Jump to content


Super Moderators
  • Content count

  • Donations

    100.00 USD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


Everything posted by seattlejester

  1. TIG welder recommendation

    I think I've pretty much settled on the Everlast 185DV unit. Just waiting on some funds to account for the accessories and the tank I'll have to buy. One of the wants is AC capable, the multiprocess ones don't offer that, at least not without using a spool gun or something of that nature. I also already have a MIG so that would be a bit redundant.
  2. TIG welder recommendation

    Looking for a recommendation on a TIG welder. Would like an AC capable unit. Prefer to have 120-220 volt option, also would prefer a relatively portable size, not one of those that you need a flatbed to carry about. Budget $1000 I think at the moment, kind of excludes me from the blue and red. Units on my list are the Eastwood digital and Everlast 185DV The Eastwood manual has also caught my eye, it is really really affordable, makes it pretty tempting. Your thoughts would be appreciated.
  3. Wastegate upsizing

    I do have a cheapo harborfrieght die grinder that I find difficult to use for the same reason, speed is just set to kill. An external speed control seems like a good idea if it does not have one. I appreciate the brainstorming. Unfortunately spacing the turbo isn't an option, I have about 1/4-1/2 an inch before the compressor hits the shock tower. So squeezing between the dump and the manifold won't work with that little room. Given the design though I should be able to go off towards the firewall if memory serves. You didn't have any problems with the elephant trunk style? I thought having the wastegate remote located was also not a good thing. How much power were/are you pushing what PSI numbers are you reading? Hmm the GT35R supposedly flows more than my borg warner S257SX-E, granted I most likely have more exhaust flow with my compression and headflow rate. I'm about 50/50 on whether I spend time on trying to get the 38mm to work or just step up to the 44mm.
  4. Wastegate upsizing

    So it is official, I have uncontrollable boost. Setup is 2jzge NA-T, 2mm head gasket to bring compression to 8.5ish to 1 Treadstone T4 cast stainless manifold Preision 39mm wastegate with a 9.4lb spring BW S257sx-e with AGP 0.7A/R hotside Backstory: My friend with a smaller hotside on a T3 manifold holds 10lbs with a poor priority on a 40mm wastegate on his 2.7L single cam motor. I decided since I wanted to run a bit more boost at around 15lbs or so I should be ok with the 38mm wastegate flange. I even got the precision 39mm which boasts a 1mm oversize. After help from Chickenman to finally figure out my boost control situation, I set my manual boost controller to 0 and went out for a drive. In first and second gear it is holding 10lbs of boost. Once I get into 3rd if I go more than 30% throttle or so it starts creeping all the way to my boost cut which I have set at 17lbs. So now I'm kind of stuck. My cast stainless manifold has a 38mm wastegate two bolt flange cast into it. They do make a 38mm to 44mm adapter, but logically to me that would not work since the restriction of the 38mm wastegate flange would still be there. What should I do? I know I need to upsize my wastegate, will a 44mm be sufficient? Or do I just go big now? I imagine I can shave down the flange and bore out to the waste gate v-band size and just weld a stainless v band directly onto the the manifold, but I know stainless is going to be terrible to work on. I don't even know if tradition style bits would work if they even made one big enough in the first place.
  5. Wastegate upsizing

    Wow, I didn't even know that was a thing. I wonder how much flex it could handle. Just to get this straight. The suggestion is with the current 39mm wastegate, cut off the current wastegate dump, cap the turbo dump pipe of the hole, add the flex hose, and see if the 39mm would work at all, basically testing the turbulence theory correct? I know for divorced setups you do want a bellow or a flex joint, if the wastegate reroute takes place it will definitely be that way. The current half measure in my mind is to actually take off the hood, cut and patch the turbo dump, then install the nub of the wastegate on inverted (so it screams to atmosphere) to see if it can hold boost as well.
  6. Wastegate upsizing

    Hmm, would something like this work? https://www.amazon.com/Makita-GD0601-4-Inch-Die-Grinder/dp/B001ASC73E/ref=sr_1_1?s=hi&ie=UTF8&qid=1521140870&sr=1-1&keywords=electric+die+grinder Then again, I wonder if a machine shop could drill out the hole for a less than the cost of that tool. I think my endgame plan will be picking up the precision 46mm wastegate, match the flange to the V-band, then clock the waste gate so that the pipe goes out and enters the dump pipe at a 90 degree to the turbo exit (follows the bend of the dump pipe), so that it goes along the curve and gradually blends into taking maybe 3-4 inches to do so. There is a childish part of me that would find a screamer pipe entertaining, but a bigger part of me finds that to be a bit too much theater. Hopefully this solves this and we can finally move onto tuning.
  7. Wastegate upsizing

    Almost looks like the manifold would have made sense with two wastegates and being truly twin scroll. As it is now it has a bit of a ramp where the exhaust enters the turbo, but it is about an inch or two from sealing. I want to say there is an aftermarket flange adapter type thing that does divide it into a twinscroll, but that would only compound my problem. Not sure the reason, the only one that makes sense to me is for a QSV, but even then I'm not sure. Technically like 87* :D, the more I think about it the more I feel like there was a reason it was done that way given how unideal it is. Not sure if it was to keep access to the bolt or just the room for the turn. I do recall being startled by the lack of space. That 90* adapter might be something. Although I'm not sure how far I can go straight back given how far I placed my motor in the engine bay. The waste gate adapter did catch my eye for stepping up to a 44mm and getting the infinite clock-ability of the V-band. I think the concern with that style is that the hole still remains at 35mm according to some diagrams online. That would mean needing to port the adapter and might as well the manifold, and if that is the case might as well just weld the included wastegate flange from a 44mm wastegate directly to the manifold after porting it to match was my thinking. Not even sure how you port cast stainless. Only thing that was worked before was tungsten carbide bit on a dremel and that took ages just to do a couple mm on a flange. I'm not sure if the hotside change is an option. The only BW turbos with wastegates are the EFR turbos, and even then my spacing is fairly tight. I think the first step will be to take some measurements, then see if there are options. I'll swap springs, but I think the setup prevents this size from working. I think a wastegate change and exhaust rerouting might be in order.
  8. Exposed's 1jz Build

    Extra vacuum line might be nice if they want to feed a boost curve into the dyno or something of that nature.
  9. Wastegate upsizing

    Thank you guys for the response, I must have missed them. I'll grab a wide angle shot this weekend. That is where the wastegate is mounted. That is unfortunately how the wastegate dump merges back with the exhaust, it is probably one of the worst ways of merging to be honest. I tried to tilt it so it is not perpendicular, but I couldn't get it very far from what I recall. There just is not very much room unless I try to do a full 90* turn and follow the exhaust for a little bit, but then I run into interference with the heater bypass hose if memory serves. I might believe that the wastegate was opening plus or minus 3lbs of the rated spring, but I've been told precision gate springs are pretty solid. Swapping the springs doesn't cost me anything though, so I will give that a try. Edit: found another picture. Looking at that seems to have jogged my memory. I seem to recall that the 90* bend actually hit the turbo dump pipe when it was turned to follow along with it. So short of resorting to pie cuts for a really sharp 90*, this was the only option I had. I can try a screamer pipe setup, but I fear that the only way to do so would be to go up through the hood because of the previously stated interference. I'll go and take some measurements this weekend.
  10. @NewZed My point was an ease of inspection and later on adding in ease of maintenance being a reason to swap to discs. My fright was centered around how they failed and how the failure is kept hidden. If I truly feared blowouts of the wheel cylinder I would have a panic attack anytime a car with drums pulls up next to me or I am offered a ride in one, and that is not the case. I think it was a fair counter point, but you are allowed to disagree. You brought up the fact they are being used dependably today by reputable manufacturers, my counter point was the only reason they still are being used is financially motivated. While I am not disputing the fact they are dependable enough to be used today, I am disputing the fact the reason they still are. There are also some whisperings by some sources as to alternative reasons why they still are, dependability and performance have nothing to do with it according to them. Regardless in the face of data, my few anecdotal experiences truly are insignificant. While the experience left enough of an impression on me to change my mind, I'm sure an analysis of the data on how many systems are in use even in older cars with no malady to report would counter my views easily, therefore irrational could be applied. Bummer when that is the case for the person who holds the view, but I concede on that front. @PrincePaul jdmjunkies.ch is actually on this board I think, I believe the two becomes one build thread is his. Having the stock bias values to compare with would be a real treat as we could compare how far off the values for popular swaps can be. I think Miles has been answering your question from the beginning. Keep the stock system, but upgrade pads and lines, maybe add better fluid. If you have to do an upgrade what you outline should be sufficient with a bigger bore master to compensate for additional fluid required. The vented differing piston caliper setup seems to be on I4 4-Runner (also vented rotor): 43mm/34mm according to the thread above. Not sure if anyone supplies a kit, but I'm sure silvermine would be able to make a custom kit if that is what you really want, it would just be a matter of grabbing different calipers from the parts supplier. To get a specific answer to your question I might suggest classiczcar, I was only slightly familiar with the Mk63 setup before this week, looking it up I see a lot more hits over there, so someone might actually be running this setup to give you a positive real world "feel" answer rather than numbers.
  11. Kudos, can't wait to see the contrast!
  12. This took a while to wrap my head around. My concern wasn't between the front comparisons, but more so your front to rear to end up at the bias ratio you have the 80/20 you arrived at. We were having some discussion on how to accurately determine the moment arm of a drum brake as well as the leverages involved on the shoes so looking at your math was a bit startling as that just removed the moment arm, but since you are comparing the same moment arms between two setups and looking for the difference between the same setups (moment arms wise) the moment arms cancel out and you are left with a force ratio, which you could compare using your method. Speaking of factors given you are multiplying both the fronts and rear by two to get total pistons you can remove those and work with some smaller numbers. You are increasing the fronts somewhat by 43mm vs the FIA 41.3mm so using the bigger 7/8 vs the 13/16 of the FIA rear cylinder would raise the force in the rear enough to maintain the ratio between the forces, in theory you should be able to run the stock proportioning valve given the very minor difference. You could use a manual one and dial in some more rear brake to improve performance somewhat, but the bottomline is compared to the FIA setup running the S12W setup would be somewhat comparable with the 7/8 rear cylinder math wise.
  13. Fair point, I don't see a point in getting unreasonable in a discussion. Counterpoint to the fact they are being made used today, the motivation isn't anything impressive. It is because a drum setup is cheaper. Manufacturers don't like to say as much for obvious reasons, but if it is cheaper and performs adequately for most consumers of the vehicle while providing them a savings, then in business sense it would be foolish not to do so. If a disc brake option was available that added no cost to the manufacturer, I can't imagine they would choose the drum. Given some newer cars have a disc and a drum in the back (drum for parking purposes), then using a wheel cylinder, forgoing the rotors, caliper bracket, and caliper is a considerable savings on say an economy car. Oops S12+8 is for the non vented right? That would be their stage 3 kit. I'm not sure that is the correct way to calculate bias is it? That just determines area the force is acting on, things like leverage aren't included which plays a factor. http://www.tceperformanceproducts.com/bias-calculator/ I mean following your assumption if you factor out leverage, pad compound, pad shape,pad size, etc than just force remains, but really they are different at least fairly drastically in leverage if recollection calls. Link to a thread where we hashed out some numbers, still not perfect since that is more or less strictly from a moment perspective (leverage x force)
  14. http://www.silverminemotors.com/datsun/datsun-240z/brake-upgrades They have the S12+8 kit under their stage 4 brake upgrade heading. @NewZed True, given enough time calipers would probably go as well, although the ones on my car and my friend's 280z were still holding before I swapped and he replaced, where as his wheel cylinder blew out, and mine disintegrated. I'm not sure if the concern is irrational. Hmm, maybe a bit alarmist in retrospect, but being able to inspect for leaks quickly as part of routine service seems to be fairly rational. I will also add, swapping out pads is quite a bit easier than changing out shoes.
  15. ^Right, I imagine if they are taking note of casting seeing a shiny rebuilt caliper where drums are supposed to be would be a red flag. Period correct, and tire width restrictions have been noted, that would also be a limitation if you can't put on bigger wheels as some conversion kits run bigger rotors. Honestly the drums kind of scare the piss out of me which is why I would go for an "upgrade." A friend said his brakes suddenly went out, when we got the drums off the o-ring for the wheel cylinder had gone and fluid was just gushing out. Being behind the drum you wouldn't notice until it filled the cavity to leak past the inspection port. At least with calipers if the brakes don't feel right you can poke your head under the car and see all the components. Technically the calipers could do the same, but the piston would never dislodge like that since the pad would keep it in place. Just kind of a scary realization. @walkerbk is there a calculator somewhere for the drums and other common swaps? Mind sharing a link?
  16. Exposed's 1jz Build

    Wouldn't be a bad idea, but that looks like angle iron that has cross bars welded to it. Those are naturally a bit gusseted, granted the CD009 is a heavy transmission.
  17. Exposed's 1jz Build

    Wow, I can't believe it lines up so nicely. Thank you for the measurement of the bell housing past the firewall as well that will tell me how far I have to shift my setup for the awesome fitment.
  18. Headlight_Relay_Diagram.jpg I think that is pretty decent. Very minimal amperage through the combo and high beam selector. 30 is going to be your main power, this is going to be a thick wire (fused) from the battery, split to power both relays, one for high beam one for low beam. 87 is going to be your output power, this is going to also a thick wire going to the positive on the headlight, one relay will be the positive for low beam, the other will be the positive for high beam. 86 should be positive voltage I'm not sure if they just used a generic relay diagram and didn't want to flip it, I've heard some do not care the voltage direction, but I believe most want 86 to be positive. This is going to be power from the headlight switch (so put the positive signal wire to 86 on both relays) 85 is going to be the ground for the coil one would go to the ground signal for the low beam and one should go to the ground signal for the high beam. The stalk for the blinker should be a ground selector as people have said. So when the headlights are turned on by twisting the combo switch that sends power to 86 (the combo switch is powered through the big wire going to the steering column). The blinker stalk should grounding the low beams normally which would actuate the low beam relay sending power from terminal 30 through 87 and completing the circuit for the low beam which is always grounded near the headlight. Pulling the blinker stalk should terminate the low beam ground for the coil and actuate the high beam ground which would complete the high beam relay coil circuit sending power from pin 30 through to pin 87 of the high beam assembly. If you wanted both the low and high beams on with the high beam (usually not on a stockish setup, modern cars with separate bulbs do keep both on, or cars with LED headlights will kick on additional lights), you could run a wire from the 85 of the high beam to the 85 of the low beam, but you would have to employ a diode to make sure the circuit would only be completed when high beam was on.
  19. Exposed's 1jz Build

    Those aren't the stock mounting points on the trans tunnel are they?
  20. I thought with two circuits of left and right it lowered the amperage a bit and let them use thinner wires to handle the load or something. Maybe my memory is failing me already.
  21. The left and right was an older attempt at trying to keep the amperage a bit lower going through the steering column. I would take the time to convert to relays with your new kit. You can just steal the signal from either the left or the right wiring. Or in your case I guess just desolder one of the contacts on the particle board depending on how clean you wanted your harness to be.
  22. Steering shaft shortening

    Welcome to the forum! Please note, you have posted to the FAQ section which is reserved for informative posts and does not allow responses. I've moved your thread to the fabrication section of the forum. The Z steering wheels are pretty close to begin with. You can run a flat face wheel to gain a couple inches. I'll leave shortening of the shaft to others to answer.
  23. Tim's 302Z

    Oh goodness.
  24. Exposed's 1jz Build

    Having to cut the ears on the early Z would be a bit of a bummer. Part of me likes the thought of being able to go back to stock. Yes please if you have any shots of how the transmission sits in the tunnel, or how you ended up mounting the cross member. I think I have a 3.7 or a 3.545 ring and pinion it was from a non LSD 300zx turbo. Looks like a 3.545 is stock. I will say the gearing feels pretty right right now with the R154, but the thrust washer is something on my mind. Not sure if the CD009 will feel the same way a bit too high until I go even lower.