BRAAP

I’m assuming you meant an L-6 and not an L-4 crank. Is this what you wanted? L-28 6 cylinder crank shaft.

The diff is the stock 3.54 ratio R-200, Lincoln Locker version, (welded spider gears). LOL… Those are just some REAL cheesy, old HARD plastic Good Year Eagle street tires. They were Round, Black in color and held air, that is about it….

I just read a write up on a small block those same people entered in the “Engine Masters Challenge”. They finished VERY respectable. I really liked their approach, and to learn they are fellow believers, Hallelujah Thank you for sharing.

Interesting view you presented. Thank you for your input. It is nice to read about what the top Echelons of sports car racing are up to in regards to EMS. With all due respect, in reading your post I feel that you are coming at this from a money being “little to no object” full tilt top echelon race team point of view. As Ron Tyler mentioned previously in this thread, it really boils down to what ones EMS needs are in regards to their application. Apparently your needs are on par with the WRC, F-3, and other top echelons of sports car racing. Features such as Telemetry are cool and all, but those kind of features that benefit full tilt race teams do add considerable financial expense that is hard to justify for us hobbyist, let alone make use of. Most of us Hybrid Z guys probably don’t have telemetry on our EMS “must have list” at least not until we are ready to start competing in WRC or F-3 with our Z cars. Your points are well proven, and as you stated, yes, they are indeed “credible”. In keeping this in perspective, we don’t have multi million dollar factory support, deep pocket sponsors etc. Granted, if we could, we would love to play with those incredibly powerful EMS that are being used on the WRC cars, but I have a hard time believing that the actual EMS that is used on those quoted winning WRC cars is even remotely close to the same systems that is available over the counter for us average consumers, and if they are available, at what cost would that be? I’m pretty sure that the internals of those top echelon winning EMS are NOT what is available to the general public in those same companies over the counter products. Even if that same EMS was available over the counter, it will be substantially more $ than the systems this thread has been talking about. Those top Echelon race teams invest lots of money and time into prototyping what we the consumer will see in our “over the counter” EMS 5 years from now. For the 99% of the engines powering cars on this forum, I would venture to guess that there really shouldn’t be much if any POWER difference between the currently mass produced over the counter EMS such as Wolf V500, Haltec, Electromotive, AEM, and all the others available in similar price brackets. The over the counter universal and plug-&-play systems mentioned in this thread are all capable and powerful enough with fine enough resolution and speed to manage the fuel and ignition to a level that most of us here would be hard pressed to better with a substantially more powerful EMS system such as what is currently being used on those quoted WRC cars. Even if those systems were worth 5% more power on our Hybrid Z cars, how much more are we going to pay for that WRC winning EMS system? (If they are indeed worth more power on our Hybrid-Z power plants, I’d bet it won’t be more than 3-5% more power for at least 200+% more cost). In regards the crap load of stuff you stated that Wolf is missing, how long ago was that test performed and exactly which Wolf system was that? Your information is inaccurate, or at least quite dated. The Wolf V500, and even the Wolf version 4 DOES support multiple maps. Again, I’m not trying to be disrespectful and I do appreciate your input in regards to the factory backed racing teams EMS technology, but I am struggling with the connection between those elite prototype Engine Management Systems and the Engine Management Systems we are discussing in this thread.

Ok. The water pump issue was fixed, then soon after that, the dreaded yet typical dead fuel injector happened. Plugged in ConZult, power balance test verified that cylinder #4 was indeed NOT firing AT ALL! Ron Tyler helped in quickly narrowing down the exact issue. We found that the ECU was sending the ignition coil and injector its signal, (Whew, ECU is OK), and then we found that the injector had infinite ohms, i.e. the injectors internal coil was now open! BURRL to the rescue again. Dustin sent me 3 spare red top injectors, and within 20 minutes with my head porting die grinder, I had the injectors swapped out, used ConZult to reset the ECU, and wa la, the car runs awesome now! Smoother and stringer than it did when I picked up, tough still in need of LOTS more torque… Then, this last weekend I was able to work on the car for performance upgrades, not just repairing failing parts, well, I did replace the wasted dripping T/C rod busing, (they are fluid filled on these cars), and the wheezing brake booster. I was able to finally find time to install all my new suspension goodies that I’ve been sitting on for last 2 weeks over this weekend. The suspension was all original including the worn out OE ’93 struts. The Tension rod bushings were dripping their fluid on the shop floor, (fluid filled T/C rod bushings), the rear sub frame was wandering all around under any and all cornering activities, brake booster would wheeze and whistle under spirited braking events, etc. Ok, so the new brake parts consist of the Greg Dupree designed Specialty Z brake kit with the slotted light weight 2 piece BAER front rotors, (saves 5 lbs PER rotor over stock), and slotted Baer rear rotors, braided stainless brake lines, and custom compound metallic “The Brake Man” pads front and rear, (the Specialty z brake kit front rotors will work with ’90 N/A calipers with a .100” shim between the caliper and hub on the later cars, so I also installed a set of ’90 N/A aluminum calipers in place of the iron calipers for approx 2 lbs more of unsprung weight reduction up front per wheel), Also, a replacement brake booster to replace my intermittent whistling and wheezing booster. Suspension upgrades consisted of aluminum rear sub frame collars, front LCA Poly bushings, Poly Tension rod bushings, Poly rack bushings, and Tokico Illumina 5 way adjustable struts front and rear with all new strut bushings and hardware, (Nismo upgrades where available). WOW!!! This a whole new car. The chassis has a new “light on its feet” feeling. With struts on setting 4 all around, the car just begs to be tossed and flicked around the back road corners to and from our place, (first and second gear corners for over 4 miles… YEE HAA). The sub frame collars reduced so much of that vague rubbery numbness that the rear of car exhibited prior. Also, the poly bushings, LCA, rack, and T/C rod bushings, gave the front end a tight connected feel that communicates exactly what is going on between the rubber and the road right back to the driver. Ah, this Z-32 feels more like a high end sports car now. This car feels 700 lbs lighter and is much more nimble and light on its feet. The perfect spirited daily driver sports car. Being as the struts are adjustable and I am an avid autocrosser, I felt that access to the rear strut adjustment was imperative. I know, some of you purist are going to flame me for carving holes in the interior body work, (those same people will be screaming when they find out I plan to install a V-8 under the hood. Preferably the VH45DE from my totaled Q-45 sitting in front of the shop). My excuse is that I bought this car to DRIVE, not just look at. If I have to make an alteration to the cosmetics or interior for performance reasons and it doesn’t make a drastic negative visual impact, then be all means, it needs to be done in the name of “enjoying the ride”. So I located the exact location where the Tokico strut adjuster would be under the rear interior panels and proceeded to carve a hole for access, but only large enough for reasonable visual access and that allowed a somewhat clean Datsun S-30 body plug to be installed. (see pics below) The brake upgrade is also pretty nice. It is pretty difficult to get real feel of what the upgrade brings to the car as the used brake booster has a busted diaphragm, and I also think the master cylinder might be bad asa well, but these pads and rotors do feel like they are indeed a nice noticeable upgrade of the OE/Brembo rotors and metal master pads. When I did the brakes, I contemplated painting the calipers bright Red. If this car was painted in a bright flashy color, then I would’ve in a heart beat. Being as this car is a nice elegant pearl green, I opted for a more contemporary gloss black which doesn’t stand out as much, but still adds a touch of class to the overall visual package. Here are some before and after shots, (sorry, nothing real exciting.) 1-2 Front suspension before and after 3-4 Rear suspension before and after 5-6 Rear strut adjuster access. Front suspension… Rear Suspension… Rear adjuster…

Very nice. Good score. Enjoy the ride... Paul

Actually, my father did the conversion. I just ended up with the car because Mom told him he couldn’t keep it any more, It is an RB 440 with a TF-727 trans with manual shift body. Last year, I sold the car to a gentleman in Louisiana. I think he visits the forum on occasion..

(quoting the kid on the Big-Wheel in the movie, “The Incredibles”).. “That is totally wicked!!!” Very cool. Thank you for sharing. Please keep this thread going with updates as you progress.

LMAO… This is TOO funny. I was just talking to Ron Tyler earlier this week about starting a thread for Burnout pics.. Okie dokie.. here are some of ours.... ’77 280Z with an RB Big Block Mopar 440, manual shift body TF 727, (My father built the car, Mom made him sell it, I bought it and soon after that, sold it to a gentleman in Louisiana) My recently totaled ’96 Infiniti Q-45.. (was rear-ended while stopped in traffic). I bought the Q-ship back from insurance for obvious reasons, and we are currently int eh process of removing the VH45DE engine in hopes of using it in one of my street Z’s. By request, the Q-ships LAST foggy performed just last weekend, wrinkled trunk and all…, (I love the VH45DE...) Our ’98 Winnebago Motor home, powered by a EFI Ford 460, (yes, that is pavement under the rear tires and that is in deed a real foggy burnout). Wifey just shook her head when I answered her question of what those little black rubber specs were plastered all over the wall behind the motor home, (she still refuses to look at these pics…) This is one of Ron Tylers old cars, in Dave Lums drive way, http://www.datsuns.com Dave at the helm… Note the jack to unload the front tire AND the dishwashing soap to reduce traction even further.. (There is a LONG story behind this one…) Ron!... Your turn...

Ok fellas. I’m still NOT buying that the VH45DE is lighter than theVG30DE! I am having a real hard time wrapping my feeble little mind around this and acknowledging that the VH is lighter than the VG, no matter what those other forum guys are saying… Just because I do own a ’96 Q-45, of which I am in the process of removing its VH45DE this weekend, and a ’93 Z-32, probably means nothing in regards to this thread, but I do look these engines over regularly and make somewhat of an effort to maintain them, and also as a professional engine builder, I have worked on the various parts, mostly the heads, of both VG30DE’s and VH45DE’s. I am not submitting actual proof or actual weights, (If I use my scales to weigh the VH45DE engine once I remove it, it wont matter any how ), but I am submitting to you my theory as to why I feel the VH couldn’t possibly by lighter than the VG. Though… I have been known to be WAY off target at times… To those who think the VH45DE is lighter than the VG30DE, please answer the following questions and offer explanations with at least some realistic theory, if not actual hard data to back up your claims if they differ from what I have presented for you to ponder… 1) The VH has 2 more pistons and rods. That is one third more pistons and rods than the VG engine. That would also mean that the total weight of the pistons and rods of the VH45DE should be 1/3 again heavier than the VG30DE pistons and rods. Do you agree or disagree with that? If not, please explain. 2) The heads of the VH45DE are 1/3 longer, (1/3 is not just a little, 1/3 is a substantial amount MORE mass), than the VG heads so in theory any how, the VH45DE heads should have approx 1/3 more mass, i.e. approx 1/3 heavier again, than the VG30DE heads, (which are NOT light heads by any stretch! Just pick up a fully assembled VG30DE head and you’ll know what I mean). So, again, the VH45 heads are guaranteed to be heavier. Do you agree or disagree with that? If not, please explain. 3) The VH45DE crank is longer than the VG30DE crank. It IS heavier! Do you agree or disagree with that? If not, please explain. 4) The Aluminum vs Iron block issue. In the domestic V-8 world, the aluminum vs iron block weight debate has been waged since the very first one was ever cast. No one disagrees with the fact that the aluminum blocks of a similar type engine are generally lighter, it is by “how much lighter”, that is usually in dispute as those aluminum blocks are also cast thicker to offset for its lack of tensile strength vs its iron counterpart. So, yes, a comparable VG30DE block, if it were cast in aluminum, would be little lighter than this iron counterpart. Now add 2 more cylinders to that aluminum block with iron sleeves, make that same aluminum block 1/3 again longer than the V6 version, which again, should mean that it is 1/3 again heavier than its comparable aluminum V-6 counterpart with all else being equal, that V-8 block will be heavier, by approx 1/3 again more weight. Now being as the VG30DE V-6 is actually iron not aluminum, that will offset SOME of the weight, but I feel that it wont offset all the difference that the material difference offers. My guess is that the VH45DE aluminum block is still heavier than the iron VG30DE, but I’ll give you guys the benefit of the doubt here and call it a wash, i.e. the blocks weigh approx. the same. Do you buy that? If not, please explain. (I’m sure someone will find lots of big holes in that theory so shoot away…) 5) The VH45DE utilizes 2 separate timing chains, not a single light weight timing belt. 2 timing chains are heavier then one timing belt. Do you agree with that? If not, please explain. 6) The VH45DE utilizes cast aluminum timing chain covers vs the plastic timing belt covers for the VG30DE. Do you agree or disagree that VH timing chain covers are indeed heavier? If not, please explain. 7) Intake manifolds, both are pretty big. I think the VH probably weighs more, but I’ll concede to them weighing similarly. Same goes for the exhaust manifolds, water pumps, and oil pumps. That pretty much wraps up the majority of both the VH and VG entire engine assemblies. Now if I missed some gravity defying material or gravity defying part that the VH45DE possesses that isn’t on the VG30DE, please let us in on it. We will make an effort to find away to get that unobtanium part adapted to not only the L-6, but also GM, Ford, and other power plants that people want to swap into their Z cars… So if any one can submit actual side by side weighing of these two engines with similar components attached, (just the engine from intake to oil pan, exhaust manifold to exhaust manifold, i.e. no P/S pumps, no A/C compressors, etc), … my vote is the VH45DE is heavier than the VG30DE.

WOW! The VH45DE V-8 is 100 lbs lighter than the VG30DE V-6! I’ll be honest with you, I’m having a hard time swallowing that one. Do you have any reference or any theory to support that claim? I for one would love nothing more than to find out that my ’96 VH45DE is lighter than my ’93 VG30DE! (I can’t say why that is, yet….) Here is just my hypothetical guesstimate. I may be WAY off, I may be spot on, at any rate, I’d be willing to bet that the VH45DE long block weighs more than the VG30DE long block. VH45DE, (Nissan built 4.5L V-8) vs VG30DE, (Nissan built 3.0L V-6), long block vs long block weight. Ok, The VH45DE has two more cylinders so therefore the engine is longer. The V-8 block is aluminum, the V-6 is iron. Being as the V-8 is supporting two more iron sleeved cylinders, one more main web, lets call the blocks a wash. The V-8 crank is heavier! It has one more throw on it that supports 2 rods, and it is longer, i.e. more forged steel. I say the V-8 crank weighs between 5 and 7 lbs more than the V-6. Pistons and rods, each should weigh comparable. The V-6 has 6 of these, the V-8 has 8, by default, these components are heavier for the V-8. I say the 2 extra piston and rod assemblies add 10-15 lbs more weight total. Cylinder heads. The heads are very similar by design, but the V-8 has 8 more valves, springs, cam lobes, valve seats, valve guides, etc. The had casting is longer etc. By default the V-8 heads are heavier. I say the V-8 heads combined add between 20-30 lbs. Ok, by my conservative, purely hypothetical speculative guesstimation, the VH45DE long block weighs between 35 and 52 lbs more than the VG30DE long block. If the VH45DE long block is lighter, than the VG30DE long block , well, I’ll … I’ll… I’ll do something publicly embarrassing.

Sorry to hear about your stumbling blocks. Your diligence in wanting to do this yourself and do it right is very apparent in your post and those pics of that gorgeous build up. WHEN you are finished with it, (not if, WHEN), I have no doubt it will be a very hard running engine. These things happen sometimes. As a professional engine builder myself, your build up is absolutely stunning. Nice work. You are apparently quite conscious about the importance of the details. Any how, just Give JE a call tomorrow and they will take care of you. Keep up the good work and keep us posted on your build. Paul Ruschman

One more wise crack… just ONE MORE Alice, and “POW” right to the moon… Just kiddin, really..

I am pretty sure that info is correct, though not 100% sure. My literature says 35mm, 40mm and 50mm are used on the blocks and I just checked an L-24 and a F-54 L-28 block in the shop and they both have 35mm plugs in the sides, a 40mm in the front and a 50mm in the back. Nissan may have used a 47mm at some point in the blocks, but none of my literature nor the blocks I have on hand have a 47mm plug in them. Hope that helps. Here is the 50mm plug in the back of the block under the bell housing…

A WHALE TAIL?!?!?! Are you directing the next SHAMU movie starring a Z car in High-Viz Camo?

I think the Jeep port configuration is different than the Datsun, but I’m not 100% sure though. The Datsun port config is… eIIeIeeIeIIe These pictures better show the Datsun intake port config. Just compare that with the JEEPs hope that helps…

Would the manifold linked below meet your requirement if it bolts right on without any issues, i.e. made for the 6 cylinder Z car engine or are you trying to do something really exotic? http://www.arizonazcar.com/manifold.html Another member on this forum has the Bob Sharp version for sale, see thread linked below… http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=121059

Post processing is any thing done to doctor or alter the picture after it was taken, i.e. using photo-shop to eliminate red eye, adjust brightness, contrast, color balance, etc. I’m just a novice photographer as well with a Nikon D70s and also just recently learned the term post processing this last year. Very nice pics.

NICE pics. Love the cars. Great contrast and sharpness. Do you post process? The D70 is an excellent camera. I purchased my D70-s new and have since shot over 10,000 pics with it. Easy to use, pics are always clear and vibrant. The camera never misses a beat. Thanks for sharing.

Okie dokie guys.. Here it is.. The Q‘s final FOGGY…. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=114696&page=8

The rubber plugs are ONLY a temporary fix to get the car off the side of the road and to the shop/home for a proper fix, (or back home from the track when one blows out, as in Garrets case)! That is the only purpose of the rubber plugs. Good luck, Paul

I apologize for the grammatical error. My education beyond High school is only an Associates degree (aviation maintenance tech/engine builder/machinist), acquired back in ’91. Since that time, I’m sure I’ve lost a lot of my English and grammar skills. Back to the 4-7 swap hub-bub. I don’t doubt for a minute that engine produced 30 more HP, or even as much as 50 more HP. That is not in dispute at all. That only proves that the previous setup prior to the cam swap wasn’t optimized as a package, and that cam swap only brought that package 30 HP closer to its ideal component-matched configuration, nothing more. Apparently in that particular pacakge, the 4-7 swap matched that induction and exhaust systems better than the original. I’ll say it again and defend it till the bitter end. There is NO magical free HP in a 4-7 swap! As long as the setup is optimized as an ENTIRE package to begin with, no power gains should be realized. Personally, I plan to run a 4-7 swap in my Supercharged SBC T-56 Z car, but only for the smoother less obnoxious exhaust note. If I use parts that are compatible with each other including the cam, then I should realize no magical power increase just because of the firing order change.

Thank you for sharing and all your input. I have a few questions if you don’t mind answering them publicly? 1) Did I understand you correctly when you said that this ECU will be available here in the states in the near future? 2) Is it just a one size fits all ECU or are there separate ECUs depending on ones EFI/IGN needs? 3) I am curious as to what ignition control, if any, does this system have and how many ignition channels it has, i.e. DIS for an 8 cylinder possibly? 4) ETA on its availability? 5) Any detailed info, spec sheet, brochure, etc? 6) Did/Does this system have name other than the company name? Thank you, Paul