RTz

Sparky, Curious, did you play with the dimmer at all? Did it reduce the harshness any? TIA

Brian, I'll answer Jon, if I may... Trail has nothing, geometrically speaking, to do with with aligning the TC to BJ. The reason for the change is simply one less part to build, marginally less weight, and a slightly improved load path.

Damn... hats off to you!

Ballsy... especially on a combo machine

Rob, Nice job. Regarding your slot finish... are you climb milling or conventional?... Can make a heap of difference in the finish.

How does that *open* a gap?

Look'n good, Brian.

I'll second Jon... It would take a preload setting way beyond usable to expect the car to move about on one axle.

Sam, I respectfully disagree. The ground strap, if the proper heat range, will indeed run hotter. Taken from Champion spark plugs.... "If you make modifications such as a turbo, supercharger, increase compression, timing changes, use of alternate racing fuels, or sustained use of nitrous oxide, these can alter the plug tip temperature and may necessitate a colder plug." Also, the way I understand choosing the right temp range is shown in the below pic... This clearly illustrates the ground strap running hotter. Twenty bucks says Braap is right

That should be the Jeff Hartman book... If so, its a good read.

Hi, Its located under the dash, nearby the steering column. It looks about the size of two standard relays side-by-side. It has two plugs attached to it (becuase its actually two releys, main and fuel pump) If memory serves, one plug is black and one is clear. HTH

I can only assume you're addressing me. I agree that you have an issue that needs resolution, but I also think its a terribly small representation of the big picture. I don't believe you can say that you have laminar flow or a propensity towards equal cylinder filling when your test's only show the static picture... too many other influences. No doubt, its a starting point and I appluad your efforts. However, once you show static flow to be acceptable... your work has only just begun. Of course, this is just my opinion... I could be wrong

Mario, I think even capping them would fall short of whats really happening. Keep in mind, every time a valve closes, it sends a pressure wave back up the runner. Theres only one valve open at any given time, so the 5 backwaves could have significant influence on whats happening in the plenum.

Yes, TPI is typically 40-42psi, 280Z typically 38-40. No worries. There are plenty of vent lines in the 240 tank to get fuel back in but, you have a bigger problem than that... if you do not run a baffled tank or some sort of swirl pot, you'll uncover the pump pick-up under accel/deccel/cornering, causing very unpleasant surges.

First, The 280Z's fuel pump is external. Second, I would assume you'll be using the TPI Fuel press. regulator (mounted to the pass. side rail, aft) so no worries on proper fuel pressure. Third, I once installed a '75 tank in a 240 ('77-'78 are larger) and it 'sorta' fit. The thing that I remember most is that the strap 'embossments' are in a slightly different location, so the strap brackets required some tinkering. Looks a litte funny as well. HTH,

What are cfds? If its not too much trouble, I'd be interested in seeing a video of one port open at a time. Is it reasonable to 'cap' 5 runners? It seems this would be a better reflection of reality. Thanks.

TBS, The videos are very interesting... thanks for sharing. I am assuming you're modeling this as though all 6 valves are open and flowing continuously? If so, how much impact do you think there would be with the valves opening/closing (individually), causing there own reversion? Thanks again.

Hi, In my experience, this is not a recommended thing to do... There's a crush sleave setting up the tolerances. Removal and/or re-installation is a gamble. I've done it once successfully (I think). Others ended up with a howl. HTH

Braap, Thanks for the plug. JSM, I pretty well agree with Braap. To say the same thing in a different way... Its been my experience that SDS will get a modestly modified Z up and running REALLY well in a short period of time with minimal headaches (if any at all). On the other hand, MS will take you 4 times longer, at times leave you scratching your head, and won't run appreciably better. BUT, MS has TON'S of room to grow. Radical cams, COPS, WBO2, ITB's, etc, etc, combined with datalogging and its low entry fee, is very attractive. Whats my point? I think you should choose one based on what you're going to do with your car.

...Probably moot but might help when you configure the req. fuel in MS... I show those injectors to flow 437@ 43.5psi Cheers, rt