Michael

Many things begin tentatively and tritely, so why not this? For over 10 years I have been tinkering with my Datsun, first as a newbie owner of a dilapidated stocker, then as a customer of a semi-pro building who did a fantastic job on a roll cage and V8 swap – only to find myself unable to deal with what really amounts to car maintenance, rather than car building. Over the years moved from California to the Midwest, bought a house in the countryside with a long driveway for burnouts and plenty of garage space, but my skills have not improved, and my motivation has atrophied. And no, I can’t blame family tensions or job loss or dementia (at least not yet); some of the greatest obstacles are emotional, ineffable, divorced from practical constraints or logic. So here’s hoping for a less whiny and more productive 2010. And here’s hoping that EVERYONE has a better year and even better years ahead!

Simple quarter-mile performance calculators assume that horsepower application is a constant. Then they multiply by a penalty factor to crudely account for the engine's torque curve, traction losses and gear shifts. What this means in practice is that "proper gearing" is that gearing for which the engine is kept maximally close to its power peak for as much of the race as possible. Too steep a gear would require an upshift too early, while too shallow a gear means loss of time while the engine struggles at rpm below its power peak. The problem with all of this reasoning is that it applies to skillful drivers who shift correctly, and to well-sorted cars which achieve predictable traction. Being a lazy and conservative driver I almost invariably prefer steep gears, because they produce the grin-inducing (but not necessarily race-winning!) burst of acceleration on demand, even in the wrong gear.

How about the 1999 AMG C43 (W202)? It’s a V8 and may be early enough to avoid significant Chrysler influence. Many C43s are selling or below $10K now; some well below. In fact, I’m surprised that so few folks on HybridZ own AMG’s. Is it the lack of appeal of a “factory†hot rod, when one can build a better/cheaper one by oneself? AMGs are overpriced when new, but depreciate remarkably quickly. They lost half of their value by age 4. My daily driver is a BMW 325is (E36), but at the risk of being branded a heretic here, I must admit that I’ve never particularly cared for inline-6 engines. They just seem long, ungainly and heavy. But having driven comparable BMWs and Mercedes back to back, my impression is that BMW emphasizes higher-rpm horsepower whereas Mercedes is more about low-end torque… which is my preference too. Thus the interest in the Mercedes. So how about the C-class AMGs, especially the C43? Reliability issues, in particular?

I haven't changed the oil in my 1992 BMW for about 15,000 miles, and have not intention of ever changing it. The car just passed 200K miles and is threatening to fall apart across multiple fronts, of which engine failure is but one of many. So we'll see how long it takes before bearing failure etc. I'll take detailed photos once the damage happens!

"'95 M3 with Modified 6.6L LS2, T56, for sale, runs and drives…" VERY impressive project, and within reasonable driving distance for me to observe in person - unfortunately the linked thread now states that the car is disassembled and only the shell remains. This whole LSx-E36 concept... definitely a brilliant, well-rounded solution! Now to go looking for completed projects on Craigslist....

Another option is to weld boxed sheet-metal mounting towers to the frame rails, in the vicinity of the stock reinforcements for the tension/compression rods. Then you can use conventional rubber motor mounts and relieve the steering crossmember from engine-support duty. I'm not aware of any "kit" for this, but it should be easier than making motor plates, and more functional for the street.

I had a 1987 MK III turbo (5-speed) in the late 1990's. It was comfy, quiet and a great highway cruiser, but felt bloated, and decidedly lacked low-end torque. Head gasket blew twice. This was the car that perpetually gave a sour taste in my mouth regarding turbos. In fact for a while I was very interested in doing a Chevy V8 swap in the Supra! Stock boost is around 6 psi. Over 40K-50K miles of relatively gentle driving, max boost decayed to around 2 psi. But other than the head gasket the car was quite reliable. 3600 lbs!!!

Yes, the key is experience. A person with an extensive record in automotive mechanics could indeed do a mild Z V8 swap without much tribulation or cost. But would such a person need to ask routine questions about parts interchange, fitment, cost, etc.? No. Such people simply show up on Hybridz one day, annoucing their build. For many people here, the Z is their first foray into automotive mechanics, beyond changing brake pads and alternators. But as I posted above, even veteran mechanics can run into serious problems with ostensibly basic builds. Don't disregard the luck factor! And speaking of wiped cams, the Chevy big block is notorious for them. The owner of one of local hot rodding shops, Kammer and Kammer (Huber Heights, Ohio) freely admits that he has suffered cam lobe wipes in customers' cars far too regularly. He is far from inexperienced, and every such mistake costs him financially.

"I don't really see where you could run into a "costly dead end" with a carb'd v8 swap" Here's how.... - get a running engine from a junked vehicle. Decide that because it came from a truck, it would be a wise move to swap the cam (mild hydraulic flat-tappet). I mean, who wouldn't change the cam when swapping an engine from a 70's truck??? Do the swap, break in the cam... and promptly wipe it. - tear down the engine and find metal shavings all over the place, from the wiped cam and lifter lobes. - do a complete rebuild. Home-port the heads. Porting job goes well. Take it to a local shop with a flow bench. Flow bench test shows decent results. Take heads to machine shop for pressing-in new valve guides. Machine shop promptly cracks the heads. - buy new aftermarket aluminum heads. Might as well get a nice custom-ground mechanical roller cam. And an adjustable timing set for said cam. - assemble engine. Runs fine. Remove cam cover for some tuning... and find that the bolts on the adjustable timing set backed out, ate into the aluminum timing cover and sent shavings all over the engine. Rebuild #2? And I know of a fellow on this site - who I consider to be nearly a professional-quality mechanic, with a gorgeous Z - who went through at least THREE rebuilds - all on a fairly basic carbed SBC (OK, mine was a BBC).

The biggest cost is not the parts that you installed, but the parts that did not fit, that broke, that would not function well together, that had to be replaced/rebuilt etc. If this were a step-by-step assembly exercise, then costs could be accurately estimated and kept under control. But it's not! It is a RESEARCH PROJECT, even if you follow the JTR plans. Why? Because unless you are a seasoned mechanic, you will frequently run into costly dead ends and will overlook seemingly minor anomalies that cascade into critical failures. Also keep in mind that few swaps have a genuinely stock engine. Add the cost and frustration of building a custom engine to building a custom car. Yes, there are shining examples of superb builds at low cost, but for each of those I would wager that there are five >$10K cars still on jackstands!

Part of the purpose of punishment is supposed to be deterring hypothetical criminals for committing future crimes, by beholding the sad fate of those already convicted. Some it’s about prevention, not retribution. This may work to some extent for thing such as stiff DUI penalties, but I don’t think that it will help to clean up the financial world. No matter how Medieval we might get on this guy, the upside potential of fraud and nefarious machinations still outweighs the downside. It’s hard to consistently beat the stock market, and these days even by tracking the stock market it’s hard to beat the returns that one gets from burying one’s money in the back yard and forgetting about “making your money work for youâ€. But people can and do try. Many will attempt to cheat their way to profit, punishment or no punishment. The real financial tragedy in the past 15 years has been the lack of good things in which to invest. I remember griping a few years ago on this board how the local real estate market where I live (Dayton, Ohio) is so stagnant or even declining, while people on the coasts are making a killing just by staying in their dumpy old cottage, let alone by speculating in real estate. I was excoriated for my idly cursing the darkness, instead of getting off my lazy butt and finding real estate opportunities a few states over. That was oh-so-2006! Where is that advice-giver now? He was no fool or gambler; but I’ll wager with no fear of foolishness that he has less money now than he did 10 years ago. If even the wise and the longsuffering systematically suffer misfortunes, how can we not expect greedy charlatans to swoop in to take advantage of the less wise and the less knowledgeable investors? No amount of regulation or stiffening of penalties will fix that.

Congrats to all the happy new owners of BMWs! I bought a 1992 325is about 5 years ago; had 110K miles then, and about 190K miles now. Reliability has been moderately good; only major repair was the clutch throwout bearing. However, I have low standards; as minor electrical components and interior trim fail, I just ignore them. These cars make decent highway cruisers, suffering from the usual drawbacks of cars in their teenage years… road noise is getting harsh, air conditioning is wheezy, stereo is failing, clearcoat is flaking off, shocks need to be replaced, and so forth. One gets what one gives. My main complaint on this car is the lack of low-end torque. Long-time HybridZ members know that I’m a lazy and unskilled driver, who would rather cart and whine than strive for self-improvement, and therefore I should probably be driving a diesel pickup with a slushbox…. but that said, on the 1992 325is (before VANOS and all those midrange torque augmentation bits) you really have to whale on the rpms to get the car moving. Handling, however, is almost as good as the hype. My second complaint is the rather mediocre mileage. Even in lazy highway cruising, 25 mpg is about the upper bound. In urban stop-and-go traffic, you’re looking at under 20 mpg. For a 3000 lb car with a rated 189-hp engine, this is poor mileage. Late 1990’s M3s are really coming down in price. The local Craig’s List has a 1999 M3 for $7500. Not having much need for transporting passengers, what would most interest me is the BMW M-coupe – basically the hard-roof version of Mike Kelly’s erstwhile heartthrob. I like their aesthetics and interior layout. But these cars are probably rarer than even M5’s, and carry a hefty premium.

Yes, many V8 conversion projects suffer from interminable garage-queen status. But is that due to the swap itself, or issues with the engine? I return to my earlier point: the swap itself is not difficult. The difficult part is starting with an empty shell of a Z, and building a hot rod out of it… including assembling an engine from scratch. If you have to build a turbo L28 from scratch, would it be any easier than a Detroit V8? If you can find a cheap but complete and running vehicle with the engine of your choice, then that’s a superb swap candidate – V8, turbo, V6, whatever. I’m really not a turbo guy at all, but if I came across a $1000 turbo 280ZX, I’d buy it and would consider it as a serious swap candidate, just because it is so much easier to mate two running vehicles than to build one running vehicle from scratch. So the enduring lesson here is: complete, reliable recipient car + complete, running, reliable donor car with suitable engine = low-cost, low-effort, highly successful swap However… Recipient car with lots of problems and/or “upgrade needs†+ pile-of-parts for swapping = high cost and years of headaches. The particular choice of engine is itself secondary!

Actually, there is a "best". The best engine is the one with which you are most familiar, from your prior hot-rodding efforts and experience as a mechanic. If that's some compact 4-cylinder with a turbo, then that's the best engine for your swap. If it is a pushrod V8 from a major American manufacturer, then that's your engine. If it is a Toyota or a Jeep or a Packard L6, then that's your engine. From my experience, the hard part is not the swap itself, but the care and feeding of your engine. No "stock" engine will ultimately be satisfying, so plan your swap around your engine upgrades, rather than around the vehicle into which the engine will be swapped. Knowing your way around that particular engine will make the swap smoother and more satisfying, even if your preferred engine is not the most powerful or the most-supported by the aftermarket.

All sorts of arguments can be made about the aesthetics of the headlight placement, the airdam, the windshield and so forth, but the broader question is: does this car succeed as a true light-weight 2-seater? We have lots of "sports cars" these days, with admirable performance... but most are north of 3300 lbs. It has become essentially impossible to find anything <2500 lbs, unless it is a Lotus or some dilapidated econobox. So if this new orange car is truly light weight, then three cheers! - regardless of what it looks like!

A few months ago I was in Melbourne, Australia. RWD Holdens where everywhere... coupes, utes, and sedans. None were particularly beautiful, but the performance was great for what's really intended as basic transportation. My main data point was riding in a colleague's 4.0L I6 ute. GM's overseas brands are mostly higher-quality, higher-style and better performance than what we get in the US. This holds for Vauxhall (England), Opel (Germany, continental Europe) and Holden. I've driven many rental cars on business trips to Europe, and none were dissappointments. All were superior to Cavalier/Malibu types of vehicles on US rental car lots. A good example was the Opel Vectra GTS, which is only a FWD 2.3 I4, but easily held 220 km/h without groans or scary manners. GM would do better by reorganizing its American operations on the basis of Opel and Holden!

240Hoke is exactly right about the math. Some of you more hands-on types might get by with a few handbooks and practical know-how, but the other side of engineering is the fundamental sciences, and that is all highly mathematical – even with today’s computational resources. I do engineering-research (aerospace) for the federal government. There is a lot of overhead, euphemistically called “program managementâ€, but the fun part is that I essentially have my own lab – a “water tunnel†where I run various experiments. After many years of graduate school, I still often feel like I’m in school, because the daily work is very academically-oriented. Depending on how the various career threads spin, eventually I might look for a professorship somewhere – if I can get tenure without having to struggle for it! Public-sector vs. private-sector employment is its own debate – many pros and cons. But in this economy, a public-sector job trumps the many indignities of working for “the manâ€.

I just bought a 1987 NA 300ZX automatic for my wife as a daily-driver. Her commute is 25-miles each way, 4 days a week. The car has some rust and 180K miles, but the price was low and the interior is in great condition. The hope is that it will last for 8-10 months without major maintenance. It idles at 2500 rpm and lurches sharply when the transmission is put in gear. The exhaust leaks, the hood hydraulic posts are shot, and the a/c is depleted… but even so, it’s pleasurable to drive, and at least FEELS like a sports car. I miss that feeling, driving family sedans and economy cars. For me the Z31’s are a good compromise for daily or semi-daily drivers: cushy enough for regular commuter driving, but old enough to feel like a “sports carâ€. I have no performance aspirations for this car, and no intention of modifying it. But, by way of comparison, it is noticeably faster than my 1992 BMW 325is, which currently has 185K miles, and is fading fast. I doubt that it will make it past 200K without major maintenance – which I’m unwilling to perform. As I often say, if you prefer RWD and don’t want a truck, but prefer something reasonably economical, the choices are small and are diminishing every year, as 80’s and even 90’s cars disappear. I drive rental cars frequently on business trips, and am continually impressed by the acceleration of modern V6 family sedans – Maxima, Taurus, Malibu and the like – but to me, there is something emotionally unacceptable about FWD.

I guess that I'll take my turn at asking what's hopefully a serious, practical question.... It has to do with oil leaks. As Grumpy already knows, I have a Mark IV 454-based big block, originally from a 1978 Suburban. The block is 0.030-over, decked, but otherwise stock. The crank is ground 0.020" on the mains and balanced, but otherwise stock. The rods are resized and fitted with ARP bolts, but otherwise stock. The oil pump is Moroso something-or-other high volume (sorry, can't recall the PN) with a pickup welded out-of-the-box. The oil pan is a Hamburger 8-quart, and uses a single-piece gasket from Napa. I have a stock 8" damper. Now the question... whenever I spin the oil pump with a drill, there is a significant leak of oil from the back end of the oil pan. It is not profuse, but enough to make a foot-wide puddle after 15 minutes of vigorous spinning of the pump and turning of the crank with a wrench. I can not, however, find an obvious area of the oil pan where oil would be dripping. The flywheel and the surrounding area, to the extent that it is visible, is however moist with oil. Do I have a leak through the rear main seal? Or can another cause be impugned? The engine has a total of 43 miles on it, and has not been run in 2-3 years. And would the leak go away if the engine is actually running, instead of being hand-cranked, because of net suction inside the oil pan? I most definitely do NOT want to do another rebuild, as it will have been the 4th rebuild so far (so, that averages 10 miles per rebuild!!!). BTW the oil windage screen is 3/8" above the sump floor - I verified with clay. And the oil pressure rises to 60 psi about 3-4 seconds after I start spinning the pump with the drill motor.

A truly stock engine pulled out of a car that’s cheap enough to sacrifice for a swap – in other words, a 1970’s-1980’s clunker – will NOT be a “high performance†model and will probably be quite worn. Doesn’t matter if it’s a Chevy or a Ford or a Ferrari engine – it probably will not be all that “fastâ€. And it may not even run. The JTR book refers to stock engines in good mechanical condition – which may not have been such a rare find in the mid-1990’s, when the intro to that book was probably written. Not so anymore. An engine swap by itself – into a 280Z that is itself otherwise stock – will not be a performance panacea. That would require modding the engine. Which brings me to my point: modding the engine can and generally is a bigger project than doing the swap itself. It will cost more and will consume more time. Engine mounts, radiator mounts, fuel line routing, subframe connectors, custom shifter – these really aren’t that hard or that expensive, even if you have a custom installation. But building a custom engine can easily cost more than the rest of the swap put together – and can take longer!

If you get a “5” on your AP exam for Calc BC, that should get you out of the entire freshman calculus sequence in college. In college, freshman classes are poorly taught. Most high school math teachers will care vastly more about the subject and about their students, than would the graduate students who teach freshman calc in college. And once you graduate, take multi-variable and/or linear algebra at the community college over the summer. AE is a risky engineering discipline! You’re tied to the defense sector, will have limited choices for geographic mobility and a very tough time getting interviews at the college career center. Consider EE instead.

ZZZeee-my TSP is also split evenly across C/S/I funds, and the losses since October 2007 are knocking on 50%. I'm approaching the midpoint of my career, and should have been more conservative with my investments. It would definitely have been wiser to stay in CDs or the equivalent of CDs. If you're just starting out, your portfolio will grow much more from additional savings than from return on your investment. Consider: if you have saved $5K starting last year, and earn 10% return, you'll make $500 this year. But you will have saved an additional $5K this year. Now suppose that you've been doing this for 20 years. If you save that same $5K this year, that's great, but it is a relatively small contribution, compared to that mythical 10% rate of return on what you've already saved from prior years. So the paradox is that when you are younger and can most afford to take risks, the benefit of a high return isn't that much. But when you are older and can afford less risk taking, the opportunity cost of not taking risks is higher!