vg30dett

[stony]

never really thought about this swap much but a friend of mine owns a shop that has a dyno and he just had a Z32 on it tuning it. this car had a set of 2530 HKS turbos, upgraded intercoolers ,550cc injectors and 19PSI on an old worn out motor with 107,000 miles on it and got 420peak RWHP and a solid 410RWHP from 4000 rpm up to redline. If i ever blow up the rb i think i might go for a vg swap due to its availablility in the states.

 

Then again, with the same turbos and booste level on the rb26, should be in the area of 450RWHP easy . im getting 390+ to the wheels with the stock turbos @ 15 PSI now.

 

Well im going to singapore for 3+ weeks so not sure if ill be able to hang till i get back so for now talk to you guys later

 

[Guest Zachb55]

that does sound like a good swap, has many people done it? i know its been done, and it would probably be cheaper over all, but i think i would go with the 2JZ first just because aftermarket part availability is higher and they are maybe just a bit more rare then a good 300ZX engine. i wonder where i could find either of em....

 

-Zach

[Guest Zpeed]

seen it done in australia, it seems that it would be as hard to work on the the 240 as it is in the 300 as its a wide motor, and witht the turbo's makes it wider..

[fl327]

thats a hard swap from what i can see, that motor bearly fits in the 300zxtt.

[Guest]

Check on

Too Intense Restoration - www.DatsunRestore.com and hit the gone racing section... they are doing a VG30 conversion right now on there Z, you might be able to source some info from them..

Rick,

[Guest Anonymous]

Originally posted by RB26Z:

Then again, with the same turbos and booste level on the rb26, should be in the area of 450RWHP easy . im getting 390+ to the wheels with the stock turbos @ 15 PSI now.

Could you elaborate more on this? Why would a larger displacement engine get less power? Is the RB26 running higher compression? I'm considering a RB26 conversion, and the VG30DETT seems like a good option as well, and it seems strange that a smaller engine would make more power at the same boost levels.

[kalium99]

Originally posted by Reno:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RB26Z:

Then again, with the same turbos and booste level on the rb26, should be in the area of 450RWHP easy . im getting 390+ to the wheels with the stock turbos @ 15 PSI now.

Could you elaborate more on this? Why would a larger displacement engine get less power? Is the RB26 running higher compression? I'm considering a RB26 conversion, and the VG30DETT seems like a good option as well, and it seems strange that a smaller engine would make more power at the same boost levels.

---

Its not odd at all. Otherwise we would all be sticking with our L28ET and not worrying about an RB/JZ etc

 

Its a completely different motor. Its just asking why the old 1.5L(?) F1 engines made 1400bhp and the RB26 only does 280...

 

You cant compare them. VG and RB are not related at all.

[stony]

the more effecient a motor is the more HP it will make with lesser cc. this is kind of a generic way of thinking about it but im relatively sure its correct.

[Guest MegaShaft_2000]

Originally posted by RB26Z:

never really thought about this swap much but a friend of mine owns a shop that has a dyno and he just had a Z32 on it tuning it. this car had a set of 2530 HKS turbos, upgraded intercoolers ,550cc injectors and 19PSI on an old worn out motor with 107,000 miles on it and got 420peak RWHP and a solid 410RWHP from 4000 rpm up to redline. If i ever blow up the rb i think i might go for a vg swap due to its availablility in the states.

 

Then again, with the same turbos and booste level on the rb26, should be in the area of 450RWHP easy . im getting 390+ to the wheels with the stock turbos @ 15 PSI now.

 

Well im going to singapore for 3+ weeks so not sure if ill be able to hang till i get back so for now talk to you guys later

 

107k miles does not make a Nissan engine old and worn out. His numbers seem pretty low for his mods. My car has 108k miles and I dynod 320 rwhp and 371 rwtq on stock turbos, stock intercoolers, stock injectors, all 4 restrictive cats still on, etc. Basically I just did intake, exhaust, and turned up the boost.

 

There's a member on TT.net that is running around 580-600 rwhp on the stock internals, and he's running 129 mph trap speeds.

[Guest MegaShaft_2000]

Originally posted by STONY:

the more effecient a motor is the more HP it will make with lesser cc. this is kind of a generic way of thinking about it but im relatively sure its correct.

Well that's not entirely true. A smaller displacement engine will always have more power per liter, that's the way it is. The torque per liter stays about the same, but since smaller engines rev higher and the formula for HP is (tqxrpm)/5252, their HP figures will look much higher in relation to their torque. That's why a Dodge Neon has more power per liter than a Dodge Viper, or a Chevy Cavalier has more power per liter than a Chevy Corvette. It's not that they are putting a higher tech engine in their low end econoboxes, it's that small engines will inherently have more power per liter.

[Guest MegaShaft_2000]

The RB surely receives its share of hype in the import world, but for big power production Nissan teams have always turned to the VG30DET or the VG30DETT. The quickest Nissan in the 1/4 mile is using a VG30DETT, and the fastest Nissan in top speed (the Bonneville Z32) also used a VG30DETT. Also, the winningest Nissans at Daytona, Lemans, and Sebring also used the VG30DETT. The RB26DETT powered Skylines attempted to break those records but failed.

 

Reasons for the RB26DETT's popularity are its ease to work on and ease to convert to single turbo.

 

The Vg30DETT is not deficient in the power production department, just ask Escort Racing what they think of their 1,200 RWHP VG30DETT using the stock factory crank.

[SleeperZ]

Originally posted by MegaShaft_2000:

Well that's not entirely true. A smaller displacement engine will always have more power per liter, that's the way it is. The torque per liter stays about the same, but since smaller engines rev higher and the formula for HP is (tqxrpm)/5252, their HP figures will look much higher in relation to their torque. That's why a Dodge Neon has more power per liter than a Dodge Viper, or a Chevy Cavalier has more power per liter than a Chevy Corvette. It's not that they are putting a higher tech engine in their low end econoboxes, it's that small engines will inherently have more power per liter.

I'm sorry, I don't buy that at all. I don't believe there is anything inherently higher revving in a smaller engine, or that a smaller engine automatically makes more hp/liter. Without going too far out on limb I will say the RB26DETT makes more power with less boost than the VG twin turbo because it flows more air. The resistance to air flow is what builds boost. As a result, the engine has a higher volumetric efficiency, not to mention it revs higher.

[David K]

http://www.zdriver.com/articles/full_article.php?ID=108

[Guest MegaShaft_2000]

Originally posted by SleeperZ:

There is nothing inherently higher revving in a smaller engine.

If you make statements like that, then you need to do some more reading up on physics and engine design.

 

For the same level of technology, a smaller engine will always rev higher than a larger engine. That's why model airplane engines rev higher than motorcycle engines, motorcycle engines rev higher than small car engines, and small car engines rev higher than large car engines.

 

In order to make a larger engine rev higher than a small engine, you need to do quite a lot of engineering and spend a lot of money using exotic materials.

 

Just to fill you in a little bit, a smaller engine will have thinner, lighter parts and will have less circumference around the piston rings, decreasing friction. Why don't you see big block chevys revving as high as motorcycles? Why don't you see Vipers revving as high as Neons?

[SleeperZ]

That's fine if you want to compare a 1cc engine to a 1000cc engine, but when we are talking about a 15% difference in displacement with similar materials, the dominant factor in how the engines make power is the actual redline and the camshaft/compression.

[pparaska]

Another thing to consider is where the USABLE rpm for the application (street, hot street, etc.) and where the USABLE power band of the engine is.

 

If the engine doesn't make much torque before 4000 rpm, you'll probably get tired of it on a day to day basis.

 

Lets keep it civil, guys.

[Guest MegaShaft_2000]

Originally posted by SleeperZ:

That's fine if you want to compare a 1cc engine to a 1000cc engine, but when we are talking about a 15% difference in displacement with similar materials, the dominant factor in how the engines make power is the actual redline and the camshaft/compression.

I used vastly different displacements simply to illustrate my point. I'm not saying that the difference between the VG and the RB will be the same as the difference between a model airplane engine and a locomotive engine... But the 15% difference in displacement does account for something...

 

After all, the RB26's redline is only about 14% higher than the VG30's and the original poster only claimed that the RB will make around 7% more HP than the VG30DETT.

[Guest MegaShaft_2000]

Originally posted by pparaska:

Another thing to consider is where the USABLE rpm for the application (street, hot street, etc.) and where the USABLE power band of the engine is.

 

If the engine doesn't make much torque before 4000 rpm, you'll probably get tired of it on a day to day basis.

 

Lets keep it civil, guys.

I agree. As most people who have worked with turbo cars should know, the amount of displacement the engine has strongly affects the spoolup characteristics. A 3 liter engine will not spool up as fast as a 4 liter engine would using the same turbo. Likewise, a 2.6 liter engine will not spool up as fast as a 3 liter engine would using the same turbos. In addition, the amount of torque that the smaller engine will have will be less than the larger engine will have running the same boost level.

[Guest ON3GO]

stock for stock the VG30DETT and the RB26DETT makes about the same hp stock.

the reason why the RB26 makes more power with less boost and more boost is because its a Inline motor. thats a reason why the 2JZ makes good power too.

The VG will make more tourque though.

The VG is a awesome motor. hell i have the non-turbo model and i cant blow it up. 133k on it and most of them hard sprinted driving....still cant blow it up.

But you cant say the bigger the motor the lower it can rev...look at Ferrari's. V12s and crazy redlines... god they sound good too.

and on topic... that ZXTT that dynoed those numbers with upgraded turbos and all is not running right at all. my friend with a 1991 ZX TT with stock turbos, ECU, intake, exhaust, downpipes, and a boost controller dynoed around 410 top the ground and even more ftlb's.

 

Mike

[SleeperZ]

MS, I agree. And to this

I agree that playing the power per liter game is a no win situation because in the end what you get are a bunch of happy Honda owners convinced that their 16 second Civics are fast.