DAW

I don't think that you're keeping it simple with the carbs in this situation. With a turbo the fuel distribution becomes even more critical and the margin of error much lower if a lean cylinder occurs. It can be done, but I doubt the risk and complexity will justify the benefit or create more hp than a stock L28ET. I'm not trying to discourage your creativity; rather, save you some headaches and some money. DAW

I misread your first post and I thought that you had the Cartech airbox for triple sidedrafts. With f.i. bolt-on and turbo bolt-on readily available for the L6, why would you try to work with two carbs and a turbo? It makes little sense to me. DAW

I would use the plenum with either triple side-draft throttle bodies on a triple Weber/Solex/Delleroto/Mikuni type manifold; or use three carbs, gutted except for throttle plates, and have injector bungs welded onto the manifold. I can't think of a good reason to use carbs with the turbo, not in this era of f.i. DAW

Maybe forget about the longer head bolts from the junkyard and just buy the set of Magnum bolts from Mopar Performance because they're relatively inexpensive, plus they have an integral washer configuration to the head of the bolt that the 360 bolts don't have. While you're buying these, some other good items from Mopar Performance are the timing chain tensioner (you should be using a double roller chain), and the inexpensive oil slinger. For ignition modifications, you can use lighter advance springs (there are two stock springs: one is very heavy and one is moderate). I removed the heavy sring and replaced it with a light spring; leaving the moderate to remain with the light. The mechanical advance on my distributor was stamped "15" on the underside of the advance base; the vaccuum advance stamped on the actuator rod is "7". Since initial timing on the stock 360 engine I have is 0 degrees, I assume the distributor markings refer to distributor degrees = (.5)crank degrees; or 30 degrees mechanical, and 14 maximum vacuum degrees. The way the stock springs appear, total mechanical advance would be reached at about 10,000 rpm. So, placing the light spring in there will bring the rpm at which total rpm is reached way down to around 3,500 to 4,200 rpm but we want to increase our initial advance from 0 up to 12-15 degrees by limiting the advance range in the distributor. My advance slots in the stock distributor were 0.270" long. I welded the inner aspects of the slots to shorten them to 0.225". I figure the 15 dist. degrees stock with the original slots became 12 dist. degrees once altered. So at the crank, 24 degrees + initial 12 degrees means 36 degrees at roughly 3,600 rpm. The vacuum advance activation point is adjustable with a small hex wrench into the port and I'll adjust this as needed to obtain best mpg without ping. These types of tips are horsepower at a low cost, which is what you are looking for. DAW

JDM n/a L28 with P90(a) heads. DAW

I'm assuming an N42/47 head for the c.r. DAW

You can use the early type L28 pistons (10.9cc dish) and machine the rim of the dish down until you've created a flat top. Take it down until the factory oversize markings on the top are still just visible. This will create deck clearance for use with the L24 rod which is 2.4mm longer than the L28 rod. Be sure to use '73-on L24 rods (or L16), and NOT the later Maxima L24 rods which have smaller journals. Alternatively, Sterling makes (or made) a piston in L28 sizes (86mm + overbores) that was used on the L24 rod. Let me know if you decide to go this way, I've got one out in the garage that has a part # cast in it and I could dig it up. It's just a cast piston like the stock Nissan but with a shorter compression ht. DAW BTW, either the machined L28 piston or the Sterling piston will yield a c.r. of about 9.8:1; higher if you overbore beyond 86mm.

The easiest way would be to go to Barnes & Noble and pick up one of the books on SU carbs (or at least flip through it to get the info you need). DAW

I believe a fixed orfice in the return line should bump it up. Use a fuel pressure guage to know where you're starting from and how much you change pressure by the size of the restrictor selected. DAW

Like you said, Sparky, the hinges are very heavy and I'm considering them as part of the hatch. DAW

I saw on Martha from the Big House to use Tri-Sodium Phosphate and a small brush a few times and they're gone! It's a good thing. DAW

It's a piece of cake...go for it and we'll provide details; very straightforward! DAW

I don't know the individual wts of glass vs hatch but the hatch without glass seems very heavy. A fiberglass hatch with Lexan would be a far better overall investment in wt savings than fiberglass fenders or even the hood. The door shells are also very heavy. DAW

I agree with the others, sell the 2.6 as a running motor to someone with a basic 240Z so that they can put their carbs and head on it to get a higher compression ratio, more displacement, and retain their good carbs (in fact, their head with manifolds attached can be transfered as a unit to the 2.6 shortblock). You then go out and find an L28ET. I've bought totalled 280ZXT cars for just slightly more than I've seen engines go for and that way you get the matched fuel pump, ECCS, trans, R200 diff with CVs, wheels, etc, etc. All of which are useable or sellable. Overall, you'll come out ahead, or with the minimal amount invested and the smoothest swap. DAW

I can't confirm what you said, datsun dude, but I've heard that before and if you look at the Mercedes inline aluminum-head engines of that time vs the Datsun, there is a striking resemblence between the two and I suspect you're right about the shared designer. BTW, I've also heard that the Mercedes uses a connecting link in the timing chain that can be used on an L6. DAW

I'm tellin' you tbs, the head water jackets are too close to the bore! DAW

Obviously, chasing down an RB engine would be easier and cheaper, but that's not the point, is it? The pics of the RB20 head alongside the L28 block pics make it look challenging but definitely a reasonable and do-able project. Many race L4 and L6s ran externalized valvetrain oiling supply systems but I don't think this may even be an issue because it looks like the RB head has one oil supply hole at the front of the head that apparently supplies the oiling demand for the entire head. A short groove (passage) would need to be "routed" (milled) in the aluminum head to connect the block oil supply hole up front to the orfice in the head (think antfarm). The block hole fixed orfice would need to be increased in size. The mid-block L6 oiling hole gets blocked off by the RB head and no oil passes through. The semi-misalignment in water passages is not a big deal except that the RB head passages are too close to the L28 cyl bore (forget about any overbores) and this is probably due to the smaller bores of the RB20 vs those of the L28. Coolant leaks/blown headgaskets/hydro-locking all could result. The edges of the head passages closest the bore would need to be welded closed and the edges more distal to the bores opened up, even if at an angle to permit flow with the main passages in the head. So, what about other RB series heads re bore spacing AND size? For that matter, what about any potential donor DOHC inline 6cyl head? Volvo, Toyota, Jaguar, BMW, Mercedes (I'm not sure about this one), may all be potential sources. It seems far-fetched but until you compare some specs you just don't know. As to making new castings, there are some interesting technologies there but I think you should reconsider that approach because you may go broke trying to reinvent the wheel vs just buying an RB engine. DAW

I paid $85 ea. for the 5.9 Magnum heads I'm putting on my 360. They were off a '99 truck with low miles. BTW, if you go this route you'll need a few longer head bolts to use the Magnum head vs the original 360 head. The lower (short) bolts are the same for both heads but the upper row of the 360 head has long bolts except for one, which goes into a higher boss and is longer than the others. It is marked "TR" on the head. The Magnum head upper row of bolts are all of the longest type, same as the "TR" bolts. So, if you're going to do this on a budget, in your travels at the junkyards pick up some "TR" headbolts as you see them so that you'll be ready for your swap (unless you pull the Magnum heads yourself, then you'll have all the bolts you need). Make sure you get Magnum valve covers, the earlier LA type are different. DAW

Check out the Italian car sites. Weber DCOE insulators will substitute as far as I know. Shackle is an aftermarket Alfa Romera high perf supplier, maybe you could check with them. DAW

I'm not sure on this at all, but the turbo piston may well have drilled passages under the oil ring (stronger piston) vs the slots found on the na piston. I say this because that's how many of the Nissan factory high performance or "Euro-market" pistons differ from stock. The compression rings are different, so maybe you can look up the rings in an auto parts store catalog and hope they describe the difference, then compare to those you have. The difference in configuration will be on the underside of the rings. DAW

Nathan, I think what I'm saying is that if the airflow sensing and injector duty-cycle are maxing out, then more fuel pressure may be a fix. Since the ECU is using airflow, temp, and rpm as parameters, if you first beef up the baseline fuel support based on engine load accross the board; and then fine tune the rest using the ECU regulation available (i.e., airflow and rpm parameters for full boost wot over 3,000 rpm); it seems a better solution than a stock FPR and stock fuel pump with the ECU pegged all the time at its full capability to try to meet the demand. I see how an Adjustable FPR could create a rich low speed condition after the pressure has been set high for max load, but that is why Rising Rate FPRs make some sense, because variable pressure corresponds to variable engine loads...with fine tuning done by the ECU. You don't want regulator set to a pressure that the ECU won't be supplementing in some way to add needed richness. For example, use of the rising rate FPR might mean that the air flow meter be tuned so that a "weaker" signal is sent to the ECU, cutting down injector duty-cycle if pressure + injector time = too much fuel. Overall, there's no "free lunch" here, it's just the concept that for a given duty-cycle and injector orfice, the cheapest way to enrichment is to increase the pressure, creating more net fuel sprayed, and the way to avoid over-richenning at low speed is to have a regulator that can link pressure values to engine load (manifold pressure). With bigger injectors installed it still protects against over-rich low speeds if it is set properly, and if the ECU function is retained as the ultimate mixture fine tuning device (it might take fooling it into thinking there's less airflow than there actually is, to compensate for contributions of big injectors and/or higher fuel pressures).DAW

addendum...shorter injector pulse if to rich; longer if too lean. DAW

A rising rate FPR is not exclusive to a turbo'd engine. The stock FPR basically has an idle pressure, and every other engine load pressure, i.e., maximum manifold vacuum, vs some value other than maximum. The most practical application is to use a higher capacity fuel pump than stock but use this pressure judiciously depending on engine load (and demand for enrichenning). At idle, it provides the same pressure as stock (or more if needed; or less if needed (like when using larger injectors)). As throttle opening increases (and vacuum falls) the rising rate FPR provides a proportionate match in fuel supply, with wot (no significant vacuum = atm pressure) receiving the calibrated pressure sought. Turbos are just calibrated with endpoints continuing on into the positive (atm + boost) pressure range. The value of the rising rate FPR is that you can protect your engine from detonation death if you don't have the $1,000-$2500 or so to do it right. The issue is not if it is better than an aftermarket stand-alone engine management $y$tem, but rather is it better than stock at performance and protecting the engine when compression ratio or boost are raised. The rising rate is more of a hydraulically-based enrichment device vs the computer-modulated ECU and therefore is more crude, but the CPU can increase injector dwell to stay open at max engine load and if there is not enough pressure or injector orfice there; it will be too lean. The load-tailored pressure is a means of covering for a non-tuneable ECU or injectors that should be larger. The ECU can be tricked into thinking it needs a shorter injector pulse if things get too rich or too lean. For the money, it's a reasonable approach but if you can afford an SDS then don't bother with the rising rate. I don't think I understood a post (above)...what is a low-rpm/high boost situation and how long does it last? DAW

I was looking for some street hp at a reasonable cost so a hunted for a pair of 5.9L Magnum heads to raise the c.r., provide better quench (closed chamber), and better "swirl" of intake charge vs what the 360 earlier heads can do, mild cam & lifters (Jeep hydraulic lifters), longer pushrods from Mopar Performance to use the new head with the non-roller block and provide pushrod oil source vs rocker rail oiling, Mopar Perf advance springs for the distributor, pre-Magnum alum 4bbl intake with adapters to use the Magnum manifold mounting method, headers, etc. Note, if you go this way don't over do it with the cam because the Magnum rocker arms are 1.6:1 vs the older 360s 1.5:1. The higher ratio of the Magnum rockers will have an amplifying effect on the cam profile at the valve. I found a lot of parts I needed at Mancini Racing online. DAW

Check out "Chrysler Performance Upgrades" book by Frank Adkins, he provides all of this info on the A/T swaps, uprades, etc. You're looking for A-518 (based on the A-727 3-spd), it was introduced in 1989, uses hydraulic governor for governor pressure, o/d and lock-up controlled by powertrain control module. Newly designated to 46RH in '92. (47RH is heavier duty version used behind Cummins diesel). 46RE is based closely on A-518/46RH but uses electronic govenor, separate transmission computer, and related wiring. The take-home lesson seems to be to stay away from the 46RE due to the extensive computer wiring. Adkins suggests keeping it simple by using an A-518/46RH trans and wire two simple toggle switches: one for 4th gear shift, and one for lock-up convertor. After driving m/t cars for years, flipping a switch off & on should be no big deal...maybe put the wiper switch on the dash somewhere and use the present switch for the trans switches. The o/d transes are longer and tailhousings bulkier than non-o/d transes. Magnum 5.9 souces won't have enough weights on the torque convertor and will need added to for use on a pre-'93 360 engine. Good luck! DAW