Michael

Just one question.... In the past two years, approximately how many Iraqis (soldiers and civilians) have been killed as a result of war, terrorism and/or insurgency?

Here’s something to ponder... Western Europe fought crusades against the Middle-Eastern Muslim world; America didn’t. Western Europe colonized Africa, the Middle East, and most of Asia – America didn’t. Western Europe redrew the map of the Middle East when the Ottoman Empire collapsed in 1918 – thus creating most of the modern Middle Eastern nation-states with the consequent state structure that offends tribal sensibilities so highly valued in the Middle East. Western Europe, even by modern American opinion, is morally and socially more lax (or more tolerant, if you prefer) than America – and hence, one would think, of greater threat to the “values†of fundamentalist Islam. It seems to me that Western Europe – and not the USA – is the greater antagonist to fundamentalist Islam, in terms of culture, lifestyle, values, tradition and direct influence. So if "they hate us for our values/freedom/lifestyle", why is fundamentalist Islimic hatred directed principally toward the USA???

Yeah, I get it now - those sleazy wops SHOT THEMSELVES, to score a public relations coup over the Americans. They fired 300-400 rounds, but missed all but one or two shots. Yup, that must be it. Those two-faced spineless Euro peaceniks always were up to no good.... Makes me so mad, I'm gonna go flush all my Chianti down the toilet.

I'm with Pete on this one. There is enormous advantage to BUILDING WHAT YOU KNOW. If you built your first engine in 1968, and it was a 327 that you built with your dad, chances are that you could extract more performance - reliably, smoothly and economically - from a Gen I SBC, than from the LS1/2. But, if your first-ever high performance car was a C5 Corvette, and you started using laptop computers before you learned to distinguish a socket wrench from a box wrench, chances are that you would be more comfortable with the LS1/2.

While I definitely agree with others' posts that school should be one's first priority, please keep in mind that it's false to assume that some short period of time after your formal schooling is over, you'll be able to jump back into the car-hobby and restart where you left off. Simply put, life gets in the way. After college there's grad school, after grad school there's the need to pursue one's career. And for some people there's family. After living for years in dorms and apartments, you'll probably find yourself yearning for a house, for a place with a garage where you could comfortably work on cars. And that's fine. But again, keep in mind - once you buy that house, mortgages and house maintenance will take precedence. Hey, I bought a house with the primary purpose of having a place to work on my Z - but instead of working on my Z, I'm more often fixing leaks, tending the grounds and doing general maintenance around the house. So here's the punchline: you made a wise choice to shelve the car hobby in favor of more pressing matters. But realize that that shelving might be for much longer than just the four years of college. After all, there's a reason that the hot rod hobby is dominated by people aged 60+.

Pyro, There are two good reasons for doing a BBC swap: 1. You happen to have a long personal history with BBC’s, know them well, and can build them well. 2. You really really really like low-end torque. That 500hp/500 ft-lb SBC won’t have the low-end torque unless it also has the displacement – which IS admittedly possible today, but a 454 SBC will cost MUCH more than a 454 BBC. My longstanding goal has been to build a car that pulls like a locomotive in the 600-2000 rpm range. Can I get that with a LS1 without power-adders? The BBC is heavier and it is wider, but aluminum heads definitely help. As does aft firewall relocation. I’ll be the first to admit that a BBC hybridZ is a difficult undertaking and for most circumstances a poor allocation of effort. But not for all circumstances! Granted, at “streetable†power levels the SBC makes more sense for most folks, unless reason #1 above applies. Certainly I have profound regrets about going BBC myself, but not because of the weight or installation issues – it’s because of the poor parts availability and high parts costs. The aftermarket – at least that portion that caters to amateurs – has largely foresworn big blocks. Increasingly, guys who build big blocks either do it for the muscle car nostalgia, or they’re pros racing 7-second drag cars. Neither description fits the “sportsman†drag racer. However, if you don’t like turbos, nitrous or blowers, want to run low-octane gas and want on-demand torque even though you’re in the wrong gear, a BBC is hard to beat.

Mike, Is the T5 bellhousing special to the T5, or is it generic to 60’s-70’s GM 4-speeds? If the latter, then another option is the Richmond gear transmissions. But you probably didn’t want to hear that....

In hindsight, it would have been good if you had the heads flow-benched at your local machine shop before commencing the porting/polishing job. And then one more time, after the job is complete. Sure, there are the published flow numbers, but all flow benches and testing methods are a little different, and a clean before/after comparison would have been greatly useful! For my 236 heads, I obtained less from my porting job than I had hoped – but I didn’t do a “before†test either, so it’s unscientific.

Hmm..., that one's new to me, and I thought that I'd seen them all. On this site, Ron Jones, Ratsun and myself have BBC Z's. Another is currently under construction (can't recall the member's name). Another BBC (blue, used to have a blower) has since been converted to SBC.

If the engine is idling smoothly, yet lacks power at EVERY rpm, chances are that it's not the carb. Some years ago I test-drove a Norskog (similar to Scarab) 240Z conversion - it was a 327 or maybe a 350, with some sort of 5-speed (probably a T5). That thing was incredibly sluggish at every speed. I mean, it was slower than my Corolla; it felt like it had maybe 40 hp. Some engines are just dead tired. Maybe the rings are shot, the cylinder walls scored and the (like already mentioned above) the cam lobes are worn off. My 280Z has a 454, originally from a 1978 Suburban. For whatever reason, it wiped maybe half of the cam lobes. Some were so bad that the lobes were worn clear down to the base circle! The engine sounded horrible, backfired all the time, and eventually sent flames through the carb. It ran on maybe 5 cylinders, and of those, maybe 2 were seeing correct valve opening and closing events. And this was in an engine that was originally rated at a whopping 215 hp. Nevertheless, if I mashed the throttle off the line, the torque was enough to swing the back end out. Morals of the story: 1. A large displacement engine in a light car can be in unbelievably bad condition and still produce enough power to deliver impressive acceleration. 2. An engine can sound like it's OK, idle like it's OK, have exhaust like it's OK, and still have such devastating problems that power is miserably low.

Automatic vs. stickshift is one of the great perennial debates, but the thing to keep in mind is that for a torque-challenged engine, either transmission will require effort to use the hp-band effectively (much of this effort is transparent with automatics), whereas for a high-torque engine, gear selection is less important and gear changes are less frequent. So, regardless of your eventual choice of transmission, the LS1's driveability will be better than the TT rotary's.

Even at 34 mpg fueling up is getting expensive. In the winter/spring of 2002 gas prices bottomed out in the Midwest. 87 octane could be found for $0.89/gal. Granted, those prices were aberrant by historical standards, but even so, a >2X run-up in less than 3 years is pretty steep seat-of-the-pants inflation. One curious thing about the American petrolium market is that diesel is more expensive than premium unleaded, whereas in Europe (and probably also the rest of the world) diesel is cheaper than the lowest grade of gasoline.

One of Autocad's advantages is that it allows you to type commands from a prompt at the bottom of your screen. If you want to draw a circle, just type "circle" - no need to remember pulldown menus and sub-menus.

280Z's are much cheaper and easier to find than 240Z's. When I lived in Los Angeles (1995-2000) I'd regularly find in the Recycler newspaper ads for 280Z's (confirmed by later seeing the car in person) in reasonable condition (minor rust, cracked dash, worn interior, but runs OK) for $1500 or so, and often under $1000. Really nice ones sold for around $2500. 240Z's were a completely different story. Rustbuckets with gallons of Bondo cost $1500, and decent cars were $3000 and up. Since then, 240Z's have appreciated, but 280Z's probably have not.

It is indeed a good treatment of the subject. Now here's the big question: do we regard the author as a liberal, or a conservative?

Creepy... Here in Southwest Ohio, gas prices literally jumped on Thursday from around $1.90/gal for 87-octane, to $2.10. Although in this area it's common for gas stations to jack up the prices on Thursday and reduce them again on Sunday, after the previous weekend's jacking prices declined only about $0.10, and now they're within about a dime of their all-time record for this area. One hears all sorts of explanations, all having to do with the spike in oil prices. One is the continuing decline in the value of the dollar, especially in relation to the Euro. Another is that OPEC trying to make a fast buck again. Another is yet one more story about crises in Iraq, or instability in Russian oil production (they're a major player now, second only to Saudi Arabia). And a forth is explanation is that it's just pure speculation. Either way, it's bad news.

Why don't you convert the Rabbit to RWD?

Your first challenge will be locating a suitable Z-car. In the Midwest (Kentucky is almost the Midwest) first-generation Z's are very rare. In the 5 years that I've lived in southwestern Ohio, I've never seen one on the street.

It all depends on your application. For a street car, it's entirely possible to have a 400 ft-lb engine with no subframe connectors, no cage, and no strut tower braces - and not notice any problems - if the car's performance is never tested in a controlled situation. On the other hand, skilled drivers will notice chassis flexure even at much lower torque levels, for example in road racing. Probably the best approach is to build the engine and drivetrain, install everything in the car as-is, drive it, and then use your judgment on what structural improvements are required.

E36 3-series BMWs (1992-1999) are becoming a pretty good deal. If you want a RWD sedan or coupe – and especially if you want manual transmission – there aren’t many alternatives, at any price range. Rumor is that BMWs are definitely less reliable than Japanese cars, and on par (or slightly better) than Detroit products. The problem is that parts are MUCH harder to find than even for Japanese imports, and various quirks in German thinking make even simple repairs relatively difficult (example – replacing the fuel filter). So when they do break, fixing them is a chore. Known weak points are the water pump (plastic blades break off), fan clutch (sticks, so the fan is always spinning, and the coolant temperature stays low), engine management computer, induction coils (intermittent failure – computer doesn’t register a trouble code, but ain’t no spark in that cylinder), the aforementioned brake warning light, and occasional poor workmanship in interior trim (for the earlier models). Pre-1997 6-cylinder cars don’t have much torque below 3000 rpm. Automatics from that era (not sure about 1997-up) have significantly worse published acceleration specs than manuals. Weight specs are ambiguous; some sources cite 2866 lbs for the 1992 318, ~3050 for the 1992 325, and about 100lbs weight gain for 1995-up. A friend of mine weighed his 1997 M3 – came out to around 3150 lbs. Other sources cite similar numbers as the above, but with a full gas tank (that’s about 100 lbs difference). 1993-up cars have “VANOS†(variable valve timing of sorts) – it’s supposed to increase midrange torque. Mine is a 1992 325is, 5-speed – bought last spring for $4600, 110K miles. E36 BMWs have comparable acceleration to 3.0L V6 Hondas, Toyotas and Nissans of the late 1990’s, but overall “driver feel†is superior. They’re not the best value if you just want a comfortable, well-performing compact sedan or coupe, but like I said, if you want RWD and don’t want a Mustang or Camaro, there really is no alternative in the American market.

It all depends on your objective. If your objective is success in competitive racing, the “quality of one’s equipment†is secondary to the quality of one’s skills. If your objective is pleasing yourself upon mashing the gas pedal – any gear, any rpm – on a deserted backroad in some forlorn countryside – then high torque, low weight and good traction are what matter. And there’s no such thing as “too much†torque. If my car’s eventual engine lives up to the promise of its chassis, and the tires and suspension can reliably put the proverbial power to the pavement, the car would probably achieve single-digit 1/4-mile times. But so what? That is not my objective. Racing is fine, and I respect those persons who achieve competitive success in racing – in any class. But if we limited ourselves to building machinery consistent with our skills as drivers, or our needs as operators, we’d generally be driving Cavaliers and Neons – or in some cases, lawn tractors.

Please don't take this personally, but if you possess the skills, experience and resources to complete this project in a reasonable amount of time (years, not decades) and reasonable cost (10's of thousands $, not hundreds of thousands $), then you probably already know what strategy is best, without needing advice from others. That said, the general consensus is to ALWAYS start with a solid car as the basis for your hybrid, rather than repairing a severely ailing car. Repairing a car in poor condition - for purposes of becoming a reliable, high-performance vehicle - only makes sense if the particular car happens to be very rare, or your access to other candidate cars is severely limited.

Some others... Will the JTR kit work in a 280ZX/300ZX? Who makes a bolt-on roll cage for my Z? What 5-speed transmission can I use/can handle the power/is cheapest What's the absolute minimum cost for a bare-bones V8 swap? How long does it take? What quarter mile times do you guys get? Will my car beat a Mustang/Camaro/EVO/DSM?

More on the Pro Topline heads... I found some flow numbers for the Pro Topline 320cc heads. I don't know to what extent the flow would differ for the 290cc heads - hopefully, the only significant difference would be at the upper extreme of valve lift. lift intake exhaust e/I 0.1 75 62 0.827 0.2 158 118 0.747 0.3 230 160 0.696 0.4 286 195 0.682 0.5 342 229 0.670 0.6 380 248 0.653 0.7 403 265 0.657 Intake flow compares favorably to ALL oval port heads (including AFR 265cc) at 0.600" lift and above. Below 0.600", the AFR's flow better. The Pro Toplines also beat most rectangular port heads with intake volume below 340cc. The only downside is the slightly weak exhaust numbers (relative to the intake numbers) - e/I ratio could be better (AFR's get around 0.80). Certainly the idea of an aggressively split-pattern cam makes sense. I'd also consider some exhaust porting. How far did they raise the exhaust port location above stock? Most aftermarket BBC heads, except for Edelbrock, raise the exhaust ports 0.300" or more, for improved flow. Sometimes this causes header clearance issues.

Those headers look very similar to Hooker block-huggers. If the, the driver's side should clear OK, but on the passenger's side the collector will interfere with the frame rail. This happened with my car, and my 454 is centered in the engine compartment; in the JTR method, it's shifted over the the passenger's side by something like 3/4". My solution (or rather, the solution of the guy who did the roll cage install in my car) was to notch the frame rail, then weld in a sheet metal patch. Now the collector cleared the frame rail, but the collector flange was still in the way. This was solved by cutting off the collector flange, welding in an extension to the collector, with a 90-degree smooth bend, then welding the collector flange onto the end of the bend. It's still a tight fit around the starter (I should get a ministarter), and definitely causes heatsoak problems, but clears the frame rails OK.