Michael

Returning to the original theme in this thread... 1. As engine displacement increases, hp/L tends to decrease – regardless of what it says on the name badge. It’s a basic consequence of things like flame-front travel, filling and emptying the combustion chamber, piston speed for a given rpm, and so forth. For example, engines in the sub-cubic-inch displacement category, for radio-controlled model airplanes, easily make 2 hp/in^3 (4-strokes) and can reach 6 ph/in^3 (2-strokes) n/a. At the opposite extreme, consider the large marine engines (battleships, tankers) – they probably make less than 0.1 hp/in^3. So, it stands to reason that a 7L V8 would have a lower hp/displacement ratio than a 2.0L I4. 2. European (and probably Japanese) driving is more suited to high-hp driving, deemphasizing low-end torque, whereas American driving is the opposite. My recent driving experience in Germany was quite eye-opening. In-town, streets are narrow, crowded, and winding. Traffic patterns are difficult to navigate, and favor the convenience of pedestrians and public transportation, not motorists. There isn’t much opportunity to gun the engine from a standing-start, so low-end torque is of limited use. But on the highways I was cruising along at a steady 200 km/h, with the engine at something like 5000 rpm. In the U.S., the streets – urban, suburban, rural – were built for cars, not people or busses. Low-end torque is important to accelerate, to pass one’s fellow motorists, to get from stoplight to stoplight. But our highways theoretically top out at 65 mph. Well, the point is that small-displacement engines can do quite OK for high-end hp, at the expense of low-end torque. But cubic inches are hard to beat for n/a low-end torque. The choice of engine architecture – high-winding small-displacement vs. lower-rpm large-displacement – has much to do with the respective driving style in the market where the car was produced. What surprises me is that European and Asian manufacturers have only recently started designing cars specifically for the U.S. market. True, Toyotas, Nissans etc. destined for U.S. import were always a bit different from their domestic-market brethren, but the differences were relatively minor. It’s only in the past 10 years or so that Camry’s have had about the same engine displacements as Tauruses. The typical 80’s and early-90’s imported family sedan had a 2-2.5L 4-cylinder, vs. its American counterpart’s 3-3.8L V6. This disparity still sticks in our memory, despite is relative disappearance in recent years.

I have a 454 BBC in my 280Z. As mentioned already , it will fit, but will require some cutting and welding. With the engine dropped low enough such that the bottom of the bellhousing hangs just slightly below the frame rails, a 3â€-high drop-base air cleaner on a Holley 4160-type carb on an Edelbrock Performer-RPM intake will stick about 1†above the hood. A low-rise intake might actually clear the stock hood – barely. It’s not necessarily true that running a big block is the death knell for road-racing and handling in general. With any V8 swap, you’re automatically in a SCCA class where being competitive is basically impossible. From that point of view, a big block is no worse than a small block. Good handling – in terms of good front/rear weight distribution and low polar moment of inertia – will probably require relocating the firewall. And the engine will have to be mounted to the frame rails, not to the steering crossmember (as JTR does it for small blocks). Aluminum heads also help. So why go big block? Well, the best reason is if you’re already experienced with big-block muscle cars, and want to carry that experience over to Z’s. Many veteran engine builders prefer big blocks, for their added durability in stock or nearly stock form, for the opportunity for much more efficiency cylinder heads, for the tolerance for more aggressive cams. But it’s definitely lots more work in a Z swap. Examples of successful BBC swaps on this site include Brad Barkley and Ron Jones. Ron’s car ran something like 8.60 in the quarter mile. Both cars were dedicated dragsters, with solid rear end swaps. Mine still retains the original rear end, 3.54 R200. But my car only ran about 20 miles, on a stock 454, before I wiped the cam. For the past 4 1/2 years I have been rebuilding the engine....

If you’re new to Z-cars, and especially if you’re new to high performance cars, sports cars or “hot rodsâ€, it’s almost impossible to “get it right the first timeâ€, even if you plan rigorously, budget carefully and search tenaciously. So here’s an alternative: buy a crappy car, something under $1000, and preferably well under $1000. Make sure that it drives, but ignore the body condition. Drive this car for several months, get to know its weak points, spend some time under the hood doing general yeomen-type mechanics. But don’t invest in it! And don’t think about swapping an engine in it. Six months later, sell it for a few hundred bucks, and walk away. Now you have practical experience, and are far better prepared to invest in a better car.

Finding a “donor†engine and doing a complete rebuild is the most educational route, but probably not the cheapest. And definitely not the shortest. I bought a used 454, originally out of a 1978 Chevy Suburban; price: $850 (yes, big blocks are more expensive). A friend and I swapped it into my Z, with the following engine mods: new aluminum flywheel, Comp Cams hydraulic flat-tappet cam and cam kit, Performer rpm intake, Hooker block-hugger headers, Holley vacuum-secondary 750 cfm carb. The aftermarket parts I bought at Summit, some with a 10% discount that I had at the time. After break-in of the cam, I drove the car for about 20 minutes – before a sharp knocking noise became apparent. I thought that it was a spun rod bearing; but in actuality it was a wiped cam. Fast-forward two years; I disassembled the engine down to the bare block. Spent many, many hours porting the heads. Fast-forward another year: finally got the gumption to take the block, heads, crank and rods to the machine shop. $1800 later, I had a nicely machined block, reworked rods with ARP rod bolts and shiny new hypereutectic pistons, ground crank, balanced rotating assembly, – and ruined heads! The heads developed cracks when the machine shop was pressing in new valve seats. Fast forward one more year: I’m still waiting for AFR to finally bring to market their long-promised 265cc oval-port BBC heads. Are you listening, AFR???? Now let’s see.... I did successfully recycle the block, crank, rods, and harmonic damper. I also recycled bolt-on's like water pump, starter, alternator and fuel pump. Everything else is brand new. And now let’s add up what still remains to be bought: Heads (assembled) - $2000 (at least!) Mechanical roller cam and roller lifters - $750 New head bolts - $100 Misc. gaskets (like copper head gaskets) - $100 So this is roughly a $7000 engine, pan to carb, with my assembly labor (and excellent help from a few folks on this site!). It should make around 500-550 ft-lbs torque, and maybe 480 hp. OK, 500 hp with an collaborative dyno. Roughly the same numbers as the ZZ502 crate engine from GMPP, which, oddly enough, is also around $7000 new. Of course, that engine has inferior valvetrain and heads, it’s set up for automatic transmission, and makes the same power numbers from about 40 cubic inches of displacement. The good part is that I know exactly what’s inside that engine. No nasty surprises from unscrupulous shops or builders. But I paid for my MISTAKES, and I’m still paying for them, in money and in TIME. Do you have half a decade to build an engine???

This has been mentioned before, but the theme got lost some pages ago…. Arguably it’s the right thing to do, to hit your enemy and to hit him hard. Not only are you teaching him a lesson, and exacting revenge; you’re also preventing future terrorism by speaking “the only language that terrorists understandâ€. OK. But shouldn’t you be damn well sure that you’ve got the right guy? In the past three years we’ve had some high-profile arrests of known Al Quaida members – we cab say that those guys belong in Gitmo, that they belong in the interrogation chamber, with its various accouterments. That does NOT mean that everyone that we’ve got in custody is a terrorist. One can support harsh treatment for terrorists AND still support due process for identifying who’s guilty and who isn’t. Respect for innocent-until-proven-guilty is NOT identical to being soft on terrorism. The difference between “us and them†is not that they’re not afraid to use force, and we are. No. The difference is that we use force with discretion, and they use force indiscriminately. Right?

Interesting article. I was going to post the following in the “torture†thread, but this one is more appropriate. As a naturalized American citizen who has lived here for 24 years but whose native culture is very different, my perception is that America has largely been spared the horrors of war and destruction in modern history. So when 9/11 happened, it was viewed as an apocalyptic event, a completely unprecedented tragedy which changed all the rules, and which was viewed as a requisite wake-up call for America to gird for a new reality. While Europeans were also horrified by this tragedy, they did not react in such an apocalyptic sense. Let me try to examine why. It’s inconceivable for Americans to lose millions of civilians to carpet bombing, starvation, genocide, and all the other evils of “total warâ€. Pearl Harbor, 9/11, Gettysburg – how do these compare to the Battle of Britain, to the battle of Stalingrad, to the seize of Leningrad, to the destruction of Warsaw? Not to belittle the deaths in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, but one must recognize the relative magnitude of the suffering and destruction. Europe has been hit so hard by warfare, that Europeans have come to collectively believe that essentially ANYTHING is preferable to war. Americans, on the other hand, tend to believe that war is just another part of the saying, “the price of liberty is eternal vigilanceâ€. So whereas most Americans probably believe that America is at war, and that it rightly should be at war – literally a war, and not just a metaphorical war such as the “war on drugs†or “war on povertyâ€, Europeans find the war-talk to be ill-placed hyperbole.

Getting back to the original discussion, I believe that the key idea is that America should hold itself to a higher standard than the standard that our enemies apply to themselves. An “eye for an eye†response to 9/11 would have been to drop a hydrogen bomb on Kabul, then threaten the same for Baghdad, Damascus, Teheran…. And act on that threat, if the intended recipients don’t cooperate. Democracies NECESSARILY find themselves fighting with one arm tied behind their backs. Phrased another way, such is the price of freedom. As for what we should do to “solve the problem of Islamic jihadist terrorismâ€, here’s step #1: get out of Saudi Arabia. Notice I didn’t say get our of Iraq, or stop supporting Israel; just get out of Saudi Arabia.

Does anyone have any more information on the 3.15-ratio R200, preferably LSD? This was mentioned in 3 or 4 threads over the years, mostly as a high-end (>$1000) race-only item.

Doug Nash (now Richmond gear) 5-speed. First gear is deep (3.27:1), fifth gear is 1:1, so there is no overdrive. With a numerically small rear end ratio, this might be a good choice. I’m running this transmission behind a 454 (big block Chevy). Bellhousing pattern is the same, I believe, as a Muncie 4-speed; tailshaft splines are the same as TH400. This is considered to be a good choice for drag racing. It’s reputed to be a strong as anything this side of a Lenco. But, shifting is notchy and the lack of overdrive presents problems in street driving. They’re pricey new (about $2000 with the shifter), but used examples can be relatively cheap; mine was $750. Another mixed blessing is the external shift linkage. Good, in the sense that you can move the shifter location around to custom-fit for a particular installation; bad, in the sense that transmission tunnel widening is required. In a 280Z you need to cut and reweld the tunnel (hammering is not enough).

From what I heard, the 496 big block currently installed in heavy-duty Chevy trucks is quite a bit different from the Gen VI BBC, installed since 1996, which in turn is quite different from the “traditional†BBC, the so-called Mark IV, 1965-1991. In the hot-rodding world, by “496†one usually means a 454 or 427 Mark IV block, bored 0.060†over, with a +0.25†stroker crank (so, total stroke is 4.25â€). There never was a stock 496 Mark IV BBC; the largest was 454. The Gen VI BBC differs from the Mark IV principally in one-piece vs. two-piece rear crank seal. The oil gallery and water jacket design is also different. The Gen VI BBC installed in boats is typically a 502, “siamese†(like the 400 small block) with 4.47†bore stock. In recent years it has started to garner aftermarket support, though the Mark IV aftermarket support is still vastly greater. I have never heard of aftermarket parts for the new 496 BBC. From what I recall, it’s back to a smaller bore but longer stroke. The hot rodding community evidently considers it a “truck engineâ€. The Mark IV BBC “truck engine†had a taller deck height (10.20†inches vs. 9.80†inches for the “passenger†big blocks), and is relatively rare. Some hot rodders prefer it for the opportunity to run a stroker crank with a long rod, thus preserving or improving rod to stroke ratio. But the taller deck hampers selection of intake manifold, distributor, pushrods, etc. The new 496 BBC is referred to as a “truck engine†in a pejorative sense – and not to imply that it’s somehow tougher and therefore better suited to high performance use.

My car's theme also keeps changing. Originally it was, "garage queen with lots of potential, soon to get back on the road". Now the theme is, "garage queen with ambiguous potential, trying to get on the road sometime before the 22nd century".

Planning is great, and planning for the unforeseen is even better, but there are situations where no amount of planning can adequately prepare one to address the unforeseen! Taking Mikelly’s example, suppose that one finds that a “custom engine†built by a “custom builder†to actually be a pile of mismatched, cheap hodgepodge with a wiped cam, oil-puking rings and knocking bearings? Unforeseen indeed! But it’s SUPPOSED to be built by a pro, and it cost a pretty penny! Well, if one has the financial resources, and the contacts with machine shops, etc., then this “unforeseen†can be successfully solved. But lacking the spare $8K and the Rolodex full of business cards, the unforeseen becomes a showstopper. The real cost of these projects isn’t buying the parts or the tools, or even paying a pro to do the job right the first time. The real cost is paying for one’s mistakes, and sometimes for the mistakes of others. The time that is takes to complete the project isn’t the time necessary to do the job right, at a relaxed and measured pace; then most projects would get done in a year or two! No, the reason that these projects take multiple decades is that minor, entirely innocent mistakes or defects become intractable nightmares. Like that small spot of rust that turns out to be a structurally unsound frame rail. Or the momentary loss of oil pressure in that fresh, high-dollar engine, which wipes a crank bearing and back to the machine shop you go! In hindsight, I did learn one thing: considering my investment in money, let alone time, it would have been cheaper to buy a new Z06, and be done with it.

I just came across an interesting technical paper on automotive aerodynamics; it’s in the journal, “Experiments in Fluidsâ€, Vol. 37, 2004, pp. 763-768. its a good review of car aerodynamics in general. Evidently, the large majority (quoted as 75% in some cases) of automobile drag is due to flow separation off the aft end – the hatch, the base, the rear bumper, and underneath. This means that the front end – the hood, the grill, the windshield – contribute relatively little. For cars with a shallow hatch slope angle, such as the Z, a major contribution to drag (and to unwanted lift) is a pair of counter-rotating vortices emanating off the roof edges, where they pass into the rear hatch. These are like the wingtip vortices of airplanes. The paper talks about measurements in a large water tunnel, at Reynolds numbers not too far from real life. This is reminiscent of my experiments with a wooden Z model in my water tunnel, but at much lower Reynolds numbers, where laminar separations dominate and the wake is too thick (so the flow separation is worse than in real life).

I bought Harbor Freight’s 13†tabletop drill press, for around $140. In my view, a sub-$200 Chinese drill press is a sub-$200 Chinese drill press, regardless of the brand name or the vendor name. They're all essentially the same. And a Made-in-USA (or Japan, or Western Europe) drill will be $$$! The main trouble with the Chinese drill presses is stability of the platform on which the workpiece is mounted (I can’t recall the technical term for this part). The other weak link is the chuck, but that’s replaceable. The motor, pulley system and feed are actually pretty good. I agree that the best option is to purchase professional-quality used equipment at auction. But, that stuff tends to get pricey, and the insiders will nearly always scoop you. Also, there’s lots of brand-name machinery that’s been abused. An abused Bridgeport is no better than a late-model Chinese mill.

Judging from the posts so far, one would get the impression that the only reason to deviate from the JTR method of mounting the engine via setback plates from the steering crossmember is some yearning for originality or customization. I disagree. Reasons for and against mounting directly to the frame rails.... Pros: * If the engine is mounted directly to the frame rails, instead of the steering crossmember, the point of application of the engine’s weight is closer to the firewall, thus reducing the strain on the frame rails, and how much the chassis would twist upon application of full-throttle. * The engine isn’t cantilevered on setback plates from the steering crossmember, so in principle the mounting arrangement is stronger, for the same amount of metal. * With enough setback, the engine mounts get close to the mounting location of the tension/compression rods (front suspension), where the frame rails are already beefed up. This is a great place to carry a point-load like the engine’s weight. So, you can take advantage of structural synergism. * You can remove the steering cross-member and service the front suspension without worrying about having to first unbolt the engine and supporting it separately * Since the there are no setback plates to interfere with the fuel pump area, using a stock mechanical fuel pump becomes possible. Cons: * Once you decide on the engine’s location, you can’t vary it as easily as you conceivably could with a setback plate system * Requires welding * Requires local reinforcement of the frame rails * More likelihood of exhaust header interference, or steering shaft interference * Engine removal and reinstallation can be more cumbersome, as the transmission bellhousing has to clear the gap between the engine mounts as the engine is lowered into place. * Requires cutting and grinding steel, whereas setback plates can be from aluminum. My car (also a 78 280Z) has a big block, with setback way beyond JTR. That much weight, with that much setback, would probably be impractical to carry as a cantilevered load, so welding mounting attachments directly to the frame rails was the only reasonable approach. The steering shaft actually passes through the driver’s-side engine mount structure.

Where in the world of SCCA would belong a car with an engine swapped from a different manufacturer, and chassis reinforcements that penetrate the firewall? I looked into this about 5 years ago, and was told... “nowhereâ€. Ain’t no class that would accommodate such a car, except maybe informal club racing. Is this [still] correct?

Just out of curiosity, what did you eat during June 2000 – March 2003? I tried starvation – lost some weight, but didn’t make a dent in recouping my stock losses. The S&P 500 is knocking on the 1200 barrier. That’s pretty impressive – until we consider that it’s a long, long climb to hit 1500+, where it was 4 years ago.

The difference in cost of living between an “inexpensive†area and an expensive one is largely illusory. With a few exceptions, taxes (state and local income, sales, property, etc.) aren’t all that different, unless you compare Anchorage with New York City. Food, clothes, books, furniture, whatever – prices are pretty much the same, for comparable items. The main difference is the cost of housing. A $150K house in one of the “better†neighborhoods of Dayton, Ohio, will cost around $400K in a mediocre neighborhood in Fairfax County, VA – and maybe about $250K in Fredericksburg, VA. But, here’s the catch: that Dayton house cost about $140 5 years ago, whereas at Fairfax County house was maybe $275K 5 years ago. And if the demographic, business and employment trends continue, the price curves will continue to diverge in the future. What this means is that indeed, the price of admission is higher in the “expensive†areas, but your housing investment will fare better over the years. So, the opportunity cost is actually lower! For a person who already makes reasonably good money, home ownership in the low-cost areas of the rural Midwest, the South, the Plains and the interior West will result in higher overall out-of-pocket costs than living along the urban coasts. I’ve been developing an inferiority complex over my house. Every time I visit my D.C.-area HybridZ buddies, I cringe in jealousy at how their houses keep rising in price, while mine stagnates or even falls. But it’s the basic law of supply and demand. People talk about escaping from the urban “rat race†and moving to the boonies, but mostly what happens in real life is the other way around. Unfortunately some of us can’t just uproot and move. One definite tragedy with the decline of American manufacturing is that white-collar jobs in the great urban centers have become almost entirely paper-pushing. With the exception of biotech and computers, engineers and scientists would be hard-pressed to find professional employment other than “science administration†in the D.C.-NYC-Boston corridor. Consider what’s happening in the Department of Defense, for example. Sure, D.C. is full of DoD administrative jobs. But the weapons labs have been downsizing and dispersing for 15 years. If you want to do research – goodbye Arlington, hello Dayton! The airplanes, the tanks, the satellites – they are designed, tested and built deep in the rural heartland, even though the programs are administered from inside the D.C. beltway. For another example, look at what happened to the aerospace industry in the L.A basin. Once nationally dominant, what little that’s survived has fled into the inland deserts. Goodbye Burbank, hello Palmdale. But hey, if you really want land, move to Southwestern Ohio. A 2,000 ft^2 house on 5+ acres, with a 4-car garage, will cost about $200K on the “good†side of Dayton, less than a half hour away from downtown. And you’re about an hour away from Colombus or Cincinnati. Go on, move out here, guys – help rebalance supply and demand! Do it, and help raise the value of my house!!!

Yes, indeed, Thanksgiving.... Yesterday afternoon my wife was involved in a car accident; car spun out on a highway interchange ramp, in a light drizzle. Rear wheels locked up (strange for a FWD car), and the car essentially oversteered into a Jersey barrier. Arina’s more or less OK, with minor sprains and bruises. But emotionally she’s still in shock. I suppose that in any circumstance one can find the perspective to be thankful. Minor injuries could have been severe. Severe injuries could have been mortal. What we should really be thankful for, is luck. It’s mostly luck that got us where we are, and it’s luck that keeps us safe. Hard work, talent, skill – they are merely the tools by which one can take advantage of luck. But take away the latter, and all our efforts are useless.

Is this the correct item? http://buy1.snapon.com/catalog/pro_det.asp?P65=yes&qt=1&test=Die%2C+Rethreader%2C+Metric%2C+M20+x+1.50%3B%247.55%3BRD7-5%3B9754&qty=1&Item_id=9754&PartNo=RD7-5&Price=%247.55&ListPrice=%247.55&FORMNAME=3&Desc=Die%2C+Rethreader%2C+Metric%2C+M20+x+1.50&SUB_Cat_ID=&SUB_Cat_NAME=&Cat_ID=&Cat_NAME=&group_id=2425&group_NAME=Master+Spindle+Rethreading+Set (Stock number RD7-5, Die, Rethreader, Metric, M20 x 1.50, $7.55)

I recently went through this procedure on my 280Z. The attempt to bend back the crimped flats of the companion flange retaining nuts (inboard side of the stub axle) proven to be hopeless. On the driver's side, I loosened the nut with lots of force and a long breaker bar; ended up eating the threads. On the passenger's side, I ground off the crimped flats completely, with a 4" grinder. The threads survived more or less intact. I removed the stub axles by placing a block of wood on the inboard end (where the companion flange used to be), then whaling away with a sledge hammer. The stub axle flange was not visible damaged, despite the rather vigorous blows. Does Snap-on (or anyone else, for that matter) sell a rethreading tool or rethreading die in the correct pitch and diameter, by itself? I don't want to buy a complete set! Also, who sells the companion flange retaining nuts? The generic parts stores in my area (Pep Boys, Autozone, Advance, Napa) do not. And finally, what's a decent price for the rear (inner and outer) bearings? Local prices are $30-$40 per bearing. That's around $140 for a set of four!!!

Another alternative.... Conservative: If you can teach yourself to fish, good. If you have fishermen working for you, even better. If none of the above, go f*** yourself. Liberal: If you’re willing to learn to fish, come and we’ll teach you for free. If you’re unwilling to learn, that’s your problem. Sometimes we forget that “liberal†didn’t always mean “tax and spendâ€.

To attempt to answer Socket_Toomee’s question, about whether Americans feel abused by Bush’s lying…. My impression is that as an aggregate, Americans do not feel abused. Most Americans probably feel that even if the occupation is going badly, and the “mission accomplished†speech was premature, and the war itself was started too casually, and the Bush administration dismissed world opinion too peremptorily, that nevertheless the invasion of Iraq WAS justified at least in principle. That is, even among critics of the war, the majority would say that some sort of war with Iraq, at one point or another, would have been inevitable. Well, the corollary to that thought is that the lack evidence for WMD’s or of direct connection between Iraq and al Qaeda are essentially technicalities. So, if Bush fibbed the technicalities, so what, in the long run it’s excusable. My own personal opinion is quite different, but the final conclusion is actually the same. I do in fact believe that Bush and/or his advisors lied to the world and to the American people. Or, to be more precise, either they were breathtakingly ignorant and complacent, or they lied; take your pick. However, I fully expect politicians to lie, to lie grossly and egregiously, to lie ruthlessly and cynically. So, in that regard, I do not feel abused. It’s just more of the same. In George Orwell’s book, “Animal Farmâ€, I identify 110% with the character Benjamin.

Personally I’m worse off than I was four years ago. My stock investments plummeted, and my house has declined in value over the years. Do I blame Bush? No. Do I credit Clinton for the 1990’s economic boom? No. As others have already pointed out, the impact that politicians have on the economy is severely overstated. However, I give Clinton credit for doing one thing very, very well: he sat back and allowed the country to run on autopilot. Instead of offering “new dealsâ€, or “great societiesâ€, or “contracts with Americaâ€, he just screwed his intern and smoked cigars. Which, in my view, makes him an excellent chief executive. What disappoints me most about Bush is his lack of conservatism in some regards, and his social-conservative zeal in others. The medicare prescription drug “benefitâ€, the increased farm subsidies, the social engineering programs such as “promotion of marriage†– these are fiscally irresponsible measures that benefit neither the investor class nor the middle class, nor in most cases the poor. Bush has used taxation and government subsidies neither to advance the greater good nor to help the needy, but to redistribute wealth in accordance with his social agenda and his political strategy. It is neither conservative nor compassionate. But most of all I blame Bush for refusing to admit making mistakes. Even staunch supporters of the Iraq war would agree that the occupation was mismanaged, the manpower was inadequate and the basic philosophy of dealing with the “Arab street†was flawed. Simply admitting that mistakes were made, even in the glancing sense of Reagan after the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980’s, would go a great distance toward blunting criticism and building consensus. Instead, Bush regards himself as infallible and his decisions as immutable. Everything that he did was right, everything that his advisors recommended was correct, and any dissent or argument is flawed, if not outright seditious. BTW, after I broke my leg this past August, and the county ambulance came to fetch me, I indeed received a bill. My health insurance paid part (but not all) of it. But the curious thing is that the health insurance company negotiated with the emergency room, greatly lowering my eventual bill. I pity the fellow without health insurance, who got shafted paying the “retail†bill. See, we ALREADY have socialized medicine in this country! It’s just that the socialization is done very deviously.

Returning to the original theme of this thread…. … I disagree. I think that there SHOULD be room for non-automotive discussions on this site, be it about politics, religion, dating, whatever. Why? Because we’re a community. We’re more than just a discussion group on modified Z’s. Why? Because finding technical information on V8 swaps was only part of the reason that this forum was started in the first place. The other part was in reaction to the bashing and denigration on the more “traditional†Z forums, directed towards persons interested in engine swaps. Reaction to such discrimination produced a collection of concerns – philosophical concerns – far beyond merely technical issues. True, it’s critical that our discussions maintain a level of deference and politeness; and emotional, ranting posts that disregard such criteria will lead to trouble. But by and large, most folks have observed the “rules†when posting about even the most sensitive political and cultural topics. So, I would opine that so long as the tone and language of the posts adheres to the overarching Hybridz guidelines, any subject is fare game. Even the most controversial. Otherwise, we’re just another automotive discussion group!