Brad-ManQ45

Interested...

I live in the Marietta area - I'll keep an eye out - no charge..

Sure you don't have a flattened rim or tire?

zguy36 is right, both the 280 and 300 ZXT's used the same size injectors.

Thanks for the lesson GV....

Unintercooled, I'd stick w/stock boost levels. If you had a hybrid turboyou could go to 6-10. I think you are better off getting a MS unit and programming it - driveability will be much better.

If you go to the technical articles library at zhome.com (where the link I gave you caqme from), there is an article that has pics of the two different types. It is titled "Swapping The Transmissions in a 240Z"...

Could this be it? http://zhome.com/ZCMnL/tech/69-83TrannyShifterDrawing.jpg

A coup[le of cans of 'drying' additive will add alcohol to the gas, lpowering combustion temperatures. More than likely it was the egr not functioning, but if you were running lean, you would have elevated oxides of nitrogen too. What did the Hydrocarbon readings look like? Ususally you would post all of the related info so that we don't take pot shots at what the problem could be....

Just to messwith people I'd have put 'SOHC' on 'em...

I try not to go cheap on anything that matters. The car gets the good stuff, tools that will be used heavily I buy the good stuff. Clothes - who cares? I will admit to buying good scotch, but after the first 1 or 2 switch to a cheaper brand...

If it's going to be a Challenger, then have the original Challengers' body line. I also think the hood could be extended a bit to have a not-as-tall grill. The closer to the original challenger the better - in everything but size...

Just a note here on doing priming and bodywork, there are two schools of thought on using body filler - directly to met and on top of epoxy. I was watching speed channel last night and Legendary Motorcars swears by spraying epoxy, filling, then spraying epoxy again in order to totally encapsulate the filler. Makes sense.

Warren is going to mount his just ahead of the cat...

The 280 ZXT's had 2 3/8" exhaust pipes, so you are bigger than that now. For an NA engine, I imagine 2 1/4" pipe would be about right.

Apparently, Energy Suspension has serious quality control problems. Warren and I were all set to install his bushings, when he discovered the ones he had bought 3 years ago had some wrong parts in them (bolts). Call them up and tell them what you've got vs what you need...

ZXT's used vacuum pumps to insure they had vacuum to work the cruise control. Haven't heard of the pump you're tal;king about, but no reason for it not to work. Doubt you'd need it though... I'd be worried about that 8" though....

There are actually 2 humps in the torque curve as you are accelerating - corresponding with the efficiencies of each turbo. Think like a 2 hump camel vs a 1 hump. The 2 hump camel will have its' second hump higher in the rev range and of course will have a higher amount of torque. If racing, you'd be better off with a single curve/hump for controlability reasons. Not only that, but even the TT RX7's and Supras go to Single turbos for POWER. For street and autocross, where instant acceleration is needed, two matched smaller turbos will spool quicker and still be linear - best of both worlds, though more expensive and involved. The real reason the ttRX7 went sequential is that wankels are notoriously dismal at providing low end torque - and sequential turbos do a good job of providing that on the street, but once again, what works on the track ain't neccessarily the same...

What kind of cam are you running to only have 8" of vacuum at idle? Sure your timing isn't off? What shape are your valves/guides in? Inquiring minds want to know...

TMC has springs for around $149... Have 'em on my '75. TMC is Traction Master Corp. They have stuff for Z's, 510's and of course - Mustangs. They also have good sway bar kits...Have them too...

I went and found the write-up in Car & Driver - their quote (note quite verbatim perhaps but absolutely correct as far as syntax and message) - "The big weight savings is the 136 lb chassis - 1/3 less than the heavier but stonger steel chassis." Like I said earlier, I'm not sure that 70 lbs saved (I know I said 40 earlier) is worth it if it means a more flexible chassis - not only from a control standpoint, but longevity reasons. I would suspect that for those of us who would actually buy one of these cars and put it to the use intended, that we wouldn't deal much with water, so eliminate the obvious advantage of no rust that an aluminum chassis has. You are left with a chassis that is more flexible, and aluminum fatigues quicker than steel does - If both frames flexed the same amount, the aluminum would fatigue quicker. But in this case, according to C&D, the steel chassis is stiffer also, so I stand by my statement. We've heard for years that the vettes were always a little too heavy, and I think Chevrolet had a goal to get the weight to the parameter people have been bandying about for all this time. I'd rather have the additional 70 lbs in a steel frame, or apply another strategic 30 to the aluminum one with proper supports/mounts for SCCA rollbar mounting (thanks Mike for the heads up on that - hadn't heard about the issue) to make it as stiff as the production chassis (without roolbar installed). In this case I will use the analogy of cars and women (male chauvinist pig that I am) and state that in both, losing TOO much weight can be a turn off...I like to be comfortable with the way they both feel.

5K is where the stock fuel maps start going lean. Get MSnS_E...

As others have stated more wordily - PCV=cleaner and longer lasting engine.

I had one magazine that stated that the schassis flexed a bit more than the production - maybe because of the bigger tires....

Actually, sequential turbo are very non-linear in their power curve, and difficult to control in racing (curves). Had a friend that has owned ttRX7's, Supras - he's got a Z06 now...