Built VQ35 or RB26DETT Swap?
04-23-2013, 01:26 PM
#41
only sleeve failures we have had are dartons from improper installations, stock sleeves we have no idea where the limit is we have one person who ovaled them at 800's but hal is still going strong in the same area not enough samples to make a determination thats where they blow. engines blowing at 450 are stock engines from weak rods which i already admitted is the vq's one weak point.
point is there is no reason to swap a rb26
point is there is no reason to swap a rb26
Thank you. 
Maybe we can agree to disagree. I've been out of the VQ loop since 2009, when engines blew at 450hp and sleeves were failing all over, and have no room to talk about the VQ. Apparently, things have changed for the better, and the VQ is turning into a more sturdy platform. However, I still don't see the disadvantages of the RB26 you point out to be all "that bad." Maybe I'm just stubborn.
I believe we also fell way off track, losing sight of the OP's interest. I doubt he'll be looking to go as far as a 800+hp daily driver.
Maybe we can agree to disagree. I've been out of the VQ loop since 2009, when engines blew at 450hp and sleeves were failing all over, and have no room to talk about the VQ. Apparently, things have changed for the better, and the VQ is turning into a more sturdy platform. However, I still don't see the disadvantages of the RB26 you point out to be all "that bad." Maybe I'm just stubborn.
I believe we also fell way off track, losing sight of the OP's interest. I doubt he'll be looking to go as far as a 800+hp daily driver.
04-23-2013, 02:53 PM
#42
I agree that an RB26 swap is not very logical. LS swap is the best in my opinion followed by the 2J and TB48. But honestly the LS swap is the only one I think will make the Z significantly better than the VQ. Nothing like running mid 9's on 532whp!
04-23-2013, 04:28 PM
#43
Just my .02, but I'd go RB26 all day over any other swap. Very time consuming and expensive, yes, but the end result is worth it in my eyes. Sure I could have the same or even more power from an LS swap with money left over in my pocket...but the roar of a V8 coming from a Z has always just been "cheap" to me. I immediately think of a mustang/trans am/gto/challenger/charger with different skin on it.
Now, the glorious sound of that boosted straight six firing up annnnnnnd boner status will be achieved.
Now, the glorious sound of that boosted straight six firing up annnnnnnd boner status will be achieved.
04-23-2013, 04:35 PM
#44
Just my .02, but I'd go RB26 all day over any other swap. Very time consuming and expensive, yes, but the end result is worth it in my eyes. Sure I could have the same or even more power from an LS swap with money left over in my pocket...but the roar of a V8 coming from a Z has always just been "cheap" to me. I immediately think of a mustang/trans am/gto/challenger/charger with different skin on it.
Now, the glorious sound of that boosted straight six firing up annnnnnnd boner status will be achieved.
Now, the glorious sound of that boosted straight six firing up annnnnnnd boner status will be achieved.
04-23-2013, 04:45 PM
#45
350Z-holic
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Scottsdale/coyote drophouse
Posts: 8,213
Received 399 Likes
on
227 Posts
why swap any engine into this car that still has the same nissan bearings in it? RB would make no sense to me imho.
If i had it to do over again, LS all day long. absolutely no question.
If i had it to do over again, LS all day long. absolutely no question.
04-23-2013, 05:13 PM
#46
nothing wrong with the bearings, bigger then i would like on both engines(call me spoiled being able to run honda bearings in a small block), issue arises from trying to spec them too tight for the power goal.
ls would be my option if i was aiming for 1k or more to the wheels personally
ls would be my option if i was aiming for 1k or more to the wheels personally
04-23-2013, 06:03 PM
#47
only sleeve failures we have had are dartons from improper installations, stock sleeves we have no idea where the limit is we have one person who ovaled them at 800's but hal is still going strong in the same area not enough samples to make a determination thats where they blow. engines blowing at 450 are stock engines from weak rods which i already admitted is the vq's one weak point.
point is there is no reason to swap a rb26
point is there is no reason to swap a rb26
04-23-2013, 10:02 PM
#48
What?
The RB oil pump problems in early motors was solved. The problem stemmed from the drive shaft being machined too narrow. This is easily avoidable. Also, being around tons of stock-blocked RB's... I've only heard of two incidents of the stock oil pump failing.
From my personal experience, torque is NOT an issue... with seeing many BPU GTR's making a steady 400awhp, 350+ awtq. Achieving 550awhp does not take head work, nor does it take "massive" amounts of boost. Turbo efficiency comes into play here. No one is going to intelligently stick with a pair of N1 turbos and boost the hell out of them. The heads flow fine for medium-tuned engines.
The biggest downside to the RB in my opinion, is motor weight, part availability, and tuner availability in the US.
The RB oil pump problems in early motors was solved. The problem stemmed from the drive shaft being machined too narrow. This is easily avoidable. Also, being around tons of stock-blocked RB's... I've only heard of two incidents of the stock oil pump failing.
From my personal experience, torque is NOT an issue... with seeing many BPU GTR's making a steady 400awhp, 350+ awtq. Achieving 550awhp does not take head work, nor does it take "massive" amounts of boost. Turbo efficiency comes into play here. No one is going to intelligently stick with a pair of N1 turbos and boost the hell out of them. The heads flow fine for medium-tuned engines.
The biggest downside to the RB in my opinion, is motor weight, part availability, and tuner availability in the US.
As for the engine in the 350z, this video should help.
One last note to mention that is off topic, what do you think Nissan is planning do for the next gen Z besides follow the FRS market?
Last edited by Kcee91; 04-23-2013 at 10:06 PM.
04-23-2013, 10:34 PM
#49
ok ill modify my statement theres no legitimate BENEFICIAL reason to swap a rb into the chassis
thats not factory and the vq has solutions for the oil pumps as well acknowledging there was a problem just strengthens my point that the rb has some of the same issues the vq has.
the video is invalid as well trying to make it out to be a engine or "luxury vehicles" since again everything the rb can do the vq can do better, 1.5 bar is ~22 psi where the vq has shown it can make 1k to the wheels. if anything it also helps strengthen what ive said. especially since the swap plus parts will cost as much, and likely more to get that power then just building the vq and boosting go ask some of the guys who have actually swaped engines if you dont believe me. they also had to go with expensive *** dry carbon parts to restore the weight distribution
nissan already said the z will not try for anything to compete with the fr-s/br-z it is meant to be in a different class. rumors for the brz/frs compititor go from the juke filling that spot(lol good job not listening) or mayby a new silvia way to go off topic
thats not factory and the vq has solutions for the oil pumps as well acknowledging there was a problem just strengthens my point that the rb has some of the same issues the vq has.
the video is invalid as well trying to make it out to be a engine or "luxury vehicles" since again everything the rb can do the vq can do better, 1.5 bar is ~22 psi where the vq has shown it can make 1k to the wheels. if anything it also helps strengthen what ive said. especially since the swap plus parts will cost as much, and likely more to get that power then just building the vq and boosting go ask some of the guys who have actually swaped engines if you dont believe me. they also had to go with expensive *** dry carbon parts to restore the weight distribution
nissan already said the z will not try for anything to compete with the fr-s/br-z it is meant to be in a different class. rumors for the brz/frs compititor go from the juke filling that spot(lol good job not listening) or mayby a new silvia way to go off topic
+1, SP Engineering down in Cali addressed the oil pump issue with swapping a 2JZ oil pump and drilling a few relief holes and no problems.
As for the engine in the 350z, this video should help.
http://youtu.be/_MNQf_t6Qgc
One last note to mention that is off topic, what do you think Nissan is planning do for the next gen Z besides follow the FRS market?
As for the engine in the 350z, this video should help.
http://youtu.be/_MNQf_t6Qgc
One last note to mention that is off topic, what do you think Nissan is planning do for the next gen Z besides follow the FRS market?
Last edited by jerryd87; 04-23-2013 at 10:37 PM.
04-24-2013, 07:55 AM
#50
ok ill modify my statement theres no legitimate BENEFICIAL reason to swap a rb into the chassis
thats not factory and the vq has solutions for the oil pumps as well acknowledging there was a problem just strengthens my point that the rb has some of the same issues the vq has.
the video is invalid as well trying to make it out to be a engine or "luxury vehicles" since again everything the rb can do the vq can do better, 1.5 bar is ~22 psi where the vq has shown it can make 1k to the wheels. if anything it also helps strengthen what ive said. especially since the swap plus parts will cost as much, and likely more to get that power then just building the vq and boosting go ask some of the guys who have actually swaped engines if you dont believe me. they also had to go with expensive *** dry carbon parts to restore the weight distribution
nissan already said the z will not try for anything to compete with the fr-s/br-z it is meant to be in a different class. rumors for the brz/frs compititor go from the juke filling that spot(lol good job not listening) or mayby a new silvia way to go off topic
thats not factory and the vq has solutions for the oil pumps as well acknowledging there was a problem just strengthens my point that the rb has some of the same issues the vq has.
the video is invalid as well trying to make it out to be a engine or "luxury vehicles" since again everything the rb can do the vq can do better, 1.5 bar is ~22 psi where the vq has shown it can make 1k to the wheels. if anything it also helps strengthen what ive said. especially since the swap plus parts will cost as much, and likely more to get that power then just building the vq and boosting go ask some of the guys who have actually swaped engines if you dont believe me. they also had to go with expensive *** dry carbon parts to restore the weight distribution
nissan already said the z will not try for anything to compete with the fr-s/br-z it is meant to be in a different class. rumors for the brz/frs compititor go from the juke filling that spot(lol good job not listening) or mayby a new silvia way to go off topic
04-24-2013, 01:09 PM
#51
The biggest issue i have with ls swaps are the transmission options. With 2j swap you can pay about 2k and keep the cd0009. Ive been in a few t56 cars and i was not happy with the way the transmission shifted. And the cost of a new t56 was just too high.
Id want to do a 4.8/5.3 +ls3 head z06 cam setup but all the money id save for having a stout lower end (and being able to cheaply/easily refresh the motor and regap rings for the power i want) would be offset big time. I can get a 2jzge motor for around 800 bucks and build it in my sleep. All you really need for big power are better rods, keep the 9-1 pistons, new rings hone bearings, arp hardware cams and you basically are set (add in some gm coil on plug stuff). Also turbo manifold('s none of that ugly over the top intake for me) would be much easier/cheaper to be made (for me) on a 2j. Then ecu stuff would be roughly the same cost, likewise for the mounts, and i already have experience working on 1j/2j's and like how they work (non interference, easy to get parts, a lot of oem stuff is usable at high power).
So i think both setups have positives and draw backs. For me, a 2j setup just would be a better place to start. If you have lsx experience, i could easily see why you'd choose that.
Id want to do a 4.8/5.3 +ls3 head z06 cam setup but all the money id save for having a stout lower end (and being able to cheaply/easily refresh the motor and regap rings for the power i want) would be offset big time. I can get a 2jzge motor for around 800 bucks and build it in my sleep. All you really need for big power are better rods, keep the 9-1 pistons, new rings hone bearings, arp hardware cams and you basically are set (add in some gm coil on plug stuff). Also turbo manifold('s none of that ugly over the top intake for me) would be much easier/cheaper to be made (for me) on a 2j. Then ecu stuff would be roughly the same cost, likewise for the mounts, and i already have experience working on 1j/2j's and like how they work (non interference, easy to get parts, a lot of oem stuff is usable at high power).
So i think both setups have positives and draw backs. For me, a 2j setup just would be a better place to start. If you have lsx experience, i could easily see why you'd choose that.
04-24-2013, 01:14 PM
#52
True. I believe you man. I just wanted to post up that video for the OP. It's been awhile since I've looked into what Nissan said. Thanks for the clear up. I still wonder though what's next for the Z? I remember Infiniti was going to use the VR engine in the next G coupe.
04-24-2013, 01:32 PM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Greenwich, Connecticut
Posts: 2,901
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
9 Posts
If the vr engine leaves the gtr chassis, i guarantee you it's going to be neutered (and i dont mean just turbo-less). Nissan would loose a lot of money if people started buying g's to make 1000+hp rather than the gtr (yeah the awd/transmission factor is huge, but they'd still loose a lot).
Last edited by Jah70; 04-24-2013 at 01:51 PM.
04-24-2013, 03:00 PM
#54
If the vr engine leaves the gtr chassis, i guarantee you it's going to be neutered (and i dont mean just turbo-less). Nissan would loose a lot of money if people started buying g's to make 1000+hp rather than the gtr (yeah the awd/transmission factor is huge, but they'd still loose a lot).
04-24-2013, 09:48 PM
#55
ls3 heads wont fit on a 4.8/5.3L the valves are too big and hit the sides of the cylinder. best you can do is ls1 heads
The biggest issue i have with ls swaps are the transmission options. With 2j swap you can pay about 2k and keep the cd0009. Ive been in a few t56 cars and i was not happy with the way the transmission shifted. And the cost of a new t56 was just too high.
Id want to do a 4.8/5.3 +ls3 head z06 cam setup but all the money id save for having a stout lower end (and being able to cheaply/easily refresh the motor and regap rings for the power i want) would be offset big time. I can get a 2jzge motor for around 800 bucks and build it in my sleep. All you really need for big power are better rods, keep the 9-1 pistons, new rings hone bearings, arp hardware cams and you basically are set (add in some gm coil on plug stuff). Also turbo manifold('s none of that ugly over the top intake for me) would be much easier/cheaper to be made (for me) on a 2j. Then ecu stuff would be roughly the same cost, likewise for the mounts, and i already have experience working on 1j/2j's and like how they work (non interference, easy to get parts, a lot of oem stuff is usable at high power).
So i think both setups have positives and draw backs. For me, a 2j setup just would be a better place to start. If you have lsx experience, i could easily see why you'd choose that.
Id want to do a 4.8/5.3 +ls3 head z06 cam setup but all the money id save for having a stout lower end (and being able to cheaply/easily refresh the motor and regap rings for the power i want) would be offset big time. I can get a 2jzge motor for around 800 bucks and build it in my sleep. All you really need for big power are better rods, keep the 9-1 pistons, new rings hone bearings, arp hardware cams and you basically are set (add in some gm coil on plug stuff). Also turbo manifold('s none of that ugly over the top intake for me) would be much easier/cheaper to be made (for me) on a 2j. Then ecu stuff would be roughly the same cost, likewise for the mounts, and i already have experience working on 1j/2j's and like how they work (non interference, easy to get parts, a lot of oem stuff is usable at high power).
So i think both setups have positives and draw backs. For me, a 2j setup just would be a better place to start. If you have lsx experience, i could easily see why you'd choose that.
04-26-2013, 11:00 PM
#57
well the good news is if you did and went with the 5.3L you could just bore it over to a 5.7(yah you can just overbore it to 5.7L no stroking) to fit the heads but dont expect the same power handling i would get nervous around 1k to the wheels overbored that much.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Colombo
Forced Induction
35
11-09-2020 10:27 AM
