


Interesting? I asked about some of your products, your dry sump pan and manifolds. Neither of which I am using.

You need to get of your high horse, experienced and educated people question designs and decisions that you proudly display on a forum... you reject and deflect every comment based on the fact you "make enough power" for the 7-10seconds it takes to get down the quarter.

Fanboys defend you because they are too uniformed to know better and the minority raise their eyebrows and give up.


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

Sniper1st said:


> so let me know what you think guys.


This is from Post #1

Have we achieved the mission yet?:chuckle::chuckle::chuckle:


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

bigmikespec said:


> You need to get of your high horse, experienced and educated people question designs and decisions that you proudly display on a forum... you reject and deflect every comment based on the fact you "make enough power" for the 7-10seconds it takes to get down the quarter.


If the results Rob achieves prove his claims to be correct, does it need to be more scientific than that? It's all very well having a document that states a part does what it says it should do but functionality in the real world is far more important in my book.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Sub Boy said:


> The guy that built my engine has done 3 seasons on the same motor without even pulling it down, it's about 700hp, and has won the S/I Saloon class for the last 5 years in a row.....no squirters.


Yeah but what would he know aye :thumbsup:




TAZZMAXX said:


> If the results Rob achieves prove his claims to be correct, does it need to be more scientific than that? It's all very well having a document that states a part does what it says it should do but functionality in the real world is far more important in my book.


Agreed and when the linered, block spacered, billet cranked, oil squirtered, nismo plenimed, blah blah blah's are out there are winning everything I'll have a re-think about it all, untill then, IT JUST DOESN"T MATTER, DO WHATEVER YOU LIKE AND BEST OF LUCK TO YOU


----------



## Little Nismo (May 31, 2002)

mambastu said:


> Let me guess...another RIPS fanboy from NZ ? Why do you guys have to treat the RB30 like some national treasure and any negative comments about it like some national slur ? Grow up ffs.
> 
> Why is it though that every RB30 thread seems to turn into a RIPS promotional thread ? It's getting pretty tiresome.
> 
> It used to be said that bragging was the Australian national sport...apparently its a little further south....


Hry maybe since Rob is respected as an expert and noone seems to be able to pull out a nissan engineer to trump him people deffer to his opinion. Also he has pretty reasoned responses.

BTW it ain't bragging if it's true, that's what Mohammad Ali said, before he'd fought to many a fight, and left his mind in the ring.


----------



## godzirra (Sep 16, 2009)

IMHO, the original question has been answered in page 6.

Does the hi-octane Mark Berry time attack rb30 run squirters? Not that it makes any difference.


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

This is becoming a bit pointless a discussion tbh.

If the RB30s have proven themselves over the years, then that's the end of the argument really.


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

godzirra said:


> IMHO, the original question has been answered in page 6.
> 
> Does the hi-octane Mark Berry time attack rb30 run squirters? Not that it makes any difference.


I would be 99% sure that's a no


----------



## mwebster (Aug 18, 2005)

based on opinions from actal engine designers (ok jaguar ones not nissan ones but still actual designers) I still feel while it is clearly possible to make the engine work without squirters it is a compromise and a risk that I would not be prepared to take thus the RB30 is not and will never be my choice. good luck to those who do choose it but I will never be a fan.


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

bigmikespec said:


> Interesting? I asked about some of your products, your dry sump pan and manifolds. Neither of which I am using.
> 
> You need to get of your high horse, experienced and educated people question designs and decisions that you proudly display on a forum... you reject and deflect every comment based on the fact you "make enough power" for the 7-10seconds it takes to get down the quarter.
> 
> Fanboys defend you because they are too uniformed to know better and the minority raise their eyebrows and give up.



Bigmikespec, you need to think about what you write here...
Calling Rob´s custimers Fanboys? who the f&(k do you think you are?
we spend thousinds of pounds for his products, because you simply wont get anything better at the prices he makes. ive spend some money at RIPS, and ive been blow away be the products he supply. What Rob doesent show, is actually what you pay for!
anyone who has actually had one of his products in there hands would fully agree, that the quality, and thought of his products are amazing comparing to what he quotes you.

The fact that you (experienced and educated aparently) has to be negative on anything that Rob is actually willing to share with all of us, just shows hos mutch/little brain you run around with...

That said...

THANK YOU ROB! 
for the fantastic service you provide.
for all the quistions you take your time and answer.
for sharing photos of builds, and custimer car. 
and for allways making bigmike look like a fool :clap::clap:

Ron aka Rips Fanboy


----------



## Corsa1 (Sep 8, 2003)

when I saw a flaw in one of RIPS products I got shot down and was told it wasn't made for your customer.and I think mike is right in what he says the trouble with mr rips is that it gets shoved down your throat when he makes something new or brakes a turbo LOL


----------



## David (Apr 25, 2003)

mwebster said:


> based on opinions from actal engine designers (ok jaguar ones not nissan ones but still actual designers) I still feel while it is clearly possible to make the engine work without squirters it is a compromise and a risk that I would not be prepared to take thus the RB30 is not and will never be my choice. good luck to those who do choose it but I will never be a fan.


Having worked closely with ignition control on the latest generation of jaguar engines I can say the reasons they need oil squirters are quite different, they use crappy cast pistons and very high compression ratios even on the boosted engines every effort is needed to make them less det limited and to stop the pistons breaking / melting.

I would have no issue using a forged rb30 without them


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

RonniNielsen said:


> Bigmikespec, you need to think about what you write here...
> Calling Rob´s custimers Fanboys? who the f&(k do you think you are?
> we spend thousinds of pounds for his products, because you simply wont get anything better at the prices he makes. ive spend some money at RIPS, and ive been blow away be the products he supply. What Rob doesent show, is actually what you pay for!
> anyone who has actually had one of his products in there hands would fully agree, that the quality, and thought of his products are amazing comparing to what he quotes you.
> ...


You are being very condescending with your comments and making rather childish remarks all for the wrong reasons which I also find cringe-making, but what rips product are you using ? not RB30 are ya? 

A couple of catch cans and a fabricated sump doesn't really mean RB30 does it? 

So I don't know how you fall into the RB30 fanboy category? :nervous:

Fail


----------



## asiasi (Dec 22, 2007)

What about the people who went from RB30 back to RB28, Ludders ? :nervous:


----------



## godzirra (Sep 16, 2009)

I think bigmikespec comments might be a bit unfair. I run a rb26/30 and dont have a single RIPS product. Although I would be happy to say I got plenty of inspiration from RIPS.

And IMHO oil squirters arent a big deal. Its clear they are not essential for reliable, high hp engines.

Look at it this way, plenty of rb26s with squirters have failed anyway.


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

Nigel-Power said:


> You are being very condescending with your comments and making rather childish remarks all for the wrong reasons which I also find cringe-making, but what rips product are you using ? not RB30 are ya?
> 
> A couple of catch cans and a fabricated sump doesn't really mean RB30 does it?
> 
> ...


I was not refering to rb30 at all.. just the fact that bigspecmike keeps posting sh!t about robs products, without having anything that really prove anything other than to read about flow dynamics.

no dubt, my next build will have a rips rb30, why? because i know it will work..


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

asiasi said:


> What about the people who went from RB30 back to RB28, Ludders ? :nervous:


Not through choice I assure you. Many a time he's told me he'd far rather have his old 30 back. You've just got to look at the time slips to see what going on there. Lets leave that at that shall we, this thread has nothing to do with Ludders.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

The point is, OP asked for peoples OPINIONS, IDEAS and EXPERIENCE.

He asked "One question, as I have a few people concerned about this.
Is there any need for them and do you need to have them fitted for High Powered blocks."

I suppose if you can't simply read that and take it for what it is, you would then want to "define" need.

You NEED air to breathe, to survive.
You don't NEED beer to drink, to survive.

Past experience has shown man kind that if you go without air for long enough you will die.

Past experience has shown that if you don't drink beer you can still survive no problem but if you do drink beer, your life may be for the better or worse depending on how you treat it.

Myself and others with experience have mearly commented on OUR findings, nothing more, nothing less.

If enough people confirm that they have had no issues when not running squirters, it would then become common knowledge that they are not NEEDED.

It might be nice to have them if you chose to, or with enough "drinking" (testing) it may be possible to show gains (or losses) in various areas of performance and reliability but the FACT reamains, they are not NEEDED in the CONTEXT of the op's question.

Its really pretty simple to grasp I would have thought guys and all this crap that happens on nearly every thread where myself and others are willing to share their experience is just crazy.

Everyone has a choice, we don't have to agree with the way others CHOSE to build their engines or cars etc but to constantly pick the hell out of genuine comments made in good faith to help some asking a genuine question is pathetic.

Oil squirters needed in the context of this thread.............NO

Can you fit them if it makes you feel better............SURE WHY NOT. 

Anybody care to argue with that logic?


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

> I think mike is right in what he says the trouble with mr rips is that it gets shoved down your throat when he makes something new or brakes a turbo LOL


Im inclined to agree,
One of the thing that really annoy me about this forum, is that so many people base their opinion on what Robs says ....and Rob is an expert at self promotion.

I won the annual puke car club speed weekend tarmac hillclimb recently (oops in my Honda *blush*) but didnt feel the need to start a thread about it.

This entire thread has become the usual Rob vs the world (tbh as soon as I saw the title I predicted this)
All rather boring tbh, it was fantastic to see the dyno comparison though, so cheers for that, but the rest of the the "discussion" is rather boring and tiresome now.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

However, it would be a pretty boring forum if people didn't share their thoughts and experiences. 

I quite liked your project thread Glenn, although I'm sure it wasn't for self gratification


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

100% agree & we are lucky to have Rob to tell us what he has done and we know he walks the talk etc:

It just gets boring when it turns into a Rob vs the world discussion
I also find the people running to his aid rather silly as most of them base their opinion on what he has told them is right rather than what they have actually done themselves, anyway, I apologise for perpetuating this.

Back to People who HAVE owned and Rb26 and then gone to a larger capacity engine in the same or similar car.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> Back to People who HAVE owned and Rb26 and then gone to a larger capacity engine in the same or similar car.


Perhaps only those persons should comment.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

PS F1 pistons are made from MMC's, same as they have for ages, same technology as F20c cylinders oh and pretty sure NSX's


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> PS F1 pistons are made from MMC's, same as they have for ages, same technology as F20c cylinders oh and pretty sure NSX's


MMC's are not allowed in F1 (I think)

Sure, you need a piston/bore gap of naff all, and composites are ideal for that.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> I won the annual puke car club speed weekend tarmac hillclimb recently (oops in my Honda *blush*) but didnt feel the need to start a thread about it.


I'm sure it would be welcome on the honda forums or the other Marques section here.



GT-R Glenn said:


> This entire thread has become the usual Rob vs the world (tbh as soon as I saw the title I predicted this)


We've discussed this before Glenn, I run a business and I PAY to be able to promote my engines, race results (which give credibility to my engines) and fabricated parts I make to sell, I'd be pretty silly to pay alot of money to be here and say nothing don't you think?

I know how it might come accross sometimes, but I would NEVER comment or make a sugestion unless I'd either done it for myself or felt I understood enough about the subject to make a worthwhile post.

It seems as soon as I say how I chose to do things or my OPINION on something, a certain few make it their life's mission to pick it to bits and try to convince others that what I have said is wrong and it should be done a different way and to be fair, I don't recall ever getting to the end of one of these "battles" and ever having to put my hand up and say "tell you what, I was wrong about that and I'm sorry" but pretty much every one ends with the thread fading away because what I have said all along does usually turn out to be logical in the context of what we have been discussing.

Note no-one has commented on my previous post, we ALL know its true (or it would have been picked on by now) but that doesn't suit so it all goes quiet and the subject side stepped slightly.

I do know a little about RBs by now and I can see why other guys with real world experience slowly stop comming onto forums like this, its like, why the f&*k should I try to help a genuine person asking a genuine question when nearly every time it ends up like this.

Rob


----------



## mwebster (Aug 18, 2005)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Oil squirters needed in the context of this thread.............NO
> 
> Can you fit them if it makes you feel better............SURE WHY NOT.
> 
> Anybody care to argue with that logic?


I disagree with this part, 

My take on it is :-

are oil squirters essential? no with the correct tune, 

would the engine be better/more reliable with them? yes it would.


I do think that people on both sides of the fence need to take a chill pill and look at the whole subject with a much more open mind.


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Not through choice I assure you. Many a time he's told me he'd far rather have his old 30 back. You've just got to look at the time slips to see what going on there. Lets leave that at that shall we, this thread has nothing to do with Ludders.


Nice deflection there. 

The time slips show the fastest RB's in GTR's seem to be RB28's... (with oil squirters)


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

bigmikespec said:


> Nice deflection there.
> 
> The time slips show the fastest RB's in GTR's seem to be RB28's... (with oil squirters)


Gee'z your a twat, stop trying to twist things around to shit stir, he's talking about LUDDERS GOING FROM A 30 TO A 28 which as I said, was not through his choice and I have nothing to deflect, trust me on that :thumbsup:

The quick guys with 28s (with squirters) have not had 30s previously as far as I'm aware but I'm sure Mike will tell me I'm wrong on that point.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

mwebster said:


> are oil squirters essential? no with the correct tune,
> 
> would the engine be better/more reliable with them? yes it would.


OK, I agree, thats a better way of putting it.

In the context of the thread and what the OP was asking about, oil squirters are not essential.


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Gee'z your a twat, stop trying to twist things around to shit stir, he's talking about LUDDERS GOING FROM A 30 TO A 28 which as I said, was not through his choice and I have nothing to deflect, trust me on that :thumbsup:
> 
> The quick guys with 28s (with squirters) have not had 30s previously as far as I'm aware but I'm sure Mike will tell me I'm wrong on that point.


Dude relax, I have not resorted to name calling.

Yes that is why I commented, he is going from a 30 to 28... just seemed like you deflected the question/comment a bit. Do you know why he went to 28?

I cant speak for the record holders with RB28's.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

> 100% agree & we are lucky to have Rob to tell us what he has done and we know he walks the talk etc:
> 
> It just gets boring when it turns into a Rob vs the world discussion


This what annoys me Rob

Yep, I could post in the Honda forum, as you could post in the FED Rb30 forum....

For me, its all good, except when it just becomes a challenge to read through the post's, like when me and NXTWAT "discussed" the worlds fastest vL powered auto trans'd R32.

Pretty sure they are Composites R32 TWomBoot


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

bigmikespec said:


> Yes that is why I commented, he is going from a 30 to 28... just seemed like you deflected the question/comment a bit. Do you know why he went to 28?


I think there is a very good reason for him not using the RB30 at present but it really isn't up for discussion on here. Can we stick to RB26 to RB30 comparisons for now?


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

mwebster said:


> thus the RB30 is not and will never be my choice. oodg luck to those who do choose it but I will never be a fan.


Mark, out of interest what RB** displacement engines are you running in your GTR race cars?


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

R32 ComTawt

5.13 Materials and Construction ***8211; Definitions :
5.13.1 X Based Alloy (e.g. Ni based alloy) ***8211; X must be the most abundant element in the alloy on a %w/w basis.
The minimum possible weight percent of the element X must always be greater than the maximum possible
of each of the other individual elements present in the alloy.
2011 F1 Technical Regulations 23 of 72 10 December 2010
© 2010 Fédération Internationale de l***8217;Automobile
5.13.2 X-Y Based Alloy (e.g. Al-Cu based alloy) ***8211; X must be the most abundant element as in 5.13.1 above. In
addition element Y must be the second highest constituent (%w/w), after X in the alloy. The mean content
of Y and all other alloying elements must be used to determine the second highest alloying element (Y).
5.13.3 Intermetallic Materials (e.g. TiAl, NiAl, FeAl, Cu3Au, NiCo) ***8211; These are materials where the material is
based upon intermetallic phases, i.e. the matrix of the material consists of greater then 50%v/v
intermetallic phase(s). An intermetallic phase is a solid solution between two or more metals exhibiting
either partly ionic or covalent, or metallic bonding with a long range order, in a narrow range of composition
around the stoichiometric proportion.
5.13.4 Composite Materials ***8211; These are materials where a matrix material is reinforced by either a continuous or discontinuous phase. The matrix can be metallic, ceramic, polymeric or glass based. The reinforcement can be present as long fibres (continuous reinforcement); or short fibres, whiskers and particles (discontinuous reinforcement).
5.13.5 Metal Matrix Composites (MMC***8217;s) ***8211; These are composite materials with a metallic matrix containing a
phase of greater than 2%v/v which is not soluble in the liquid phase of the metallic matrix.
5.13.6 Ceramic Materials (e.g. Al2O3, SiC, B4C, Ti5Si3, SiO2, Si3N4) ***8211; These are inorganic, non metallic solids.
5.14 Materials and construction ***8211; General :
5.14.1 Unless explicitly permitted for a specific engine component, the following materials may not be used anywhere on the engine :
a) Magnesium based alloys ;
b) Metal Matrix Composites (MMC***8217;s) ;
c) Intermetallic materials ;
d) Alloys containing more than 5% by weight of Beryllium, Iridium or Rhenium.
5.14.2 Coatings are free provided the total coating thickness does not exceed 25% of the section thickness of the underlying base material in all axes. In all cases the relevant coating must not exceed 0.8mm.
5.15 Materials and construction ***8211; Components :

5.15.1 Pistons must be manufactured from an aluminium alloy which is either Al-Si ; Al-Cu ; Al-Mg or Al-Zn based.
5.15.2 Piston pins must be manufactured from an iron based alloy and must be machined from a single piece of material.
5.15.3 Connecting rods must be manufactured from iron or titanium based alloys and must be machined from a
single piece of material with no welded or joined assemblies (other than a bolted big end cap or an interfered small end bush).
5.15.4 Crankshafts must be manufactured from an iron based alloy.
No welding is permitted between the front and rear main bearing journals.
No material with a density exceeding 19,000kg/m3 may be assembled to the crankshaft.
5.15.5 Camshafts must be manufactured from an iron based alloy.
Each camshaft and lobes must be machined from a single piece of material.
No welding is allowed between the front and rear bearing journals.

5.15.6 Valves must be manufactured from alloys based on Iron, Nickel, Cobalt or Titanium.
Hollow structures cooled by sodium, lithium or similar are permitted.

2011 F1 Technical Regulations 24 of 72 10 December 2010
© 2010 Fédération Internationale de l***8217;Automobile

5.15.7 Reciprocating and rotating components :

a) Reciprocating and rotating components must not be manufactured from graphitic matrix, metal matrix composites or ceramic materials, this restriction does not apply to the clutch and any seals.
Ceramic bearings are not permitted in ancillaries which are included when assessing the weight of the engine, e.g. alternator, coolant pumps and oil pumps ;
b) Rolling elements of rolling element bearings must be manufactured from an iron based alloy ;
c) Timing gears between the crankshaft and camshafts (including hubs) must be manufactured from an iron based alloy.
5.15.8 Static components :
a) Engine crankcases and cylinder heads must be manufactured from cast or wrought aluminium alloys ;
No composite materials or metal matrix composites are permitted either for the whole component or locally ;
b) Any metallic structure whose primary or secondary function is to retain lubricant or coolant within the engine must be manufactured from an iron based alloy or an aluminium alloy of the Al-Si, Al-Cu, Al-Zn or Al-Mg alloying systems ;
c) All threaded fasteners must be manufactured from an alloy based on Cobalt, Iron or Nickel ;
Composite materials are not permitted ;
d) Valve seat inserts, valve guides and any other bearing component may be manufactured from metallic infiltrated pre-forms with other phases which are not used for reinforcement.
5.16 Starting the engine :
A supplementary device temporarily connected to the car may be used to start the engine both on the grid


It appears you could be correct


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

:chuckle:

Glenn you go to such extents... 

I'm pretty sure R32 Combat will be satisfied with your findings 

:clap:

.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

bigmikespec said:


> Yes that is why I commented, he is going from a 30 to 28... just seemed like you deflected the question/comment a bit. Do you know why he went to 28?


Yes I do know why and as tazzmaxx said its not for discussion on here except for the common knowledge that he now has a 33 with a 28 in it and isn't going as quick as he did with the 34 with the 30 in it and I don't think anyone would chose for it to be that way. 

I'm over and out on the squirter, 26/28/30 debate, I've posted before and after dyno graphs which tell the story.

Rob


----------



## mwebster (Aug 18, 2005)

Nigel-Power said:


> Mark, out of interest what RB** displacement engines are you running in your GTR race cars?


The engine I run is a stroked RB to 2.8 with 86mm pistons full counter billet crank in an N1 or RRR block. running currently around 945 bhp.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

mwebster said:


> The engine I run is a stroked RB to 2.8 with 86mm pistons full counter billet crank in an N1 or RRR block. running currently around 945 bhp.


Sounds great, any video's or in car video's of it in action?


----------



## adamsaiyad (Aug 23, 2006)

Im sorry Rob but indeed time and time again posts always seem to go into a battle ?
or they become make an idiot out of X or Flame X.
Its a pain in the ass and totally uncalled for .
Answer the questions or get off the forum .... stop turning posts into a debate... unless the Debate was actually a post from the word go!!!!!


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> R32 ComTawt
> 
> It appears you could be correct


Why, thank you. I just wish I could return the comment.


----------



## DrGtr (Jul 18, 2009)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Ooh ooh, I've had one!!!
> 
> One let go in my dragster, when the oil filter collapsed and it threw a rod, data logger clearly showed what went wrong.
> 
> 1 other had damaged the rear side of thrust bearings from external loading.


was it the one i have seen? or thats is the 2nd one?

for my bad luck i didnt have the chance to drive it and compare the rb26 to it.
If you can sent me some contact of the other 2 persons they got the forged ones so i can try to see how it goes.
really curious to see whats the fuss about the rb30 being so different.


----------



## tonigmr2 (Sep 12, 2002)

Next immature name calling I see earns an Xmas holiday. There's really no need for it.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

adamsaiyad said:


> Im sorry Rob but indeed time and time again posts always seem to go into a battle ?
> or they become make an idiot out of X or Flame X.
> Its a pain in the ass and totally uncalled for .
> Answer the questions or get off the forum .... stop turning posts into a debate... unless the Debate was actually a post from the word go!!!!!


I don't know what your on about sorry?

Last thing I do is try to turn anything into a debate (I KNOW I'm always right!!! hahaha joking), I mearly give my own experience on something if the OP has asked for opinions or people to comment on what they have found on a particular subject.

Others may not agree with the way I have gone about some things but that usually won't effect how I chose to do things, and they are entitled to dissagree or do things there own way but all to often I'm told my opinion or the way I do things is wrong starting a discussion/debate.

If everyone could just accept that people may chose to do things there own way or differently to others and that if they are happy with it, thats their business and there's nothing to go on about.

If experiences are given they are just that, it doesn't/shouldn't mean anyone else should try to show it is either right or wrong, its just the way someone chose to do something.

If people want to run a 26 or a particular manifold or oil squirters are happy thats fine, and if others don't thats also fine and among us all we will always get differening results which if they can be shared without drama's the next guy can learn and make choices about how he might want to do something.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

DrGtr said:


> really curious to see whats the fuss about the rb30 being so different.


The dyno graph I posted earlier shows the back to back difference between a same spec 26 and 30.


----------



## Glen (Jan 21, 2011)

I know i'll be going 30 bottom when my block is no longer any use.


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

^^ At 4500rpm the RB30 almost doubles the horsepower of the RB26.....


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

Yep, difference between having RB30 vs RB26 - at the very least you will have a little more hp than before at any given rpm... otherwise its at a different level. Nothing about fanboism, its just reality - subscribing to it is basically being a realist.

Preferring an RB26 is fine, however- personal taste is never wrong, and is worth factoring into the "whats better" equation in the form of what works for you.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

A true comparison would be without turbocharging it. It's obvious you will get more power out because the turbocharger is pumping more air in due to the increased engine capacity.

What you need really is identically sized turbos on each setup. 

This is the problem with a little miss information. 
You know what they say, bovine excrement baffles brains.


----------



## Glen (Jan 21, 2011)

That comparison is with same turbos......Try reading. "Here is a back to back comparison with NOTHING changed except a RB26 bottom end to one of my RB30 bottom ends.

Same head spec, same cams, same turbo's (-5s), same fuel system, same fuel, same boost, same tuner (not us) same everything.

On a 4wd hub dyno it gained 104ftlb and 65whp." 

So it is a good comparison.


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

R32 Combat said:


> A true comparison would be without turbocharging it. It's obvious you will get more power out because the turbocharger is pumping more air in due to the increased engine capacity.
> 
> What you need really is identically sized turbos on each setup.
> 
> ...


How is how they perform in na form of any relevance in this situation? No one cares what they do in na form as no one is running and na rb gtr.
Like glen said, only below the head gasket was changed. Can't see how it can be more simple.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

R32 Combat said:


> What you need really is identically sized turbos on each setup.
> 
> This is the problem with a little miss information.
> You know what they say, bovine excrement baffles brains.


No i think this is the problem when someone is fighting a crusade!

If you had read it carefully you would have seen that the only change in set up was the swapping of bottom ends.

Ok so we don't know if there is a comparable compression ratio but everything else seems to be a good indication of the benefits of an RB30 over a 26.

Would be good to compare a 28 to a RB30, or even a OS30 (with oil squirters lol) and a RB30


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

MIKEGTR said:


> Would be good to compare a 28 to a RB30, or even a OS30 (with oil squirters lol) and a RB30


Does the OS Giken RB30 have oil squirters? 

Very pricey though.


----------



## Piggaz (Sep 5, 2002)

I think I can throw my 2 cents in here.
A mates car and my car. Same turbo's, cams, tuner, fuel. His being a 3.0 and mine a 2.8. 3.0 wins handsdown. I have a GT blocked Tomei 2.8 in my car and about to build a 3.0, yes they are THAT MUCH BETTER! Just wait for this guys new engine. Lets just say its the biggest the world has EVER seen in an RB.
On -5's, same dyno blah blah, at 4000 RPM (I think) he has an extra 50 Kw on me.... forget about it lower than that.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Can't really argue with that, although someone will lol


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

No lap times being mentioned anywhere.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

bigmikespec said:


> No lap times being mentioned anywhere.


And if there was people would say conditions different, a driver can't be 100% consistant, different tyres etc etc, its clear that some favour the rb26 and some the 28 and some the 30 and they won't be swayed come rhyme or reason. Above you have an honest critique from someone with real world experience yet it still is not enough.


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

You just don't get this quality in the R35 section


----------



## infamous_t (Jul 9, 2007)

bigmikespec said:


> No lap times being mentioned anywhere.


No pictures of dinosaurs & unicorns either.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

I didnt realise there was an option for the new R35 to have 1 million hp.
I saw it on Top Gear , Clarkson said "this one has 1 million hp" therefore it must be true 
Maxx is yours that version ?

oh ps, would that be faster than the other worlds fastest autotrans'd gtr ?
NXTWAT ?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

bigmikespec said:


> No lap times being mentioned anywhere.


Regarding the dyno graph I posted:



R.I.P.S NZ said:


> The owner of the car uses it for track racing, Targa endurance road racing and on the street, in his words "its performed really well with a large noticeable increase in low down torque. I can run a higher gear everywhere on the track now reducing the number of shifts and pulling hard out of corners giving me a definite improvement in lap times."


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> A true comparison would be without turbocharging it. It's obvious you will get more power out because the turbocharger is pumping more air in due to the increased engine capacity.
> 
> What you need really is identically sized turbos on each setup.
> 
> ...


A genuine question here, you have had or still have a RB30 right?
Did you not get good results from it hence your reluctance to some of what is being said?

It seems everyone else who has actually had a RB30 or been in a car with a good RB30 all agree its a great option, just curious as to why you don't seem to think so, or am I reading it all wrong?


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

The dyno sheet IS same turbo's same head, same cams , 
R32 ComTWta is promoting bovine scantology


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

bigmikespec said:


> No lap times being mentioned anywhere.


Look for YBOTHA's thread in the projects section, he has just gone from an RB26 to an RB30 - and was never fully convinced by them before. 

The concept may seem far fetched to some, but an engine makes more power everywhere often has the potential (all other things being equal) to be faster.


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Regarding the dyno graph I posted:


Wouldn't happen to have been Mathew Early's R34?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Sub Boy said:


> Wouldn't happen to have been Mathew Early's R34?


Brent Early is who I have been dealing with. Have you seen it on track?, he tells me its quite mental compared to how it used to be, I'm still waiting to see the in car footage, be interesting to see how it looks as it has the R34 6 speed and 4.4 diffs.


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

GT-R Glenn said:


> I saw it on Top Gear , Clarkson said "this one has 1 million hp" therefore it must be true
> Maxx is yours that version ?


Mine could well be making that at the crank but it would obviously lose about 3% by the time you factor in transmission losses. Anyway, let's get back to topic as I don't want my great car to detract from what's going on here

I'll be honest here, I'm seriously tempted to get an RB30 to put in an R32 (when I finally get one).


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

WTF6 speed and GTs4 finals ....
And the 3L 
Gah, wouldn't ever use 1st or 2nd

Back to the topic wtf?
Bitching about stuff ?


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Brent Early is who I have been dealing with. Have you seen it on track?, he tells me its quite mental compared to how it used to be, I'm still waiting to see the in car footage, be interesting to see how it looks as it has the R34 6 speed and 4.4 diffs.


Sorry, Mathew is his brother if I remember correctly, They are both into their audio, So have sold a bit of gear to them in the past.
I have only seen him driving it in the Targa....It fires out of corners like a rocket!

....He did manage to roll it in a ditch though...:nervous:


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Sub Boy said:


> I have only seen him driving it in the Targa....It fires out of corners like a rocket!
> 
> ....He did manage to roll it in a ditch though...:nervous:


Yeah, and still managed 5th overall against the big daddy R35s too, he was very happy.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> WTF6 speed and GTs4 finals ....
> And the 3L
> Gah, wouldn't ever use 1st or 2nd


Lol, might be similar to the Mines ultimate response package?

That'll get the bitching started.......................I'll get my coat.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> A genuine question here, you have had or still have a RB30 right?
> Did you not get good results from it hence your reluctance to some of what is being said?
> 
> It seems everyone else who has actually had a RB30 or been in a car with a good RB30 all agree its a great option, just curious as to why you don't seem to think so, or am I reading it all wrong?


I built my RB30 for my R32GTR.

It was a superb engine with no issues(apart for a idiot at a dyno)

All RB30's have noticeable piston slap (no squirter), coarsely graded bearings, no knock sensors etc. It's not as 'refined' as the RB26. It's obvious that the RB30 will produce more power with the same setup, it's turbocharged.

Thus the RB26 is better, more responsive and more reliable.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

R32 Combat said:


> I built my RB30 for my R32GTR.
> 
> It was a superb engine with no issues(apart for a idiot at a dyno)
> 
> ...


So many contradictions here. But as an example what is more stressed a 1000cc turbocharged car at 500bhp or a 3000cc at the same power? How can u say it's less reliable?


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

R32 Combat said:


> I built my RB30 for my R32GTR.
> 
> It was a superb engine with no issues(apart for a idiot at a dyno)
> 
> ...


Cos its sooo hard to fit knock sensors to an rb30. Didn't the next owner of the car find a sock in the intercooler too?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> All RB30's have noticeable piston slap (no squirter), coarsely graded bearings, no knock sensors etc.


Sorry but IMO none of the above is correct:

RB30s don't have to have noticable piston slap.

Its very possible to get the bearing clearances at least as even accross the board in a RB30 as it is with graded bearings in a 26

A RB30 block does indeed already have threads to install knock sensors.




R32 Combat said:


> Thus the RB26 is better, more responsive and more reliable.


I won't even go there, its so easy to disprove at least 1 of the above statements and the other 2 are your opinion, not fact, but thats IMO.


----------



## infamous_t (Jul 9, 2007)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> A RB30 block does indeed already have threads to install knock sensors.


RB30ETs had knock sensors.



R32 Combat said:


> All RB30's have noticeable piston slap (no squirter)


All? Have heard plenty of RB26s with piston slap. Have heard plenty RB30s (twincam or not) without.
ALL is a big statement.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

infamous_t said:


> All? Have heard plenty of RB26s with piston slap. Have heard plenty RB30s (twincam or not) without.
> ALL is a big statement.


I agree.



R32 Combat said:


> All RB30's have noticeable piston slap (no squirter)


What about the 30s where guys have installed squirters? Does that mean they are now imune to slap or is your statment ALL RB30s have noticable piston slap still stand true?

Or.....just to really throw a spanner in the works....If one built 2 identicle motors other than 1 has squirters and one doesn't, both have X type of pistons and Y piston to bore clearance, isn't the one with squirters actually MORE likely to be a "slapper"? Just a thought.


----------



## Infomotive (Oct 22, 2009)

Wow. So much misinformation by some.
Firstly, my preference is for RB30 and i have tuned and built my fair share of rbs of all descriptions. In my opinion no comparison in overall improvement going to RB30.
Has been proved time and time again.
What interests me is this hangup on oil squirters.
I do admit when i built my first 30 i was trying to figure out how to fit them, surely they must be needed? (esp as i was using the facory cast pistons)
As luck would have it an ex formula 1 engine builder got involved, "your worring about nothing"...
Never did have a problem and dont give it a second thought when removing them from motors as generally they are unnecessary and often create more problems than they try to solve on a built motor. (as the Jaguar ign calibrator alluded to, sorry cant be bothered going thru pages to find poster)

In my view and experience the advantages of having piston oil squirters are
1- Reduced Piston crown temperatures on extended full output operation such as on "the auto barn" with cast pistons and marginal fuel octane.
Thats about all i can think of.

Disadvantages-
1- Reduction of piston strength as a result of relief in piston to accomodate oil squirter! ( yes have pulled a number of RB25/26s down with inconsistant compressions and the pistons have cracked up the skirt at the top of the squirter relief,not thru to ring lands, maybe coincidence, i doubt it, and, some were with forged pistons)
2- Massive increase in windage.
3- Drop in power output( see above)
4- Increase in tensile load(got to pull that shit back down)
5- Not so great at high rpm, (see above)
6- Oil control, (see all of above)
7- Aditional oil pump capicity required with use of squirters.
8- Paricitic losses(see above)
9- Sump increase in capacity required.
10-Reduction of block strength.
I could probably go on and on...

Thats just on RBs
4g63s same deal, who would compromise on piston strength etc etc etc etc... for the mis informed belief that oil squirters will bring a performance increase and reliability?

I doubt that the big power 26/28 rb engines would be using oil squirters, but thats probably just a hunch.

It seams many miss understand the application of piston crown squirters. Especially as they genarally arnt operational at low engine speeds and often when tested are not even operational!

I hope that this has been of some interest to some of you.
I know some will just dismiss it.
I really dont care.
Jason


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

rb30r34 said:


> Cos its sooo hard to fit knock sensors to an rb30. Didn't the next owner of the car find a sock in the intercooler too?


I did fit knock sensors, and no, the next owner did not find a sock in the intercooler.

I appreciate the NZ guys will rave on about them, Rob obviously will, he sells them.

As far an getting an ex F1 engine builder goes ( I didn't know there was much if a knowledge base down under), he knows that with the huge PBC that aftermarket pistons required, they are not required.

Now let me think, oh yeh, why does Rob sell massive oil catch tanks?


And to conclude, it's interesting that all you uneducated persons think a multi billion pound global car maker simply 'got it wrong'.

Merry Christmas.


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

R32 Combat said:


> And to conclude, it's interesting that all you uneducated persons think a multi billion pound global car maker simply 'got it wrong'.


You don't think they got a few things wrong with the factory R32 GT-R?

Drilled brake rotors that crack
Oil pump drive too narrow
Ceramic turbos
Too small sump, lack of baffling
Oil control to head

There are bound to be plenty of others.....

Regardless, as soon as we start to get into RB30s, there tends to not be a lot of standard engine parts, so saying Nissan got it right is irrelevant when we built modified engines anyway.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

R32 Combat said:


> And to conclude, it's interesting that all you uneducated persons think a multi billion pound global car maker simply 'got it wrong'.


Lets look at Toyota for a start - billion $ brake recall anyone??


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

R32 Combat said:


> I did fit knock sensors, and no, the next owner did not find a sock in the intercooler.


Tube sock...... http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/52458-rb30-engine-conversion-lots-pics-28.html

Muppet


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

Sub Boy said:


> You don't think they got a few things wrong with the factory R32 GT-R?
> 
> Too small sump, lack of baffling
> Oil control to head
> .


Those two are totally incorrect, sorry.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

rb30r34 said:


> Tube sock...... http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/52458-rb30-engine-conversion-lots-pics-28.html
> 
> Muppet


Reeeaallllyyyy? I did not sell the car to him, so your are incorrect.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Sub Boy said:


> You don't think they got a few things wrong with the factory R32 GT-R?
> 
> Drilled brake rotors that crack
> Oil pump drive too narrow
> ...


Ceramic turbos? Only used for the entire Skyline GTR production. Obviously Nissan thought they were acceptable. 
Oil control to head? Not sure what you mean there.


----------



## alternatengine (May 17, 2006)

A question was asked earlier in the topic that hasn't been answered but that I would certainly find interesting.

Does the OSG RB30/RB315 use oil squirters.. For that matter does the built Tomei 2.8 use them?

I know at least one major UK GTR tuner (In my opinion the best one) who prefer not look outside these two manufacturers for engine components.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

alternatengine said:


> A question was asked earlier in the topic that hasn't been answered but that I would certainly find interesting.
> 
> Does the OSG RB30/RB315 use oil squirters.. For that matter does the built Tomei 2.8 use them?
> 
> I know at least one major UK GTR tuner (In my opinion the best one) who prefer not look outside these two manufacturers for engine components.


OS GIKEN | RB26 6-speed sequential transmission

Yes, both do. I'm not sure why though. The low power agricultural RB30 doesn't!


----------



## Kenneth-A (Nov 15, 2011)

alternatengine said:


> A question was asked earlier in the topic that hasn't been answered but that I would certainly find interesting.
> 
> Does the OSG RB30/RB315 use oil squirters.. For that matter does the built Tomei 2.8 use them?
> 
> I know at least one major UK GTR tuner (In my opinion the best one) who prefer not look outside these two manufacturers for engine components.


Yes they do, and as far as I can tell an OSG rb30 block is an rb26 block thats been bored out to 3l so it would retain all the factory rb26 fitments.

As far as nissan getting it wrong on the rb26. They only reason the N1 engine was developed was because the regular setup couldn't take the punishment from the races it was built to race in. N1 engines also use steel turbos because the ceramic ones weren't up to it either.

So if r32combat's only logic behind squirters being a necessity is that nissan put them in the 26 and big car manufacturers never get it wrong, I guess there is no point in discussing it further.


----------



## Simonh (May 24, 2002)

this thread is getting laughable now


----------



## Glen (Jan 21, 2011)

21 pages of awesome. WINNING.


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

bigmikespec said:


> Those two are totally incorrect, sorry.


Care to share your logic?


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

R32 Combat said:


> Ceramic turbos? Only used for the entire Skyline GTR production. Obviously Nissan thought they were acceptable.
> Oil control to head? Not sure what you mean there.


Not the entire GTR production, The R34 had steel wheel turbos IIRC
Regardless they were unreliable....Are they in the R35?
How many engine builders put restrictors in when they are rebuilding an RB? I would say most.
You are living in a glasshouse if you think what the car came out standard with is acceptable now for a performance engine


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> I appreciate the NZ guys will rave on about them, Rob obviously will, he sells them.


Why do you think I sell them? THINK about it......... 

Do you seriously think that after the first 2 or 3 RB30s I did that if we didn't get better results than 20s, 25s and 26s we'd built, and better results than other guys here running 20s/25s/26s that I would have continued to develop them?

You seriously think I've been sitting here for the last 7 years saying to myself, geez I hope no-one finds out but these RB30s really are crap and have a long list of short commings but what the heck, I'll stick with them, fake all my results, get a good video editor and bribe the officials at NZDRA, IHRA and FRAM AUTOLITE, all the dyno operators, trophy makers and certificate printers?

In case you hadn't noticed, at least 2 people who have contributed to this thread are DIRECTLY involved with the development, on a daily basis, of the 2nd quickest (by 0.03 sec) RB of ANY kind currently operating in ANY type of car the world. (NO, I'm not one of them)




R32 Combat said:


> And to conclude, it's interesting that all you uneducated persons think a multi billion pound global car maker simply 'got it wrong'.
> 
> Merry Christmas.


Uneducated? You sir are priceless, thanks for the laugh's :clap:

Merry christmas to you to, I hope you like the present I'm sending you, a breathaliser for your key board :thumbsup:


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

rb30r34 said:


> Care to share your logic?


Yes. Actually it is something a friend had just spoken to me about.

The RB26 crankshaft is cross drilled. At highist rpm cross drilled crankshafts cause of the oil, it almost gets "pulled apart" because of the forces created by the centripedal acceleration of the rotating crank.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Sub Boy said:


> Not the entire GTR production, The R34 had steel wheel turbos IIRC
> Regardless they were unreliable....Are they in the R35?
> How many engine builders put restrictors in when they are rebuilding an RB? I would say most.
> You are living in a glasshouse if you think what the car came out standard with is acceptable now for a performance engine


You are indeed incorrect. The R34 has CERAMIC exhaust wheels. And why? Well, your wouldn't believe me is I told you.

Rob, PORT!!! FAIL!! :thumbsup:

All high expansion forged piston cars spal when cold compared to a cast piston. That is a fact. Will a 75 micron clearance make more sound than a 25 micron clearence. Yes.

So, all forged piston engines load the compression ring more. Thus more piston blowby, thus worse emmissions.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

Oh well, Proven wrong on the turbos (But that's why I put IIRC on the post) but still a design that is not used anymore, and certainly not used on modified cars.

Having said that, You can continue with your love for the small capacity engine, And we will continue to make more torque and horsepower at the most usable areas.


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

bigmikespec said:


> Yes. Actually it is something a friend had just spoken to me about.
> 
> The RB26 crankshaft is cross drilled. At highist rpm cross drilled crankshafts cause of the oil, it almost gets "pulled apart" because of the forces created by the centripedal acceleration of the rotating crank.


How is that relative to what sub boy said. He commented on the lack of baffling in the sump which contributes to oil surge. Correct. We know its true because even with oversize extended sump we cant stop the oil surge on the fast cars.
If you don't get oil surge and your not dry sump your not very fast.

He also commented on the oil control to the head. We all know that the rb26 can end up with heaps of oil in the head and f(@k all in the sump. A combination of it constantly being pumped up there and it struggling to return due to windage etc. 

Not sure how this relates to your comment. Can you explain further for us stupid people.........


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> All high expansion forged piston cars spal when cold compared to a cast piston. That is a fact. Will a 75 micron clearance make more sound than a 25 micron clearence. Yes.
> 
> So, all forged piston engines load the compression ring more. Thus more piston blowby, thus worse emmissions.
> 
> You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.


Once again, the above makes no logical sense in the context of what we are discussing as you said all 30s slap but implied 26s dont so your comparing a RB26 with stock cast pistons to a RB30 with forged pistons?........................nek minute..........more port.

You clearly state a 30 is worse than a 26 for several reasons but I'm still waiting to hear even one that I can agree with............next.

If your feeling REALLY brave, try telling us all how a same spec 26 is more responsive in operation than the same spec 30...........


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

> How is that relative to what sub boy said. He commented on the lack of baffling in the sump which contributes to oil surge. Correct. We know its true because even with oversize extended sump we cant stop the oil surge on the fast cars.
> If you don't get oil surge and your not dry sump your not very fast.


This is only partially true, the Gibson cars were wet sumped...and as far as I know still ran very fast lap times, even compared with the taxi's of today.

This thread isnt really teaching me anything ....
Any video editing guru's here ?


You can make any engine behave however you like its all proportional to your wallet.
Partial favouritism to the RB30 would be directly linked to geographical positioning, this doenst exclude others ideals though and shouldnt.


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

rb30r34 said:


> Not sure how this relates to your comment. Can you explain further for us stupid people.........


The airation of the oil caused by the high rpm coupled with the cross drilled crank shaft design creates a lot of foamy oil that will not flow but remain suspended... I believe it is this build up that prevents oil from draining back effectively as you create positive pressure in the crank case. Hence why the band aid fix of a head to sump VENT may act to help.

High G forces and wet sumps don't go well together regardless of what engine so that is irrelevant if we are singling out issues regarding the RB26.


----------



## JTJUDGE (Nov 21, 2011)

Now I'm fairly new to the forum having only joined last month and I'm also a bit of an idiot when the inner working of a motor engine is concerned. I chose my cars on the look, the way they make me feel and the noise!
Having read most of this tread I find myself asking 1 question

Q, is everybody thats on this forum an engineer because I'm feeling even more stupid.

I'm almost scared to ask my next couple of questions but I'll do it anyway. 

Is an RB26 an engine? if so does it make less power than an RB30?

What's the main benefits of upgrading to an RB30?

Edit: I continued to read on through the threads info and I have my answers I think. 

Couldn't work out how to delete the post hence the edit!


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

OMG 
Sorry I laugh so loud my eyes watered.

Comtawt, please explain ***** rings + total seal rings then ....?
And the relationship to expansion / verse emissions / or whatever you were attempting to explain before...


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

JTJUDGE said:


> Q, is everybody thats on this forum an engineer because I'm feeling even more stupid.


A = a few of us are but it's difficult to tell who is and who isn't


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> OMG
> Sorry I laugh so loud my eyes watered.
> 
> Comtawt, please explain ***** rings + total seal rings then ....?
> And the relationship to expansion / verse emissions / or whatever you were attempting to explain before...


opcorn: and while your at it this.....


R32 Combat said:


> the RB26 is more responsive


 :clap::clap::clap::clap:


----------



## JTJUDGE (Nov 21, 2011)

TAZZMAXX said:


> A = a few of us are but it's difficult to tell who is and who isn't


:thumbsup:


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> OMG
> Sorry I laugh so loud my eyes watered.
> 
> Comtawt, please explain ***** rings + total seal rings then ....?
> And the relationship to expansion / verse emissions / or whatever you were attempting to explain before...


Eh, don't you know? Ah, sorry.

It's all about piston cooling, PBC and detonation. But as the RB30 has not piston cooling, AND massive PBC and you have to can't run optimum ignition and fuelling with out det. SO, you have to southern hemisphere the ignition timing and run lower AFR. You can, and do, compensate for power loss by raising the boost pressure. 
So, thats why emissions are crap on high performance RB engine. Have you ever seen a 500hp production car smoke on boost? No, didn't think so. 

I'm not sure what a **** ring is. Is it a lesbians sphincter, or a circular ditch? If it is, then nothing.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> SO, you have to southern hemisphere the ignition timing and run lower AFR. You can, and do, compensate for power loss by raising the boost pressure.
> So, thats why emissions are crap on high performance RB engine. Have you ever seen a 500hp production car smoke on boost? No, didn't think so.


Mmmmmmm, another well thought out post........

So we run RB30 engines rich and with less timing but more boost to compensate for our short commings but the UK guys with 26s and 28s with squirters don't? :clap::clap: 

Maybe your RB30 pumped out black smoke and I have seen plenty of GTRs that do but did you see any black smoke from the Drag-r at TOTB?

TOTB 2009 RIPS Drag R 2 - YouTube

I would also put money on the fact we ran the LOWEST boost of any turbo car running 9s there that day (1.8 bar for 9.4s @ 156mph in 1740kg with 1000cc inj and quite low fuel pressure so couldn't even be rich if we wanted to) 

Is there any black smoke in this vid? 7s with 1 bar of boost for the first 3-4 seconds then raising to 1.4-1.5 bar.
RIPS FED at NZDRA Summer Nationals Taupo 11 Dec 2011 - YouTube

Do you think we deliver customers cars pumping out black smoke and running lots of boost etc? 

Even our 750-900hp RB30s give at least as good, if not better open road fuel milage than STOCK.

You really make no sense to me at all sorry mate and each of your posts seems to get worse and worse, there's just nothing that adds up.

To re-cap, we run low boost for the results given, FAR leaner than you would expect and probably give better fuel milage than most. 

Have a drink, relax, have a great xmas and please realise that not everyone does things the way you may have seen it done or presume it is done.

Rob


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Wtf, Comtwat just say you dont have a ****en clue....
It would be easier


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Rob, you miss the point again.. It like flogging a deads horse this. My rb30 didn't smoke. There is a video of it object YouTube. I was not referring to running an engine for short burst.
Oh, fukc it. Enjoy you tractor pulling.


----------



## rb30r34 (Jun 30, 2008)

R32 Combat said:


> Rob, you miss the point again.. It like flogging a deads horse this. My rb30 didn't smoke. There is a video of it object YouTube. I was not referring to running an engine for short burst.
> Oh, fukc it. Enjoy you tractor pulling.


There you go again. The black smoke is relative to the tune, not the run time. The grammar in you posts doesnt even make sence, are you always drunk or something?


----------



## infamous_t (Jul 9, 2007)

R32 Combat said:


> I was not referring to running an engine for short burst.


Are we talking endurance racing again?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

infamous_t said:


> Are we talking endurance racing again?


We can if comtwat wants, the engines I've done for them don't have squirters, don't have piston slap, don't pump black smoke or anything else he feels our southern hemisphere tractor engines must do.

I think this sums things up nicely actually, merry xmas.



GT-R Glenn said:


> Wtf, Comtwat just say you dont have a ****en clue....
> It would be easier


----------



## hytech (Feb 26, 2003)

My RB30 makes 550kw at the wheels on only 1.3bar of boost with no oil squirters, no black smoke and no piston slap. Not bad for this uneducated tractor engine builder from the southern hemisphere.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

hytech said:


> My RB30 makes 550kw at the wheels on only 1.3bar of boost with no oil squirters, no black smoke and no piston slap. Not bad for this uneducated tractor engine builder from the southern hemisphere.


Confirmed, I've driven it. :thumbsup: but hey comtwat probably won't believe you either...........you still going to the ******* tractor pulling comp with it mate? C you there :clap:


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

Doesent piston slap come from low quality forged pistons?

its my belive, they have higher silicone %, and therefore expand more, resulting in a bigger boreclearence?

how on earth can a engine have a tendency to have pistonslap, unless its driven 10 times around the earth?

Ron


----------



## Swobber (Oct 8, 2006)

I just dont get it - Its very obvious that 2 identical engines (Apart from one being a 2,6l and the other 3,0l) will not produce the same amount of power at the same boost.

Its all about the amount of air you can pump through the engine.


----------



## Corsa1 (Sep 8, 2003)

The thing that makes me laugh about it is all this people running RB30s are all using RB26 exhaust cams, has no one done a profile apart from me for a 86mm stroke?


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

RonniNielsen said:


> Doesent piston slap come from low quality forged pistons?
> 
> its my belive, they have higher silicone %, and therefore expand more, resulting in a bigger boreclearence?
> 
> ...


Cast pistons have around 12-18% silicon. This has 2 advantages.
1) Reduced thermal expansion
2) Better heat insulation

It also have 1 major disadvantage, it becomes brittle.

So, for small piston bore gaps that are required to pass new car emissions laws, pistons have to be of a high silicon content. 

Most forged pistons have a 35 micron radial clearance, where are cast ones have 12 micron clearance. So, regardless of what you think, forged pistons do slap. You can detect it with a knock sensor if you use a good ECU. They do expand when they warm up and become quite.

Credit where credit is due, it's easy to get high hp from an RB30, I've done it, quite a few have. However, I'm sceptical that a 'well engineered' RB30 has been made yet. Everyone seems to chase dyno figures and 1/4 times.


----------



## Piggaz (Sep 5, 2002)

Whats the difference between a RB26 and RB30 forged piston then? The way I read that, all built RB26's are not 'well engineered' either.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

Obviously is depends on who makes them.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Ronnie, as a general guide,
Cast pistons mass produced ones, have expansion control built into them , usually a steel band in the skirt that controls how much they grow.
In the olden days, forged pre high silicon pistons ran quite large clearances, this was becasue the pistons did not have any form of expansion control and grew a lot in diameter from cold to normal running temps.

It was common for them to rattle on startup untill they grew to the correct diameter.

With the development and easy availability of higher silicon alluminium, its very easy to run very tight tollerances with forged pistons now, either tomei of HKS state 1 1/2 thou on the trust side which is very tight for a forged piston.
Silicon helps with abrasion resistance and expansion, which is also why they work so well in very hard cylinders.
Forged pistons dont run any form of expansion control so if the fit is correct for normal running temperatures and much more stable rather than cast pistons that will still grow some at elevated tempertaures, meaning they will still seize.


----------



## Piggaz (Sep 5, 2002)

R32 Combat said:


> Obviously is depends on who makes them.


Both Mahle RB pistons for example. Would the 30's be any worse than the 26's?


----------



## infamous_t (Jul 9, 2007)

R32 Combat said:


> Cast pistons have around 12-18% silicon. This has 2 advantages.
> 1) Reduced thermal expansion
> 2) Better heat insulation
> 
> ...


How many people rebuilt their RB26s with cast pistons? 
Less than 5% would be my guess, and mostly not out of concern of emmisions etc.

Now comparing to an RB30 bottom end, one of the most common conversion practices is to use a dead stock RB30 bottom end, cast pistons and all.
Shouldn't be any emission problems then right?

Must of been a decent engine at the the time too, Holden (shock horror, a multimillion dollar automotive company couldn't get it right!) couldn't even come up with a new engine at the time to comply with emissions standards coming in... so Holden bought the rights to the RB30.

Back to what we were talking about, what's the big difference between an RB26 & RB30 factory cast piston, in terms of emmisions?
Or perhaps I should be silly about it and compare a cast RB30 piston to a forged RB26 piston... then label all RB26s crap on emmisions?

The RB30 positives & negatives compared versus the RB26, but you need to be realistic and not compare forged apples with cast oranges :thumbsup:


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

GT-R Glenn said:


> Ronnie, as a general guide,
> Cast pistons mass produced ones, have expansion control built into them , usually a steel band in the skirt that controls how much they grow.
> In the olden days, forged pre high silicon pistons ran quite large clearances, this was becasue the pistons did not have any form of expansion control and grew a lot in diameter from cold to normal running temps.
> 
> ...


nice understandable explanation there 

next quistion then! because ive heard both car cold starting with HKS pistons,
they give a tiny noticeable sound if you know what to listen after.
and some cp/lowquality ebay ones, witch gave some serius rattle..

how mutch clearance does lowquality forged pistons compared with Hks/tomei
Run?

Ron


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Piggaz said:


> Whats the difference between a RB26 and RB30 forged piston then? The way I read that, all built RB26's are not 'well engineered' either.


I read it that way too...........the 26 piston of the same brand will be weaker and more prone to cracking (as discussed earlier) due to the knotch for the oil squirter.


Keep in mind R32 Combat, the inferior RB26 rod to stroke ratio will INCREASE piston slap when compared to a RB30 running the same type of pistons in the same bore size at the same clearance so that one is out the window to.

The only superior quality you felt the 26 block had over the 30 for a while was piston squirters, the LONG list of negatives for squirters submitted by someone with actual experience developing and tuning engines with and without, hasn't been objected against or even discussed by anyone here since, wouldn't that indicate that it all makes perfect sense?

It seems as soon as your theory of how poor something is is discussed and in reality shown to be flawed, you just change to another subject.

So for the record......IYO what EXACTLY do you feel is inferior (in real world operation that people on this forum would likely use their engines for ie. NOT sustained full power dyno runs for hours or sustained autobarn use) with the 30 over the 26?

We know its not torque, power, response, emmisions, piston slap, block or crank strength, reliability at a given power level etc or anything like that.

I'm always open to listen and to receive information from others to consider but even after 23 pages of discussion, I still can't think of a single one.

Feel free to go back to the squirter list and comment on any of it and isn't it great for a change its R32Combat against "the world"


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> The thing that makes me laugh about it is all this people running RB30s are all using RB26 exhaust cams, has no one done a profile apart from me for a 86mm stroke?


What were your back to back results of the off the shelf RB26 ex cam against your custom grind when tested on a 85mm stroke? (stock RB30s are 85mm strock btw, not 86mm.)

Flow charts or dyno printouts?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

RonniNielsen said:


> next quistion then! because ive heard both car cold starting with HKS pistons,
> they give a tiny noticeable sound if you know what to listen after.
> and some cp/lowquality ebay ones, witch gave some serius rattle..
> 
> ...


Not sure about low quality e/bay ones but CPs are a real nice piston and for a 86.5mm bore they reccommend around 0.003 to 0.0035 in a turbo application.


----------



## Corsa1 (Sep 8, 2003)

Rob Iam not giving to much away but it wasn't about lift as that would not change from stroke to stroke it was the opening of the exhaust valve in relation to where the piston is on the power stroke.


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> Rob Iam not giving to much away but it wasn't about lift as that would not change from stroke to stroke it was the opening of the exhaust valve in relation to where the piston is on the power stroke.


You are switched on Andy!


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> Rob Iam not giving to much away .


Haha, you never do and I'm sure your doing your thing but where's the results of all the hard work man, where are the cars using your heads and what results are they getting over other guys without all the "andy love"

Merry xmas.


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Haha, you never do and I'm sure your doing your thing but where's the results of all the hard work man, where are the cars using your heads and what results are they getting over other guys without all the "andy love"
> 
> Merry xmas.


Maybe it is just not in his signature?


----------



## Corsa1 (Sep 8, 2003)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Haha, you never do and I'm sure your doing your thing but where's the results of all the hard work man, where are the cars using your heads and what results are they getting over other guys without all the "andy love"
> 
> Merry xmas.


The trouble is rob I never get to leave this padded cell that iam kept in,Iam only allowed a laptop.merry christmas to you to.:thumbsup:


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

How about a dyno sheet on the RB26 cams vs your custom grind cams Andy? (Lift for Lift)
I'm not doubting any of your claims, But like most people we would like to see some results.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

bigmikespec said:


> Maybe it is just not in his signature?


Come on you can do better than that :thumbsup:


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> The trouble is rob I never get to leave this padded cell that iam kept in,Iam only allowed a laptop.


So how do you know if your changes are working on road/track then?

For years you've claimed your up to all sorts of things, some that will change the way RBs are built forever IIRC, surely by now you must have some results you can share so we don't all think your just some crazy mad scientist?

Oh, hang, on.........padded cell........got ya. :thumbsup:

back to backs or it didn't happen 

Have a good one mate.


----------



## hytech (Feb 26, 2003)

OMG....have read some of this thread, what a load of twoddle.:blahblah:


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> The trouble is rob I never get to leave this padded cell that iam kept in,Iam only allowed a laptop.merry christmas to you to.:thumbsup:


Any manifold designs in that padded room? Still interested in a manifold, PM me your number and I can give you a call to discuss. Thanks


----------



## RonniNielsen (Jan 14, 2011)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Not sure about low quality e/bay ones but CPs are a real nice piston and for a 86.5mm bore they reccommend around 0.003 to 0.0035 in a turbo application.


and Hks/tomei runs 0.0015 ?

Thats gotta be noticeable when it comes to piston slap?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

RonniNielsen said:


> and Hks/tomei runs 0.0015 ?
> 
> Thats gotta be noticeable when it comes to piston slap?


Nope, the expansion rates are obviously different, even when cold at 0.0035 the CPs are fine, all you can hear is the injectors ticking.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

hytech said:


> OMG....have read some of this thread, what a load of twoddle.:blahblah:


But dick, you havn't confirmed which side of the fence you are on :nervous:, a statement like yours could be taken either way


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

bigmikespec said:


> Still interested in a manifold


 whoa whoa there big fella, I nearly fell off my chair, you mean your considering replacing the almighty Nismo plenim of your dreams? (well I spose you can't technicaly replace something you don't even have yet)


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> whoa whoa there big fella, I nearly fell off my chair, you mean your considering replacing the almighty Nismo plenim of your dreams? (well I spose you can't technicaly replace something you don't even have yet)


Sorry champ, turbo manifold... not plenum. Nice try though


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

RonniNielsen said:


> and Hks/tomei runs 0.0015 ?
> 
> Thats gotta be noticeable when it comes to piston slap?


It does.

You see, HKS and TOMEI pistons run with oil squirter, so the clearance can be tighter leading to improved efficiency.


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

I would have thought you would have gone with a 6boost manifold being you are from Aussie, they are a well respected product from many enthusiasts?


----------



## bigmikespec (Sep 5, 2008)

Sub Boy said:


> I would have thought you would have gone with a 6boost manifold being you are from Aussie, they are a well respected product from many enthusiasts?


Probably should continue in other thread? I will post there is you want to reply.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

86.5mm bore they reccommend around 0.003 to 0.0035 

What ?
.003 mm ?
I doubt it very much


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

GT-R Glenn said:


> 86.5mm bore they reccommend around 0.003 to 0.0035
> 
> What ?
> .003 mm ?
> I doubt it very much



Slight unit issue there..


----------



## hytech (Feb 26, 2003)

Ok Rob on the RB30 side of the fence. With the setup that's on my car the RB30 does not need the nos to spool the turbos, where as the 26 just couldn't do without it. However I have retried the car and as you know gone Mitsubishi.

Piston to bore clearances, irrespecive of the advertised clearances I always give a little bit more. ie .003" would probably give .0035" - .004". Also depends on the application the engine will be used for. Never had an engine rattle when cold, however what difference would it make, when the engine gets to operating temp the noise disappears.

Again twoddle......


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

hytech said:


> Ok Rob on the RB30 side of the fence.
> 
> Piston to bore clearances, irrespecive of the advertised clearances I always give a little bit more. ie .003" would probably give .0035" - .004". Also depends on the application the engine will be used for. Never had an engine rattle when cold, however what difference would it make, when the engine gets to operating temp the noise disappears.
> 
> Again twoddle......


Agree 100%, at 0.0035" they don't rattle and I'm just about to fire a RB30 with 0.005" clearance when cold (on CPs recomendation for the application) I, as I'm sure most, are actually more concerned with the clearance it has when up to temp and in operation.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> HKS and TOMEI pistons run with oil squirter, so the clearance can be tighter leading to improved efficiency.





hytech said:


> Again twoddle......


R32 Combat.....Why do CP suggest 0.0035" for their RB26 pistons which would be run with squirters and 0.0035" for their RB30 pistons that would be run without?

HKS and TOMEI pistons can run tighter clearances because of the material the pistons are made of NOT if you have a squirter or not.



GT-R Glenn said:


> Wtf, Comtwat just say you dont have a ****en clue....
> It would be easier


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

.003 mm = .00012 "

Dont say bore size "metric" / piston clearnace "imperial" in the same sentence.

Anyway, yes 3 to 3 1/2 THOU would be spot on I think.

I ran 1 1/2 thou (I think) clearnace on my last 1600 711m engine I built, that was with cast 1100 high comp pistons.
The engine reconditioner didnt believe me when I asked for that fit ...


----------



## nailsgtr600 (Aug 2, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> The trouble is rob I never get to leave this padded cell that iam kept in,Iam only allowed a laptop.merry christmas to you to.:thumbsup:


no phone andy?


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

I appreciate the quality is a little poor.

However, for those who did not believe me about piston slap, emissions etc...


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

Let me dig out my magnifying glass, good sir Combat 

Always a documented disagreement.. GTR-Glenn shall be impressed.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> However, for those who did not believe me about piston slap, emissions etc...


Great read, thanks for posting, the last paragraph sums it up perfectly from my point of view and seeing as we don't have any piston issues with street RB30s I'm happy to not run them.

*IMHO* there are to many negatives when dealing with a RB30 to bother with them especially when emmissions etc are the last thing on a GTR owners mind.

Happy new year everyone!

Rob


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

Although the last paragraph is incomplete,it does however; affirm that for race use engines, squirters are not commonly used. .


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

I dont see anything there that proves anything, in fact they basically say what has already been said.
"tend to have increased thermal expansion requiring greater piston to cylinder clearance when cold"
Ah, yeah .....
We already said that.

The higher emmisions are only when cold ?

Ah, yeah we said that too.

R32 Womtwat, Should I consult the *IDIOT* group again ?


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

GT-R Glenn said:


> R32 Womtwat, Should I consult the *IDIOT* group again ?


:chuckle:

I thought that would've sufficed your challange, but it appears not.


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

The last sentence does not apply to you Rob.


----------



## simon tompkins (Aug 14, 2005)

its an interesting read guys but do some of you have to be rude,you all have your points to make,and most people think they are always right,but some of us just want to have a good read,and try and learn something about our hobby,

have a safe and good new year to everyone:thumbsup:



simon


----------



## Nigel-Power (Dec 16, 2009)

This is a war of pistons and rods as well as displacement, not to mention squirters; a bit technical for many to even understand.

Let the boffins do their sumo wrestling 

You're right simon, it gets a bit heated up at times.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Nigel-Power said:


> You're right simon, it gets a bit heated up at times.


I agree, its quite often because some guys can't accept that when dealing with many combinations, for many different applications there are no hard and fast set rules that apply to all in every case, sometimes you just have to try things and see what results you get over a period of time.

When one reports findings from actual testing over several years in the exact applications and environments the majority of readers here would be concerned about, it seems some just want to pick it to bits because it doesn't match what they have read somewhere or it doesn't match what they have been told by someone else. 

Surely if someone doesn't like or agree with the way someone else does something, they are welcome to do things their own way and then compare results perhaps rather than turning everything into a drama?

When I go about something I just take it right back to basics and ask myself what am I trying to achieve here and what is going to be the easiest and most reliable way of doing it, I'll then just try it and see what happens.

If I wanted results like everyone else I'd follow like a sheep and do things like everyone else, I don't so I don't so I test on my own cars and I'm willing to accept their may be a stuff up or something that can be improved on from time to time.

If I then report on the findings whatever they may be, its a bit harsh to be thrown under the bus isn't it especially when people are entitled to go about things how ever they like and report back (or not).

As always, it comes back to each to their own, the forum is to share ideas and then everyone is welcome to go about what they do to their car in any way they wish, some will just get better results than others, thats how I see it anyway.

Happy New Year.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

R32 Combat said:


> The last sentence does not apply to you Rob.


Your *opinion* is noted 

Keep in mind I said I agreed with it, I didn't say I *was* anything in particular, big difference :thumbsup:


----------



## Audiophile (Sep 23, 2009)

Hi. Hope nobody minds me posting this here. As I got no replies to my build thread. 

http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/159461-r33-gtr-2-8l-project-11.html

I have couple of questions to people who know this stuff and how to properly prepare RB30

1. Oil squirter - a lot of debate here. Some people run them some dont. Doesn't it affect the overall combustion temperature before ignition? Means that you could run a bit more advance? Im doing the RB30 build at this moment on CP pistons that are 86.5mm and 8.5:1 CR. 

On those moments i tend to think about engineering that was done by Nissan. If they where used in RB26 (nissans perfromance engine) why they could be installed to RB30? 

2.The groove that is machined to the block to allow to use RB26 style bearings. What is the recommended width, depth of this groove? 










3. Stock oil feed to crank is bit less than 6 mm. Is it vital to enlarge that channel, allowing greater flow of oil to the crank. That would mean that bearings should be modified too? I’ve seen people doing this but I need specialist opinion here…is that really necessary


----------



## David (Apr 25, 2003)

1. If you search on here you will find RIPS posted that he has never used oil squirters I believe instead the rods he uses has a drilling at the gudgeon pin to cool the pistons. I think this is a standard feature on Nitto and Argo rods. For all the hassle I would not install them

2. I don't understand why you would do this, I used Rb26 bearings in an RB30 and the oil feed hole aligns you don't need a path down the centre of the back of the bearing. Who's engine have you pictured?

3. Not heard of this mod before


----------



## Audiophile (Sep 23, 2009)

Engine picture is from Spool Imports page

Drilling at the wrist pin? I have never heard that mod..

Both Brad from Spool and Rob brom R.I.P.S have confirmed that no oil squirters were used on RB30 engines they built. 

Markus 



David said:


> 1. If you search on here you will find RIPS posted that he has never used oil squirters I believe instead the rods he uses has a drilling at the gudgeon pin to cool the pistons. I think this is a standard feature on Nitto and Argo rods. For all the hassle I would not install them
> 
> 2. I don't understand why you would do this, I used Rb26 bearings in an RB30 and the oil feed hole aligns you don't need a path down the centre of the back of the bearing. Who's engine have you pictured?
> 
> 3. Not heard of this mod before


----------



## David (Apr 25, 2003)

Audiophile said:


> Engine picture is from Spool Imports page
> 
> Drilling at the wrist pin? I have never heard that mod..
> 
> ...


No not drilling the wrist pin, but a drilling in the top of the conrod that takes an oil feed from the wrist pin. It's a standard feature of nitto rods, you can see it in this picture

Nitto - Connecting Rods - I Beam


----------



## David (Apr 25, 2003)

To answer 3, in this picture below you can see rips doesn't add that bearing mod even with his girdle kit. I see no advantage to it either


----------



## mambastu (Feb 13, 2002)

I didn't bother with squirters on mine but I did drill out the main oil feed holes slightly and machine the mains surfaces with a groove to use the multi-hole RB26 main bearings. Can't remember the dimensions offhand but basically I gave the engineering company a RB26 block and they took the groove depth and width from that with the exception of more of a taper at the end but that was due to the tool used by the engineering company rather than by design. You can get a rough idea of sizing from the pictures.

























Justification for doing it...basically the RB26 revs to 8,000 rpm in standard trim - the RB30 to about 5000rpm. I assume the RB26 needed improved mains oil supply for reliability and since I plan to rev to 8,000 rpm (rather than 5,000 rpm) on the RB30 and I don't have my own R&D division I'll copy them.


----------



## Audiophile (Sep 23, 2009)

Can anyone tell if RB30 is thinner, weaker vs the RB26? From that point where you would normally install oil squirters?


----------



## Audiophile (Sep 23, 2009)

Main studs of RB engines? When its reasonable to change them? My storker RB28 engine that was built in Japan had OEM studs on it. Now if going to RB30DET route, should those be changed too on 7-800hp setup?

ARP Main Stud Kit - RB20 RB25 RB26 RB30 - Raw Brokerage


----------



## qatif-sa (Feb 22, 2018)

Hi friends
What is the Best
Spool RB30 - RB34 3.4L Stroker kit with Ross Racing Forged Pistons

or

NITTO PERFORMANCE ENGINEERING 3.2L STROKER KIT (I-BEAM RODS) RB30
__________________


----------



## diki (Oct 23, 2016)

gatif, depends who builds the engine and what you want. by the way spool also makes 3,2 cranks


----------



## qatif-sa (Feb 22, 2018)

But what a better choice
3.0 or 3.2 or 3.4


----------



## Sub Boy (Jan 28, 2008)

It's the Nitto 3.2ltr that are making the big power numbers around the world at the moment.


----------



## qatif-sa (Feb 22, 2018)

*rb30det*



Sub Boy said:


> It's the Nitto 3.2ltr that are making the big power numbers around the world at the moment.


Thank you my friend
I look at the pictures and I have a deep insight into the project


----------

