Michael

On matters where I’m reasonably competent, I prefer to work alone. But whenever I have doubts, especially in installing expensive parts where casual stupidity could cost me dearly, I would much rather seek the help of some one more experienced. I’ve found that the more I learn about engine theory, the more I doubt my capacity to execute engine practice. It’s almost as if ignorance really were strength. This is one reason why my engine sat abandoned and forlorn for three years. Then I found Denny, (Denny411 on Hybridz), who lives “nearby†(~90 miles). It’ll take many more weekends of joint work for my engine to finally run – but perhaps now it’s a matter of months, not decades. Pete Paraska and Mike Kelly have also been very helpful over the years. Like many people my age (30’s) I’m finding that time is more precious than it used to be, but a combination of luck and planning has somewhat lightened the financial burden. Often it strikes me that it would be more productive – and cheaper in the long run – to pay shop-rates for a professional to finish the job. But like many have said, can we really trust a “professional†with a unique custom car? And what happens to the achievement value, if you replace your hands and tools with a checkbook and credit card? I would much rather be in a friend’s shop and “helping outâ€, even if all that I’m doing is watching him work, than to completely farm out the work to a stranger. But the issue of working on cars alone vs. working with friends is much deeper than just the car hobby. Unfortunately as people move into the “family formation†stage of life, social interaction between acquaintances and even between friends becomes sporadic and strained. My wife and I made the decision not to have children, and this has done wonders for ensuring leisure time and leisure money, but few people in our demographic cohort have a comparable approach. It’s hard to find social interaction even to play bridge or go shooting, let alone to work on cars. My wife complains the she doesn’t have any friends – and women are supposed to be more social than men!

Mike – don’t interpret my disillusionment as a criticism of your car or your endeavors in car building. Bartman – in short, I have no background. My “racing†experience consists of exactly one 1/4-mile pass at the Pomona drag strip (Los Angeles), around 1998, in a 1987 Toyota Supra turbo. It ran 15.9 @86. But by then, the turbo wouldn’t boost past around 3 psi. So I have zero practical appreciation for what makes a race car fast, in any venue. All that I can draw upon, is what I personally find pleasurable in casual driving, in my hamfisted ways. And that comes down to on-demand throttle response at any rpm. Mike Kelly’s Corvette and Pete Paraska’s 327Z deserve full appreciation for what they were intended to be, but that appreciation is just not consistent with my juvenile fascination with meekly tapping the gas pedal and having the car violently lunge forward. Maybe I never properly learned to drive a manual transmission; 17 years and some 200,000 miles might not mean much, if I started with bad habits and never had occasion to improve them.

In the end, it all goes to heat, so why bother?

In the spring of 2000 I also “saw it comingâ€, and reduced my exposure to the market considerably. So far, so good. But in late 2000, when companies such as Dell, Lucent, Worldcom, AT&T, Cisco, Intel, and so forth, had lost >50% of their value from where they stood when the NASDAQ peaked, I came to think that the market has found the bottom, and bought very heavily into large-cap tech stocks. Of course, the rest was history! My Worldcom and Global Crossings “investments†went to zero, Dell eventually broke even, and the rest are somewhere in between. I did sell most of my tech mutual funds, and took the capital gains tax hit. And speaking of taxes, losses will bring many “happy†years of $3000 annual capital gains write-offs. “Buy, hold and diversify†should not be taken as a mantra. It is indeed far superior to many alternatives, but is by no means foolproof, and by no means necessarily the route to affluence, even over the proverbial long term. If there’s one thing that I learned, it’s that it is better to invest in index funds (several at once – S&P 500, overseas markets, etc.) than in actively-managed mutual funds. But even better than that, is getting the insider deal.

Mike, Of course your car – any car – will produce more torque in the rpm band where volumetric efficiency is highest. But we both agree that the whole point of a large V8 in a “relatively†light car is to avoid peaky response. Breadth over depth, you might say. Your Vette might reach 450 ft-lbs at 4500 rpm (or whatever it happens to be), but surely it’s making an honest 60% of that at 1000 rpm – right? Right? And even that should feel pretty stout. To better explain what I want in a car, here’s an analogy…. A moderately athletic adult human produces around 1/3 – 1/2 peak hp. That ain’t much. Power to wait ratio would be around 1:400! And quarter mile performance would be – well, right around 1 minute. But if you can run the 50-yard dash in, say, 7 seconds (this was reasonably good performance in junior high physical education class), you can probably accelerate from a walking pace to a hard sprint in only a few steps. You don’t need to “plan ahead†to achieve that acceleration. Your brain says, “Hey! Start running!†- and off you go. I would like a comparable “throttle response†in a car. It’s not about the 1/4-mile time, or the skidpad numbers. It’s that instant, ferocious, all-circumstance on-demand animal lunge forward – this is what I crave.

This thread reminds me of my test drive of a 1998 Z28 Camaro (the first year of the LS1). I was all excited about a reasonable (on paper) RWD stick-shift V8. The car was supposed to be a rocket. It wasn't. A couple of months ago Mike Kelly gave me a ride in his modified C5 Corvette. By all evidence his car is at the sweet spot of LSx streetable modification. But I was - underwhelmed. Whenever I come across a promising new car, invariably the euphoria fades after the first test drive, or in some cases even the first test ride. So I made the decision that it's pointless to salivate over OEM "performance" cars. I might as well drive an economy car and go for the reliability and low costs. And save aspirations of performance for the Z. Still, now that my Z is "finally" coming together, I'm worried that the acceleration will turn out to be a disappointment.

Numerous people have posted numerous times regarding optimal pushrod length and the need to check this length for engines with other than completely stock components. However, the criteria for “what is the optimum length†conflict, or in any case are ambiguous. For instance, some sources emphasize minimal total travel of the rocker tip over the valve stem, while others emphasize minimal travel over the portion of cam rotation where the respective valve is half opened to fully opened, while still other sources emphasize that the rocker/valve stem contact area should be as close to the center of the valve stem as possible. In my application the block has been decked, the heads are aftermarket (though valve lengths are evidently stock), the cam base circle is probably not stock (1.18â€), and I’m using Comp Cams roller rockers. However, with the stock pushrods, the rocker tips sweep an interval of about 0.070†width, right in the center of the valve stems. This is just pure luck. I did NOT have access to checking pushrods, but merely tried checking on a whim the valvetrain geometry with the OEM pushrods. So I got lucky. Now here’s the question – should I use proper checking pushrods and go through the exercise of checking valvetrain geometry ANYWAY, trying to drive the swept interval of rocker-tip-to-valve-stem contact even lower – or, should I leave well-enough alone? Is 0.070†a reasonable number, or can one do better? Keep in mind that every adjustment of pushrod length requires making sure that the intake and exhaust pushrods are in turn on their respective base circles of the cam, and then spinning the crank for two revolutions – not easy and very time consuming. The engine won’t see >6000 rpm, and probably not > 5500. So, there’s the issue of some adjustments being more trouble than they’re worth – unless one is pathologically curious….

Shouldn’t this be in the “fuel delivery†forum? Now that I’ve annoyed the original poster, here’s a related question… With electric fuel pumps typically one uses a pressure regulator and a return line, for example as in Grumpy’s diagrams in this thread, or in http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=108825 . And most people end up with an electric pump, either because they’re adapting a stock fuel tank with an internal electric pump, or are using JTR-type engine mounts which interfere with the stock Chevy mechanical fuel pump location. In my application there is no interference between the engine mounts and the stock fuel pump. (454 BBC mounted to the frame rails). I plan on using a Carter “street†mechanical fuel pump, rated at something like 110 gph at 6 psi, going into a 4160-style 750 cfm dual-feed, single power valve, vacuum-secondary Holley. This should be plenty, because, well, let’s do the calculations… a 0.030-over 454 at 6000 rpm at 90% volumetric efficiency (optimistic) uses about 43,000 ft^3 of air per hour, which at standard sea level is about 100 slugs of air, or around 3200 lbm of air (per hour, not per minute). Assuming 12.5:1 mixture and fuel density of 6.3 lbm/gal (should be close), this gives just over 40 gph fuel flow requirement, if fuel were being burned at a steady rate. In an actual fuel flow path, the various pressure drops might be such that to maintain continuity, the requisite pressure rise across the pump at equilibrium is greater than 6 psi, in which case the actual max fuel flow rate will be less than 110 gph (there’s a nearly inverse relationship between volumetric flow rate and pressure rise). But I’m still fairly confident that the 110 gph at 6 psi pump should be sufficient. I’m using a 3/8†fuel feed line. Now here’s my question: (1) with this combo, do I need a fuel pressure regulator at all? (2) I have a fuel cell with a built-in sump, but don’t plan on using a return line. Do I need a return line, after all? This thread: http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=106679 suggests that a return line is always a good idea, for heat-soak reasons.

Yup, you’re never too young or too old to start investing – which means that you’re never too young or too old to start losing money in the stock market! I’ve been working full-time and saving aggressively for almost 13 years – and I’m quite a few years younger than Mike. But in 2000-2003 I lost my a$$ in the market, and am only now crawling my way back to half-a$$. But there’s something to be said for a government job with a government pension. Unfortunately, unlike investments, defined benefit pensions are back-loaded. You don’t really get rewarded for starting early, but you really get penalized for finishing early. The way that defined-benefit pensions work (with the exception of the uniformed military), you’re better off messing around and being stupid in your 20’s and 30’s, then settling down for a stable job in your 40’s-60’s. Fortunately my wife still thinks that a Super-Value Meal is 5-star dining, and luxury living in Midwestern winters means turning up the thermostat to 60 deg F. With such moderate expenses, early retirement becomes possible, even with the pension penalty. But the real reason to retire is that work sucks, whether you work in the private sector or public sector, small business or large business, or even self-employed. Sometimes I think about getting a faculty position, but that probably sucks too. Then again, sitting at home sucks….

Widen it a bit, and drop in a V8! Why was I the first one to post that suggestion?

To add to the chorus… Depending on your circumstances, a slightly used Vette will actually cheaper than a LS1 240Z in the proverbial long run – if, that is, you want an all-around car that’s quiet, has A/C, stereo, etc. Of course, if you already have the tools, the time, the work area and the experience, the swap wins hands-down. If you want a maximum-effort bruiser built purely for acceleration, then the swap becomes considerably more attractive. But then, should you really be starting with an OEM engine?

We can distinguish two separate cultural trends here. Unfortunately it’s difficult to comment on either, without running afoul of our anti-politics dictates. The first is what some might regard as the recalcitrance of immigrants or foreigners in not bothering to make sincere effort to learn English; and similarly, the perceived excessive accommodation of this recalcitrance by the mainstream society. The second is shorter lag between youth generating a new slang, and the acceptance of that slang in the mainstream culture. That is, every generation had its rebels and its slang, but it seems that in the present generation the slang doesn’t pass through a stage of derisive dismissal, on its way to eventual acceptance. The common theme is that newcomers haven’t taken their lumps; they insist on society conforming to their demands, instead of vice versa. As a first-generation immigrant myself – whose native language is not English – I find myself torn between competing viewpoints. On the one hand, I take pride in having achieved a modicum of mastery in English, and find rather disappointing the dearth of comparable effort on the part of some of my peers. On the other hand, there is something distasteful in the rabid criticism of the new and the foreign, in a society whose very existence is predicated on affinity for change and rapid absorption of outside influences. Perhaps the compromise, as previous posters have noticed, is to censure (1) the obviously careless posters, and (2) those who contemptuously flaunt a membership in the latest clique with the latest colloquialism, who expect everyone else to realign their standards of discourse. Now would some one please explain to me, regarding the newfangled concatenated/phonetic typing (“u r†instead of “you areâ€, “becuz†instead of “becauseâ€, and so forth) – to what extent are these and related trends due to: (1) text messaging, instant messaging, etc. (2) video games (3) the latest urban slang, for example on the West Coast (4) pop/rap music

Is this really true? I thought that the assembly lines would be rolling at least through the completion of the 2006 model year. BTW I heard that GM has suspended plans for all of its sub-luxury RWD platforms. This means that the 2008/2009 Camaro is dead, as is an entry-level RWD sedan. Chevy and Pontiac will continue to offer V8 FWD sedans, but Corvette and Cadillac will be the only RWD. The reason, evidently, is the usual one: GM decided to concentrate on trucks and SUVs, which monopolize the RWD production lines. Regarding the aesthetics of the GTO – personally what I find among the most distasteful about modern cars is the garish exterior in anything with a claim towards performance. In my view, the GTO actually has too many scoops and swoops – rather than too few. One reason that I drive an older BMW is its demure styling. However, the GTO is far less obtrusive than the competitors, such as the Mustang, Subaru WRX, etc. But the main problem with the GTO isn’t its styling; it’s the weight. 3800 lbs? It could really benefit from losing 300-400 lbs. So maybe I’ll start talking myself into buying a new GTO, before they become defunct. One thing that I’ve learned from my adventures in tinkering with a V8 Z – some inspired, but most asinine – is that $30K for a turnkey 13.5-second car isn’t such a bad deal, especially if it has air conditioning and ungrudgingly starts on cold mornings. Not to change the subject of this thread too much – but it’s the indirect costs of doing a swap that matter most; tools, time, education, broken and incorrect parts. I “only†have about $15K in my Z, but vastly more than that in ancillary costs. In many regards I would have been money-ahead by buying a new, turnkey car. Evidently next month GM will be having another of their sales-boosting but profit-compromising sales.

And one of my first-ever posts happens to conclude the thread that Superdan posted above. Looking back, it’s curious how little has changed. For whatever reason, I often have the concluding post in a thread – same as ever. Am I scaring off follow-on posters? Were my words that dry and dreary? And then there’s the enthusiasm for theoretical solutions – what sounds clever in principle, but intractable in practice; this too has been a constant for me. So here I am, 6+ years later – still working on the SAME engine!

This is a fairly standard rendition (as such things go) of an all-aftermarket big block Chevy. For the claimed hp level and the displacement, it seems a little under-carbed and over-cammed, though of course that depends largely on what portion of the claimed hp is supported by the nitrous, vs. what portion is all-motor. At this level, typically the block would be aluminum, and often they get a dry sump, or at least one of those fancy billet oil pumps. Would be an interesting swap in a Z - with suitable chassis and suspension mods, of course.

Mike, congratulations on your progress! And here's to further success - more contracts, more billable hours, more rewarding quarterly statements in that 401-K plan (or whatever you self-employed guys call those things)! It's great that we have the enterprising folks willing to take such risks. That said, I'm looking at a lifetime of employment in the federal government. Especially in modern - and future! - times, one can't underestimate the importance of a guaranteed pension!

This thing needs a V8!

If you don't mind the weight, and want to stay with Ford, why not do a 460 big block? It's relatively inexpensive, aftermarket support is OK, and the width is probably less than the OHC 5.4.

This seems a little high. By “shellâ€, do we mean the removal of absolutely everything that is not welded together to form the unibody? The only “factual†basis that I have for my opinion is the following: removing the engine, transmission, and most underhood componentry from my ’78 280Z, but leaving intact the suspension, glass, interior (what’s left of it), and so forth – so, the car is a “roller†– one can, with a modicum of effort, lift up one of the front corners of the car by grabbing the corresponding fender lip. It’s possible to lift the corresponding tire about 2†off the ground.

Here’s a similar, though somewhat more benign situation…. A couple of years ago, on one of our semi-regular drives from Dayton, Ohio to Washington, D.C., my wife and I made a stop at a rest area in western Maryland. It’s the first rest area upon crossing the West Virginia/Maryland border, eastbound on I-68 into Maryland. Returning to our car and driving down the ramp back onto the highway, I noticed a car with its high-beams on, driving directly towards us – thus, the wrong way! Then the lights flashed – it was a cop. So naturally I stopped. Then, in the proverbial seemingly out of nowhere, another cop pulled up behind us, boxing us in. I tried to sit calmly, engine off, hands on the steering wheel. From the rear cruiser comes a voice on the intercom: “Step outside of the car, slowly, with your hands where I can see themâ€. I’m not making this up! So of course I complied. The rear cop walks up to me, pats me down, then starts shining a flashlight into the car. He notices my wife - she’s short, has dark hair, and was evidently not visible from behind the car (this was late at night) – and orders her to get out too. The cop from the cruiser parked in front of us then gets out, walking with a somewhat asymmetric posture. Before I even formed the question of why his right arm is behind him, he says, “I have a shotgun, so please keep stillâ€. At this point the situation seemed so surreal that it felt completely comical; scary, indeed – but so weird as to be comical. I mustered the courage to ask, “would you mind explaining to me what’s going on?†The first cop, who has been orbiting our car with his flashlight, said that they received a tip that a bearded man wearing a black jacket was prowling around the rest area brandishing a rifle. Feeling self-righteous, I calmly informed the cops that they’re welcome to search our car. The shotgun-carrying cop says: “Sir, we don’t need your permission, we’re going to search your car regardlessâ€. And so they did. And then they searched my wife’s purse (how does one conceal a rifle inside a purse?). And of course they found nothing, because at the time we owned no firearms. Then, never losing their peremptory haughtiness, they remarked, “you’re free to goâ€. I don’t recall them even having checked my driver’s license! Questions for the lawyers… 1. On what grounds did the cops have a right to treat us in this manner? Or to search our car? 2. Suppose that I did have a rifle – let’s say unloaded, and in the trunk – if that were the case, would I have gotten arrested? Or otherwise harassed? 3. If, for the sake of argument, the cops acted properly in pursuing a suspect (I have a beard and I was wearing a black jacket), what right did they have to search my wife’s purse?

Denny, good to see you finally posting again!!!! I might as well mention it publicly - for the past 2 years or so, I've been making the 90-mile drive to Wapakoneta every few months, to get Denny's help with my Z. It was only by his tutelage that I've been able to reassemble my car's suspension, get the short block built - and, maybe soon - get the engine running. And it was on the basis of his advice that I took my engine components to the machine shop, in the first place!

Good question! There are several possible reasons.... * Unlike in the muscle car or traditional hot-rod worlds, most of the folks on this forum are relatively young. Youth, like it or not, brings instability. The project car takes a back seat to college; lack of suitable garage space means that construction has to stop; parents’ or spouse’s objections shortcircuit the whole endeavor, and so forth. * Many HybridZ’ers are engineers, if not by professional occupation then at least by formal or informal training. Engineers like to tinker; once they get a project accomplished, they get bored and prefer to move onto to the next challenge. This, I think, is the reason why some of the most breathtaking swaps end up getting sold shortly after their completion. * Many folks have reached the conclusion that whereas Z’s are good all-around hobby cars, they don’t really excel at anything – at least not in stock form. If you want a good drag car, you eventually go elsewhere. If you want a good road-race car, you go elsewhere. If you want a comfortable GT cruiser – well, you know. So for many, Z’s were starter cars. After doing the Z swap, they went to something else. From time to time I question myself, “why bother with the Z� The answer comes down to the following: how many other relatively commonly available cars have the combination of aesthetic appeal, low stock curb weight, large engine compartment, relative mechanical simplicity and RWD. And of those, how many are old enough to be smog-exempt, yet modern enough to have front disk brakes, IRS, and so forth? This makes the Z a very natural swap candidate. Some day I’d like to build my own truly custom car – starting with absolutely nothing: design my own chassis, suspension, body lines, and so forth. Until then, there’s the Z. And if it takes me 30 years to finish this thing, so be it.

For those of us who don't participate in competitive motorsports, there's something to be said for the "feel" of hard acceleration and speed, vs. the actual numbers. Personally I find that a cushy (read, modern) car gives less visceral sensation of going fast, than a hollowed-out tin can with rattly exhaust and aluminum-foil doors that won't quite close properly. To each his own, of course - and I can't deny that the Gen III RX-7 is an impressive car, made yet more impressive with the LS-1 swap - but the older I get, the more affinity I feel with bare-bones, raw-knuckle cars ill suited to anything but the occasional storming down a deserted country road.

Autocad's principal advantage is that it is the most natural analog of old-school manual drafting. So if you learned drafting on a drafting board, Autocad is a good choice. Also, Autocad is very convenient for 2D drafting. Just be sure that 2D is really what you need, and not merely what you'd like to start out with. Solidworks has become the industry standard in most areas of mechanical engineering. As an Autocad to Solidworks convert, I've also had considerable trouble with the learning curve. The concept of parametric sketch is still counterintuitive to me, but automatic drawing of fasteners, for example, is very convenient. Both Autocad and Solidworks have tremendous support in user literature: "for dummies" manuals, and so forth. Also, the Solidworks user interface can be configured to sort-of emulate Autocad, complete with a command prompt. Niche industries such as aerospace have been using Catia or Unigraphics, because of their "lofting" features - that is, they perform complicated operations on compound curves semi-automatically. This is the one area in which Solidworks is still inferior, but it's growing fast. Pro-Engineer is the original parametric drafting program, but it's fast becoming overtaken by Solidworks. Bottom line - either Autocad or Solidworks. Final choice might come down to price/availability.

I agree that Roots blowers are not without problems, but the general concept of the car in this thread - tiny chassis, huge engine - is stylistically impressive nonetheless. The builder definitely gets my respect. That said, some relatively "minor" (given the level of effort already invested) modifications would tone down the visual cues, improve drivability and ultimately performance. For 500 hp in a 454, one would think that forced induction is unnecessary. With good heads, a roller cam and "proper component matching" (as the mantra goes), 500 hp with single n/a 4-barrel on a 4000-rpm torque peak and 6000 rpm redline doesn't strike me as at all exotic; at least, that's essentially the goal for my own car.