BRAAP

I honestly wonder if all that was staged, i.e. the car did exactly as they planned? My point being, how was he planning on landing across the river, SAFELY? Where and how was that car supposed to land and land in such a sway that it wouldn’t kill the occupant from the massive impact with terra-firma from that elevation and speed? His car was supposed to reach a height of 350 feet. If it were actually planned to come down from that height with a living occupant onboard, if this was truly planned out over 4 years, there would’ve been a landing ramp, a WIDE landing ramp to allow for trajectory errors. The ramp woud be designed and angled to absorb and dissipate all that energy from 350 feet elevation and a supposed 280 MPH.. I didn’t see any ramp on the other side. Honestly, the car would tumble, if not in mid air, when it hit the ground. Parachute was large enough to “land" the car from a high elevation, not really be a drag chute to slow it down after landing.. Hmmm…

If you were thinking it may be the same as the world famous ’68-’73 Datsun 510, as pictured above, it is not. It only shares the badge and utilizes an L-4 for power plant. http://www.datsuns.com/modelguide/modelguide-hl510.htm Noting special there, it would have to be REAL cheap, like haul it off and its yours kind of cheap. If the engine runs, heater blows hot, wipers work, interior is intact, maybe $150…. Or if you are just really really bored… Alexidways,... Could you please post your pics stacked vertically instead of horizontally? Nice pics by the way. Thanks for sharing.

From my back ground growing up, I can appreciate, to a certain degree, where Aux is coming from. What I have recently been learning from the good book, Sex is encouraged and to be enjoyed between a married couple, which is most likely what ThugZ has grown up understanding and apparently trying to be diligent in. Combining what I have learned, over all, sex is natural and encouraged, even in the good book. No matter what school of thought you come from, "biblical", or "premarital sex is part of dating", If a man and a woman are not sexually compatible, the "sex issue" then really is NOT the issue, but just a consequence of much bigger, other issues. I firmly believe if one really is interested in getting to know a girl on a deeper level than just playing on her playground, those issues should’ve been learned about or at least noticed before that big step of "bumping uglies". This thread started out innocent enough. ThugZ, as a VERY young member of HybridZ, you have handled yourself respectfully amongst the more adult advice given in this thread. On that note, Politics and Religion are two sensitive subjects that are really too sensitive in nature to be discussed at any depth on HybridZ, refer to Rule #8 in the rules and guidelines, (sex in general seems to be ok, if kept to a PG rating) Many here have strong feelings on all sides, including myself. As a New Admin, it is tough keeping those feelings in check and using that authority to “serve” HybridZ in a manner that maintains its well established, and successful theme. In short, This thread will continue, but if it goes much further into religion, it will get locked and tossed in the tool shed.

Cool. I take it that you are using some sort of diverter valve that will divert the air around the S/C so the engine will essentially run N/A when the S/C is off, (electric clutch), and vice versa? Is that the M62 Eaton? Please, keep us posted on your carbed S/C project. Should be WAY fun.. You may already know, incase not, C.A.P.A. looks to be a good source of parts and goodies for the Eaton S/C.. http://www.capa.com.au/eaton.htm

Doc, I love reading your view on things. Great perspective, and always humorous.

The drive gear on the distributor quill shaft is pressed on. Sounds like it is spinning. Tony D. has talked about pinning it for very good reason. Sounds like this is that reason..

Thank you, SSG Louis Foster. We all owe you and the rest of the troops serving, a huge debt of gratitude for offering yourselves in whole, for our country. Thank you and God bless, Paul, Krystin, Meshaelyn, Lelaina, and Isabella, Ruschman

Being married 19 years, father of 3 daughters, (oldest turned 15 today, middle daughter is 12, youngest daughter is 2 ½”, and we are discussing having a 4th child, though at our age?...). Our family is also quite dedicated to our local church, (my wife is the youth leader and my oldest daughter is well on her way to holding an office in this church in the future). From what I’ve read and understand of your posts, I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Depending on the age of the kids, and also their personality plays huge role in what decisions and choices we parents let our kids make on their own without our guidance or intervention,, i.e. the length of their leash will vary. My oldest has a crush on one of the boys in our church, a year older than her. He is a good boy, makes wise decisions, etc, but she does not date. They hang out at church, we invite him over to the property on occasion, he helps out driving the tractor, getting the motor home ready for camping trips, or just hanging out watching movies with us. As parents of teenage daughters we make an effort to chaperone as much as we can, but we also know that the girls need a little room to be able to make their own decisions, (how else are they going to learn and grow as young women?), and depending on the situation, we will discern the best we can with our life’s owner manual as our guide, how big and intense her young lifes lessons should be, i.e. actually participating in the role of parent without being overbearing. Your situation could be similar in that her parents knowing her personality and where she lacks judgment in making prudent life decisions, are keeping a short leash on her giving her more time before they allow her to make those sort of decisions on her own, (did that make any sense what so ever?) Take care and God bless, Paul

The ’77 and ’78 suspension should be exactly the same, (maybe the rear brakes are a little different due to wheel cylinders, but that should be it). Sounds like you may have mixed something up front to rear etc. or your old car ahs some non OE parts in it. You might check the upper rear spring perches. They “should” be really tall. Some guys with the 280 cars will swap those out for the 240 style which is shorter, i.e. lowers the car without cutting springs etc. I’m not 100% sure on this, but I think that on the earlier cars, the lower spring perch that is welded on the strut tube may be at different positions on the strut tube so if the previous owner swapped out strut tubes?… Let us know what you find..

Ok, lets start over, this time with a more subdued approach. Nothing wrong with launch control, but using spark cut without adjusting the fuel accordingly will fuel wash the cylinders. As an engine builder/machinist, that is like fingernails on a chalk board… full body chill… I freely admit that I am not up to speed on what the industry is doing using EMS in the role of launch control, (if you are, please shed some light on the subject). As an engine builder, I would like, and hope to think that actual industry accepted launch control techniques for drag racing, are not fuel washing cylinders.

Oops! You are VERY wrong on that one. Cutting spark is NOT safer in ANY regard compared to cutting fuel when it comes to wear and tear on the engine internals AND externals. Curious, where did you hear/get that information? To set the record absolutely and positively straight, ANY raw fuel in the cylinders is fuel washing, PERIOD! By cutting spark, there is PLENTY of fuel at those pulse widths to fuel wash the cylinder walls adding LOTS of wear to the rings and cylinder wall. If you have done much engine building/machining/tuning, you’ll know that just an overly rich fuel mixture fuel washes the cylinders. Remember, gasoline acts as a solvent and washes the oil film off the cylinder walls and out of the hone crosshatch. That oil film “in” the hone cross hatches is what keeps the rings from actually physically touching the cylinder walls, i.e the rings are always floating on that film of oil. Allowing the rings to actually contact the cylinder walls by washing the oil film off allows metal to metal contact causing the rings and cylinder walls to wear excessively, and that is a bad thing, unless you don’t mind having your cylinders bored every 10-30k miles.

Hmm.. Well first he needs to finish up his obligations on the right coast and while doing that, he could start paving the road for the move over to the left coast. The Pacific Northwest is a pretty nice place to be, he'll just have to get used to the tire smoke… If he makes the right connections on the upper left coast, certain bits of machine work, fabrication, parts sourcing etc, might be easier and could even open up other opportunities that he hasn't thought of yet for a Hybrid Z… I think there is a VH45DE that produces LOTS of tire smoke available here too... Oops. Sorry fellas. I have no idea where I was going with that. I was just uh,.. typing out loud.. really….

As Buzy said, You won’t hurt your engine by using that restrictive muffler. I repeat, you will NOT blow up your engine with the excess back pressure that restrictive muffler would create. Though if you are under 18 and still living under Dads roof, you’ll be better served respecting your fathers wishes. Parents respond real well to a child who is respectful of parental authority. And in the long run, you’ll benefit, trust me… The mechanics of what is happening… That restrictive muffler just adds considerable back pressure in the exhaust system and as a result, the cylinders wont be able to rid all the spent gasses out of the cylinder and keeps some of that now inert gas in the chamber for the next cycle, just as the EGR valve functions. Reducing intake charge density. Excessive back pressure is sort of like an automatic EGR. (OEM uses Exhaust Gas Recirculation to keep combustion temps down and the resultant oxides of Nitrogen from excess combustion temps in check). Power will be down as result of not being able to breathe as much combustible air fuel into the cylinders AND from the pumping losses associated with exhaust back pressure. Also, if your exhaust system is not up to snuff, i.e. any of the portion of the exhaust system is old and really corroded, the added pressure in the exhaust could blow it out at the point. It would just show you what part of your exhaust system was about to go in the next few thousand miles anyway. More than likely, nothing will happen other than a noticeable loss of power, loss of fuel mileage, maybe little quieter, maybe a bit of “whoosh” noise at WOT, but that’s about it. Good friend and sometimes poster here, Dave Lum, (has a Ron Tyler installed VG30DETT in a 2dr 510), purchased a 510 wagon that the previous owner installed a small motorcycle muffler on. It was relatively quiet at cruise, at wide open throttle it sounded like the exhaust of a jet engine. A somewhat loud whooshing sound, sounds a lot like tires skidding without the squealing noise. I’m sure you all have heard some car drive by and they floor it and just makes an obnoxious “whooshing’ noise? That is what it sounded like, a VERY choked exhaust trying to escape. When he installed a real exhaust under the car, it sounded much better and that little L-4 was pulling harder in the upper RPM range. Darn kids playing with motorcycle parts on their cars.. … Next they will be using 12v computer fans stacked in series in their intake as electric super chargers… or maybe even leaf blowers.. .

I have never really thought that replacing or adding fuel lines to a z car was ever much of a problem. I think most if not all Z cars have a fuel return line, at least the ’72 and later cars have fuel return lines. Though on the 240, that itty bitty excuse of a return line really is too small for any performance application, even an N/A L-series, and actually, the 280 return and supply lines are a bit on the small side for a real performance V-8. Installing a second line, or even replacing the existing fuel lines really isn’t a huge a project especially compared to a V-8 conversion on the whole, or even a rear disc conversion on the S-30. I ran new Stainless fuel lines, (purchased from Summit), both supply and return, up in the top of the trans tunnel of my race car with the complete drive train in the car and it wasn’t too bad. The 280 cars ran the fuel lines beside the frame rails which would be even easier to swap out than running them in the upper portion of the trans tunnel. Not all electric fuel pumps are noisy. There are quiet “street” versions available, and if you also mount the pump in a fully isolated suspended manner, that will further reduce pump noise in the cabin. I used a simple inexpensive Holley EFI fuel pump, mounted it in the an OE 280-Z EFI fuel pump mount and in the fully gutted race car I could barely hear the fuel pump when I kicked it on without the engine running. As for your aerated fuel concerns, even with a complete dead head system like this mechanical pump set up, if the fuel pickup, picks up an air pocket from extreme maneuvers, that air pocket is trapped in the fuel line and you’ll have aerated fuel, though it wont get to the engine till much later. With a return type fuel system, that same air pocket will quickly move through the fuel system with only a short hiccup, (used to experience that quite often with the OE ’75 EFI with less than ¼ tank of gas). A fix for aerated fuel is a surge can/tank. There are few ways to go about building one, and HybridZ member Strotter posted a wonderful DIY surge tank concept… (worthy of Sticky in my opinion) http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=122978 That’s my $.02 on EFI fuel lines, pumps, and aeration.

Ooops. apparently I need to be more selective in what ammunition I give to the troops..... DOH!

First off, Welcome to Hybrid Z. Ok, being as the blinker circuit goes through the hazard switch, (if the hazard switch is unplugged or malfunctioning, the blinkers wont work at all), my knee jerk reaction is to say scrutinize and continuity test the hazard switch completely and its wire harness connections real close. I’m sure someone here has to have a schematic of the hazard switch internals. I’m not sure on the hazard switch itself, but I do know that the ‘78 Z wiring was totally revised so the Haynes manual ’77 wiring diagram really doesn’t help ’78 owners in most instances. Also, I moved this thread over to the 280 model specific section.

(I can’t believe I’m actually about to admit this publicly...) I worked as a new car salesman on the Nissan lot at Quaid Auto Expo in Riverside California back in 1988. (Whew, now that is out of the way, that wasn't so bad... ) As for the limited edition '88 ZX turbo, every dealer supposedly received one of those cars. They were all Pearl white and some of the features that made them different from the rest to the ZX line for ’88 were the wheels were painted body color instead of the typical grey color, the splitter, or lower portion of the air dam, was also painted body color instead of the typical grey color, the very firm yet simple lightweight Recaros seats, 5 speed, analog instruments. I put something like 30 miles on our dealerships car in test drives/joy riding bad Paul. There may have been a couple other special little trinkets, but I don't recall them. The springs were a little stiffer and it had the now so coveted LSD. The engine and Turbo were the same as offered in the standard ZX Turbo cars, though the ’88 model year did receive some revisions over the ’87 model year in regards to the engine and turbo. One of the highlights while working there was going to Anaheim for the unveiling of the Nissan ’89 model year line up. The Maxima 4DSC, the 240-SX, the Access, and even a sneak peak at the Z-32 with some great video footage of the suspension test bed for that Cray super-computer designed multilink rear suspension, (hack hack gag gag… ). Within a month or so after that show, we started receiving the 240-SX. What treat that was back then. Ah the memories..

Hamburger oil pans manufactures an inexpensive thick walled shallow oil pan with kick outs on both sides. Exactly 7” deep, holds 7 quarts, has built in crank scraper and trap door baffling. Clears the exhaust easily with the Hooker shorty headers. I used one on my first V-8 Z, a '75 280-Z, aka BRAAP.. That one I actually shorted the pan another ½” so it was 6 ½” deep, and added a piece a 1/8” sheet metal to the bottom of that for extra protection. This put the bottom of the oil pan at the same elevation as the bottom of the front cross member using the JTR engine mounts, (I did NOT use the JTR cross member spacers as that would’ve caused the oil pan to drag that much more). BRAAP was an autocross/street car and was lowered quite a bit and the OE V-8 oil pan was always dragging when coming off of speed bumps, no matter how slow I went over them, (remember, the sump of the SBC oil pan is behind the front wheels with JTR conversion), in the bottom of dips in the road, etc. I’d cringe real bad every time it drug, shut the engine off, stop and make sure it wasn’t leaking or didn’t collapse the pan enough to possibly be an issue covering the oil pickup. That is when I finally did the Hamburger pan shortened. You can’t shorten it much more than 6 ½” due to the oil pump, (unless you were running a remote oil pump such as dry sump…) Any how, I still drug the pan, but only on occasion and the extra material tacked to the bottom helped as the pan never distorted or collapsed. My current V-8 Z project, another SBC but with a blower this time around, is also getting a Hamburger pan, a new one and I have not shortened it, yet, and not sure if I even will this time around. Depends on which Z it goes into, (might end up in my Z-32) and depending on ground clearance. I’m not sure if Hamburger offers this pan for the one piece seal crank, though just because it isn’t listed say on Summits site, doesn’t mean they don’t offer it. Her is a link.. http://store.summitracing.com/partdetail.asp?autofilter=1&part=HAM%2D3037&N=700+400385+4294840045+115&autoview=sku My new Hamburger pan…

Ok, satelite is back, for now anyway. That was cool. Noticed a couple things that were pretty cool. Tire smoke on occasion indicates an open diff, looks like it has bit of rear brake bias, (puckering up on a couple of the corner entries) Overall, much like a lot of our own street driven HybridZ. I love the power brake foggy at the end..

If you are using the original Autometer sending unit for that gauge, you shouldn’t have to recalibrate it with resistors unless you are trying to adapt some funky non Autometer sender to your Autometer gauge. On the Autometer web site, (I linked what I believe to be your gauge below), your gauge should’ve come with the sender and 2 bushings. The Sender is 1/8” NPT, the smaller bushing is 3/8” NPT and the larger bushing is 1/4” NPT. http://www.autometer.com/cat_gaugedetail.aspx?gid=2629&sid=7

Hugh, Are you planning to install an EGT for each cylinder and just use a rotary type switch to select which one to monitor and when?

Model run.. '70-'73 240. '74, early and late 260. '75-'78 280 Exterior. As mentioned, body line wise, ’70-’78 were pretty similar. The creases, roof, fender, and hood lines were all the same. Exterior differences were the bumpers of course, taillights changed at the introduction of the 260. The front lower valence on the late 260 and all 280’s is lower, (to accommodate the larger radiator and open up the radiator opening to compensate for the larger bumper), and the late 260 and all 280’s also have the front turn signals in the grill just under the hood instead of the below the bumper in the valence corners as on the 240 and early 260. The very early 240 had the interior vent outlets on the bottom of the rear hatch, late 240 and all subsequent 260 and 280 cars that interior outlet vent was on the "C" pillar behind the badge just behind the quarter light. Interior. In general terms there were two distinct interior designs. The 240 was one, and then the 260/280 was the other. The 240 didn’t have to many interior changes through its production. The 260 interior was totally revamped. The 280 retained the 260 interior. In ’76, the shoulder belt mount point went from the “C” pillar to the strut tower, (seat belt doesn’t dig into your neck as much on the ‘76+ cars). Also, in ’76, the AMP gauge became the Volt gauge with a fiber optic charge light. In ’77 the only significant interior changes were the font style of the gauges and the doors received a total redesign internally, which relocated the window crank and the door lock switch. The door changes in ’77, (which carried over to the ’78), made for much heavier doors, but the window regulators were much smoother and the actual door striker design was totally different than the earlier ’70-’76 doors. Doors for the ’77-’78 will not interchange with the earlier doors due to the different striker design. In ’78, the speedo received KMH in small blue print. Either in ’77 or ’78, under dash foot well lighting was also added. In ’77, the Z received larger capacity fuel tank which encroached on the spare tire well necessitating the space saver spare, (the 240, 260 and ’75-76 280 received a full size spare tire), and also the ’77-78 rear hatch area now has a raised false floor which was to accommodate the larger fuel tank and that little deflated spare. Depending on which manufacturing plant the ‘77/78 was manufactured in dictated how the that false floor in the hatch area finished out to the rear. Some were flat level all the way back, others kicked up at 45 degrees to the hatch. Structural. There were subtle structural differences as well. The late 260 and 280, the trans tunnel was widened substantially at the bottom. For some guys doing V-8 conversions, that is a big plus for exhaust routing. The T/C rod mounts were beefier as well as portions of the frame rails on the late 260 and 280 vs the 240 shell. As mentioned above, the late 260 and 280 had a larger radiator opening and as such, the lower core support dropped. Suspension. Functionally and in basic design, they were all similar. The 280 strut tubes were a little thicker, the 280 had a little more caster, it has been said that the 280 rear control arms are a little heaver gauge material. The front cross member of the 280 is a little beefier as well. Brakes were the same, though the later 280 had anchored dual piston wheel cylinders in the drums vs the earlier sliding single piston wheel cylinder. The 260 received slower steering rack and pinion and the pinion housing was cast iron vs the 240’s aluminum. (The rack and pinion may have been and early to late 260 change, someone else here would know for sure). Power train. The 240 had the 2.4 liter 6 cylinder, 260 had the 2.6 etc. ’70-’72 had the desirable SU carbs. ’73 240 and the 260 received some heavily smogged carbs that people complain about. The 280 received the virtually maintenance free EFI. Electronic ignition was first used on the 260 and carried through the 280 series. 5 speeds became available in ’77. In regards to the engine and trans, due to the cars age and all the previous owners, it could have any engine and trans and any induction system as they all readily interchange. There are other subtle details that I’m sure others will fill in, but that should give some idea as what the major particulars are. Good luck, Paul

First off, welcome to HybridZ. Secondly, no apology, you aren’t butting in, your contributions to this thread are appreciated. Please continue.

Great stuff Pete. The scope of the injector and the PWM explains a LOT about low impedance injectors. This shot would be a nice addition to your sticky… Rick, Glad to hear you got your car back up and running and the PWM set correctly.

Within this mechanical pump, there has to be some sort of a built in pressure regulator. Do you have a link to the manufacture, or article regarding this mechanical EFI fuel pump? With so many questions, it would just be easier to read it first hand. Something that sounds out of sorts is why they would tout back to back dyno pulls with the same fuel maps. With EFI, the engine doesn’t care how the fuel is being pumped, so long as the required fuel quantity is being delivered at the right pressure. Outside of that there should be NO power difference and really no need to prove that on the dyno if “only” the pumps were changed. Now if they changed something else as well as the pumps, that would make sense. Here is another hand drawn diagram, (just like Strotters above), of a “returnless” or “dead head” fuel system. Just place the pump and fuel pressure regulator back at the tank.