BLOZ UP

Step 2: Remove engine and transmission. Took note a few things that need replacing. This includes new downpipes, as all the studs broke. So the rebuild is going to cost a bit more.

Step 1: Acquire 5 speed swap parts. Not pictured, Z32 NA transmission. She wants to do the whole swap for under $1000, but that's probably not going to happen. This (plus the transmission) is $1,200 already. On the good side, it's a Fidanza lightweight flywheel and Z1 Street Performance clutch. Should liven it up a bit and hold stockish or slightly more than stock power. There's still some interior trim to get, but I believe we have more or less everything.

About the same time I picked up my 280Z, my wife (girlfriend at the time) sold her 350Z. She found a 92TT soon after for a great price. 150k, but well maintained. She drove it to Z meetings and such but we didn't do much to it. Timing belt, coolant hoses, and a couple other minor things. Then it started having problems. The PTU harness was corroded and would cut out the engine. That was fixed. Then the transmission started having a hard time shifting, and now the brake pedal park release isn't getting triggered. So, the wife decides it's time to do the 5 speed swap. The engine had pretty low compression, so we decide to do a rebuild as well.

Sounds good! More videos of driving and getting on it!

Good point. You've had this problem with this pump? Where it shuts off if the PWM drops? What controller do you use (the fuelab digital FPR)? I can see how that would be annoying. PWM drops too low, engine stalls, then ECU switches pump off. Yeah, I can't see why they have a turn off threshold at all. It should just be 0-10% is 'slow', then variable, and then full power above 90%. If I want the pump off, I'll cut the 12v power to it... We'll see. This is annoying, as I sumped my tank, ran these lines and got this overkill Aeromotive pump to never had fuel problems again, and pretty much all I've had since are fuel problems. Oops. Too little flow becomes too much. I guess you can't just keep throwing more fuel at your fuel problems...

Oh. I'm putting the popcorn away to jump in now... Do you know what the controls are? In the 70s we have manufacturers claiming 400HP from shitty SUHC carb V8s. They did this with race pipes, no accessories, no cats, etc. So when it was in the actual car, it made less. A lot less. Nowadays they are required to setup the engine as it is in the production car. They still use engine dyno numbers, however. The point is, it was to keep the manufacturers honest, not the dynos. When individuals mod a car and dyno it, there's usually video proof of the setup in addition to mods lists. What's the problem? Easy. Performance car engines are mass produced, reliable, come with a warranty, and are designed with a specific performance level in mind with the budget given, noise and comfort levels, and in combination with the rest of the car's performance. When a "backyarder" decides to stick a huge turbo on an engine, he risks reliability for a few more HP/L. That's if we're talking about peak HP/L, which is a pretty much meaningless number. What you wanted was some broad powerband. The problem is that people came in this thread showing cars with big top end power. I don't think anyone claimed to have met your requirement, they were just misunderstanding your original request. That said, while it may not be possible to get the powerband you want out of the VG30E, that doesn't mean that no "backyarder" can ever exceed the performance level of a stock engine. Us "backyarders" aren't trying to say we're smarter than all the snobby engineers at Nissan, we're just more willing to risk reliability, driveability, noise, etc. to get more power. Again, the people who design engines do so with very strict constraints. A better comparison would be the engineers for GT2 or F1 engines.

Got rid of my DD Focus, and got a WRX. Fun.

MS3 can (I think... it might be too low Hz software PWM), but I don't feel like upgrading my MS2 for it. I was just going to do the switched output, right off the IAC pin (as it can do ~1 A, and the pump says it used "much less than 1 A", whatever that means). So, since now you have me worried, I looked over the instructions. It says to refer to the pump certification chart, which I don't have yet. Searching on line got me to this post on Fuelab's own forums, which says: So, that's disappointing. 70% is still going to pump a lot of fuel very fast. All is not lost, though. I can try it for a bit and see if it's sufficient. If that doesn't work I have a spare Arduino which can easily do 1KHz PWM output. So I can hook up my IAC output to it and use the Arduino to switch to a preset PWM value. The instructions say that 0-19% PWM is off, 20-89% is variable speed, and 90-100% is full power. So, I can set 30% PWM when my MAP is below 120kPa or whatever. If that's not fancy enough I could use multiple IAC pins (although IIRC 2 is the maximum you can use for outputs) for multi-stage pump triggering. 30%/60%/100% or something like that. And when I get tired of playing around with the Arduino I'll just get the variable speed pressure regulator.

MSQur Update to 0.72b: Update INI parsing so more files are supported, and more data is displayed (not 100% complete) UI update so all this new data is slightly better organized (slide down sections) Bug fixes and other minor things Known issues: MS3 support is poor Constants are displayed ugly and all at once. Array constants are hard coded out. A few more updates and I'll release it open source, as I need to move on to other projects.

Mmmmmm need some video footage...

I'm waiting for parts so I can hopefully autocross again. I ordered a Fuelab 41401 pump, the one with PWM/switched control. They give you many options, it's very nice. PWM continuously variable control, or ground it for slow, or give it ~12v for high speed. I plan on wiring it to a spare MS output (on of the IAC ports), and setting it to trigger on MAP sensor values >= 120 kPa or so. Could also combine it with throttle position, etc., but I think that will work just fine. I noticed that Fuelab sells an electronic pressure regulator as well. You pair it with their PWM pumps and you can have the fuel system regulate pump speed itself. Cool! But since I have the ECU capabilities to control the pump I see no reason to replace my current (Fuelab) regulator. I'm also waiting on a Nardi wheel and quick disconnect hardware. It's getting real annoying to get in and out with my seat and the stock wheel in the way. Can't wait to install it.

It looked bluish to me? At the first mountain crevice scene?

My little trailer with it's own flatbed...

The fourth run I noticed the power loss. Strangely, it would idle fine. It was just during acceleration that the fuel pressure dropped significantly. It stalled a few times in the grid, and was very hard to start again. It didn't occur to me until later that it was vapor lock. I just assumed my hot start cranking pulsewidths were way off. Anyway, I figured I would leave now and some airflow would cool everything off. The engine was sitting at 98 degrees C (100 CHTS). Once I started moving it dropped down to 180, then eventually 160 (thermostat temperature). The symptoms seemed to get better so I thought I was golden to get home. Nope. Came back all at once and I pulled over immediately and called Hagerty. I thought the fuel pump had finally bit the bullet, but it started again this morning. Regardless, the pump is on its last legs and I've been eyeing a Fuelab replacement with built-in PWM speed controller. The tow, while covered, was a complete racket. Companies bid for contracts on the NJ Turnpike (a private road). You can't call your buddy with a tow truck, you have to be towed by them. And they required another flatbed for my trailer (all 5' of it). Total cost? $700... Yeah... no corruption there...

Went to an autocross with my trailer and tires. Didn't get there early enough to put the tires on . Wasn't enough time between heats, either, and I forgot my breaker bar and torque wrench. I got 4 runs in before something went wrong. I only recorded 3 however. You can see in the second run the fuel pressure drop a few times:

No, but you can cut the foam easily enough. It's an option from some sellers. I will still need the bracket to center the mounting point of the AS strap though.

Good question. I know federal EPA laws apply to emissions equipment. But, I'm not sure what the federal laws have regarding swaps.

Yes, good idea. I was considering going to trans tunnel seat belt mount hole, as I do not want to weld on the body. However, angling the bar toward the trans tunnel seat belt mount point would be iffy, since I'd have to clear the seat. So, something that fits between the seat bracket and the floor for the two rear seat bolts would be better. I was thinking I could improve it having a 3rd mount point at the rear belt receiver mount point. Here's a shitty diagram, not to scale: Red is proposed bracket. Blue is the antisubmarine belt. There would have to be some type of slot or slip prevention. I just put some tabs on there to keep the belt in place. Slot on the rear would be better now that I think about it.

Ah, yeah ihryu sells them here at distributor prices. The 15/20% off sales are like Labor/Mothers/Fathers/Veterans/Spring/Summer/Christmas. Usually a couple months between each one.

Highly recommend Speedhut. Just wait for their 20% off sale. I have 8 of the damned things. Great build. LS is so easy compared to my VG...

I see. Well, I'll take my chances this weekend at the autocross and start on a harness bar.

I could make that. Is the current location dangerously unsafe? Would it be better to move one belt to one of the strut studs? Also, I can't seem to find it, but a few people made harness bars that attach near where the speakers (280Z) are. There are apparently 3 10 or 12mm holes on each side (behind the door). Are those sturdy enough for a harness bar? It's likely I won't use that anyway, as I'd rather make a harness/strut bar across the strut tower. Hm, the stock lower belt receiver has two bolts. One on the side, and one near the center. It's about 4" off center, IIRC. But it is just behind the seat. That's not acceptable, I'm guessing?

Tell me if this is a bad idea. I'm using the OEM shoulder belt bolt location. It sits pretty level with me belted in. But, the right belt is angled. I checked through a few harness posts, but couldn't find any reference to horizontal angle. I browsed through the linked Schroth instructions as well without finding a diagram showing any horizontal allowance. I could put the right harness on either of the two forwardmost shock tower bolts, but I do not know if that area is strong enough. Or should I just get a proper harness bar? This is just for autocross at this point, to keep me in the seat. The stock belt barely fit with my Sparco Torino. Last question. Where can I bolt the antisubmarine belt to? I'm guessing the stock most central belt bolt location is out of the question. It seems too far behind and to the left of below the crotch area that appears to be specified.

[popcorn]