Jump to content
HybridZ

jpndave

Donating Members
  • Content count

    232
  • Donations

    80.00 USD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3
  • Feedback

    0%

jpndave last won the day on June 14

jpndave had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About jpndave

  • Rank
    Always Here
  • Birthday December 1

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/123712-240z-pro-touring-build/

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Hyde Park, UT
  • Interests
    73 240Z owned for 30+yrs(my high school car). Doing a full makeover now, Voodoo/T56 Magnum, Suspension, Brakes, etc. http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/123712-240z-pro-touring-build/

    2007 Jeep JK Unlimited, LS3/6L80E/242AMG https://www.rme4x4.com/showthread.php?77265-Jeep-JK-Unlimited-quot-Transformer-quot-6-2L-quot-LS3-quot-GM-build

Recent Profile Visitors

4003 profile views
  1. jpndave

    Ceramic Coating

    I did cam, valves and cylinder heads myself using Tech Line. I didn't go into the bottom end at that time. The build thread on my Jeep shows some of that. The engine has since been disassembled and the results are somewhat mixed IMO. I'll see if I can get some photos of the parts now. Cam was definitely better with the coating. I'm skeptical that the intake, combustion chamber and valve coatings did much of anything. The cam showed NO wear at all. However, with roller lifters and high quality bearings, not sure it makes much of a difference in the end. Money probably better spent somewhere else. I'm not sure if I will do that on the new engine, not sure it's worth the effort and cost from what I saw on the previous engine. I didn't see any damage, flaking or anything similar on that engine. I just don't know if it's worth the cost and trouble for that application.
  2. jpndave

    240Z Pro-Touring Build

    I don't want my build thread to turn into a debate on what the Voodoo is and is not. What it "is" at this point is my choice for my build. I'll totally agree that the crank is not as light as some flat plane designs. The arrangement of U-D-U-D and firing order are indeed different to accommodate the single intake plenum which I'm sure was done for packaging in the Mustang and cross compatibility with the Coyote. The intake and heads are now sold as upgrades for the Coyote. "100% about exhaust packaging" is simply not true. The flat plane allows all eight cylinders to breathe close to the same - not so with a cross plane either intake or exhaust. That in turn allowed tuning to an inch of its life (you have to tune for the least effecient cylinder), 12:1 compression - without direct injection, stratosphere 8200+ rpm (from the flat plane too - the similar component Coyote is 7500rpm which is still respectable), not great torque on the bottom and IMO one of the most beautifully intoxicating sounds I've ever heard if exhausted correctly. My thinking is that torque lacking on the lower end will be a different story in a car that's 1200lbs lighter. Better (or maybe better said, more useable) power delivery for the lighter Z platform. Intoxicating sound and high rpms with broad power curve and awesome top end are my reasons for the choice. Easy? Nope! As far as weight goes the only semi official numbers I've seen are from Ward's putting it right at the LS3 430lb mark. One wrecking yard I am considering purchasing one from swears it hit the scales at 297 which is no way correct, maybe 397... I can live with 430 and will hope for less. The crank itself does have much more counterweight than I'd hoped for but I suspect that they are there for a reason on that engine. It it a higher quality forged crank more on par with the 4" Manley I have for my LS and drilled rod pins, etc. make it lighter but they do the same to my cross plane LS. The plasma spray liners make it lighter also - again do the same thing to a 5.2L Coyote. Thanks for following along. I'm hoping to get to the project soon and make some headway.
  3. jpndave

    240Z Pro-Touring Build

    LOL, isn't that the truth all around! I totally agree that the LS would be MUCH "easier". Love the LS3+ in my JK and can't wait to get hear/feel the 6.8L stroked version come to life. But...not what I'm after in the Z. Totally respect all those that are going the LS route. I originally was going that route and practically speaking (as far as ease and cost one install) still should. I had an '08 LLT - original 3.6L first used in the CTS and base Camaro which is an impressive engine that I was going to use in an abandoned project. Super short but WOW on the width up top and height - freakin huge as you so eloquently put it. Still have a few parts for that one imported from Australia to make it work right.
  4. jpndave

    Arttu's 240Z Never Ready

    Awesome build TUME! I found some great ideas in you build that are inspirational to mine. I'll have to follow-up on those and am really looking forward to seeing how you progress. Hang in there!
  5. jpndave

    240Z Pro-Touring Build

    I haven't lowered one in the bay yet but the dimensions will work. Length is is a non issue. Width will be easy with my planned A-arms and clears stock towers by 2" (1"each side). Height is the big question - stock I don't think will go cleanly and have any ground clearance at the oil pan. There are at least two aftermarket low profile oil pan versions that should solve it (like 4" of extra clearance) or you could always use a dry sump. A new house/shop have prevented much progress but that is nearing the end so hopefully things can move forward shortly. I've been hesitant to grab the engine until closer to needing it for the reasons Tube80z mentioned. Yellowoctopus and bimmota have mod motors in their cars and I think the mod is a little taller. I'm sure there will be surprises and look forward to sorting it out.
  6. jpndave

    240Z Pro-Touring Build

    To clarify 2 brake master cylinders with a balance bar, one front & one rear going to a late Mustang (probably) ABS box. Then a third for the clutch. Sizes yet to be determined/dialed in to match calipers and clutch slave.
  7. Jboogsthethug, I wasn't implying you are off couse with your posts, to the contrary they seem right in line with the topic. Just because they apply to your car too isn't a reason to leave it out or chat about common interests. I have had people go on a rant totally off course in my JK build thread and that's frustrating. Omar can speak to his preferences but we've talked about ideas for his seat mounts a few times so I expect any input is appreciated. My comment was just about the interior rails. A quick opinion from seattlejester and Omar is appreciated, any more than that should probably get a new discussion thread. On your 1x2 tubing idea, it sounds like a good option. If the metal underneath is solid you can save weight and potential rust spot by cutting off the bottom of the tube or maybe have a "u" channel bent. Structural channel is pretty heavy and rough for these applications. If you are OK with lighter material (less than 16ga) you are welcome to use my brake to bend it. It's rated to 16ga but as you approach the 4' length it doesn't make really crisp consistent bends. If you're in Riverton the drive is not horrible. It's a "box and pan finger brake" so we can even bend up a bit more complicated pieces. Same for Omar's project. We talked about the option a bit but he was pressed for time trying to get the car back up so he can work on it through the school year. For heavier there is a job shop in Logan that is reasonably priced. Any heavier stuff I just have them do. HTH to clarify some, Dave
  8. The plate probably isn't ideal since it's only 2 dimensional and strength to weight would be better if raised up and tied to structural members. How obtrusive are the rails up into the floor? I've toyed with that idea but am concerned with it always being in the way. Strength tying everything together and totally flat bottom underneath would be nice. I'm not sure that the longitudinal rails mess with aero much but they certainly can't if they are not there. I don't want to sidetrack Omar's thread much but thought I would ask as you both have been in the car.
  9. I've never really found a problem with the height of the doors. It feels like your dropping down into a "cockpit" so to speak. The car is just small and low. Other sports cars I've driven are similar, some maybe not quite as much. Just part of the character I guess. The interior door release for example is near impossible for a newcomer to find but once you are familiar with the location it's just right in the perfect place, lay your hand down and there it is.
  10. jpndave

    240Z Pro-Touring Build

    LOL, no that's just the different sizes I have there will be two spares. I'll use whatever balances front/rear/clutch out correctly. Hopefully I have the correct size...
  11. Helmet to bar clearance I can see being an issue. Setting the bar back far enough would help but the low roofline could make that tight. I haven't tracked my car and the bar is still coming so my experience is from all the years prior to teardown.
  12. Nice progress on the project! As far as room in these cars, my experience ~6' similar to Omar, is that they are quite roomy. For that era from Japan they were definitely made for a US sized market. It's one of the few cars I've owned that I don't just run the sliders all the way back. Seating is reclined but it's a sports car and should be.
  13. jpndave

    Group Buy on SpeedHut Gauges

    You can get faces/needles that are very similar. Even with black bezels they will still show so not an exact match if you really want a "restored" look. That said short of a full restoration, which should be OEM and not at all what this forum is about, this is by far the best option. I've had Autometer, VDO, and multiple other instruments including some high end race pieces. These are by far the best way to go for a Z IMO and for sure what my car will get. We purchased a set from ihiryu for my son's Jeep CJ project (and these are the lower line) his service, prices and the quality of the gauges were outstanding. I'd have already purchased mine but I'm not at that point in the project yet and they may have new features or updates between here and there so I am waiting until I need them for that buy, with any luck maybe this year's Black Friday sale.
  14. Very nice work on the exhaust. While a single can certainly give the output if sized correctly - especially torque. Duals are what I'll be using, easier to route the smaller pipes and the look as well as sound out the back are more what I want. Trying to get a 3-1/2" (that's the equivalent size to 2-1/2 duals) single pipe down the middle of the car with a T56 Magnum and all the rear components sounds pretty daunting to me. looking at the photos of alainburon's car, I don't see a 3-1/2 pipe going down there without a pretty good clearance compromise. My LS3 (now a cammed 6.8L) runs nicely on dual 2-1/2 into single 3-1/2 and sounds good - in the Jeep as more a truck type application. I'll take the duals in my Z.
  15. jpndave

    280z Ford 4.6L Mod Motor

    Nice write-up. Where are you in Saskatchewan? I spent some time up there years ago. Interesting how much different the Mod motor is to the Voodoo/Coyote. Your thread gives me some hope.
×