BRAAP

Damper installer worked perfectly! Another new tool. Took a Chevy trans driveshaft yoke that I use as a plug, chucked it up in the lathe, machined flats across the top of the yoke for perfectly square surface when verifying power train angles during engine swaps. You could just as easily measure off the bell housing mating surface if you can get access to it, machined cylinder head surfaces, or the crank damper. This is handy for immediate comparisons to the diff input flange angle. Also made a power train aiming tool from the advice a good friend, using a Datsun 280-Z steering column tube which just so happens to be within .001” of ideal OD to fit in the tail shaft of the GM T-56, and using a section of schedule 20 PVC pipe that fits oh-so-nicely over that as a telescoping slide, I am able to verify the “aim” of the tail shaft to the diff input during conversions. Sorry no pics of that goodie.

If you ask them, they'll tell you they don't change the oil in those garages, in fact, I'd bet they don't change the oil! If you have that much money to spend on "multiple" Ferraris AND a suite nicer than our houses to store them, you take the car to someone else to do your oil changes.

SKIB!?!?! I thought I told you NO pictures! Dang kids, don't listen!

Back to the original topic, Depth should not be that big of deal within reason of course, as the spray pattern should miss the injector slot in the head and spray down into the port. Now the Supra injector appears to have two ports aimed off center for the split ports of the multi valve head. My guess is the Supra injectors are possibly further away from the valve itself vs the Z, so its angle might be quite narrow. If that is indeed the case, the spray pattern could then be wetting the port walls, but probably not make much difference in overall power output, as noted above, would mostly affect light load conditions, and the affect may be negligible at that. You’d be amazed at how much variation in pattern/aim can be made before a measured or seat of the pants difference can be felt. In short, I wouldn’t be afraid to try them, don’t worry so much about mounting depth as it shouldn’t affect it adversely, it will land it where it lands unless you modify the manifold. As for the fuel rail, so long as the fuel rail receiver hole is the correct size for the Injector O-ring, it will fit and should seal just fine. The injector will “float” it he fuel rail. Hope that helps, Paul

You are both right. Due to the Z car injector spray pattern being a stream that will squirt approx 24”-48” vs a nice fine mist spray, it is sprayed directly at the back of the intake valve, (chamber wall if the valve is open), it doesn't make much difference as the stream is hitting the valve stem, back of the valve and chamber wall, i.e. not fully atomizing in the air stream before it enters the combustion chamber. As such, jc052685 is correct. This shot looking down an injector port into the cylinder head at the back side of the intake valve/stem. PalmettoZ is also correct in that the newer more modern Fuel injection systems, (vs the early Z car EFI), injector spray pattern, point of injection and aim of injection have become more specific, engineered, to the point of even incorporating sequential injection, to take advantage as best as possible, all the attributes that contribute to fuel atomization prior to the combustion event. Some injectors atomize best when the stream is sprayed against a hot metal surface such as the back side of the intake valve or port wall near the valve/chamber, others offer better atomization being sprayed down the port to get as much contact time in the air stream for optimum atomization. Back to jc’s point, we see it all the time in Motorsports where the injector will be aimed directly at a port floor, not down the port as logic would dictate, and it works fine, i.e., spray pattern, aim, etc really doesn’t matter, the engine will run within 1-2% of ideal either way. Aimed at the port floor; Sequential injection. The benefits of sequential are only realized with an injection system engineered with an injector spray pattern, aim, and injection event timed tot he intake valve, and the benefits are most notable at idle and light throttle, i.e. mileage and emission reasons, not power reasons. This aim may be at the back side of a closed hot intake valve or when the valve is open to inject directly into the cylinder, (not against the cylinder wall as that causes cyl wall fuel washing which is a bad thing). At WOT, no real benefits for sequential vs batch. Stop and think about it for moment and you’ll understand why. An injector pulse width at WOT with an appropriately sized injector will have a duty cycle of approx 80%. That means that approx 80% of the injectors life during WOT is spent open spewing fuel into the port. The intake valve is NOT open that amount of time during a complete combustion cycle, which is 720 degrees of crank rotation, (2 crankshaft revolutions). A cam with 240 degrees of duration leaves the intake valve open for only 33% of the cylinders cycle, so a good portion of the time that the injector is open during WOT, fuel is being sprayed into the port behind a closed valve as well as when it is open! It is during light load and idle where injector pulse widths are small, all within the total time the intake valve is open or closed as the design timing may be, for full effectiveness of what sequential injection has to offer. Again, that only really counts for a system with the injector location, spray pattern, aim, and open time vs intake valve timing are engineered together.

Please title your threads a little more descriptively. Click ME for more info on thread titles! I changed it for you, if it not quite what you think it should be, let me know and I'll fix it.

Boost is addictive! Race motor was MN47 head on L-28 OE flat top pistons, over 11:1, running slower burning Av Gas. For a stock compression N/A L-28 with good pump gas, my map is is close to the edge of max. I'm still on the fence over the MN47 head with flat tops on the street, especially with pump gas! That combo has definitely proven itself to be safer than the E88, N42, zN47, etc on the flat top L-28 bottom end... Maybe the cooling passages in the head were revised?!?!?That's a discussion for another thread already in progress...

That shot while performing a Pacific Norhtwest style Foggy would be cool!

:lmao: ... uh... hey, wait a tick!

Ahhh.... in that light, being married now for going on 21 years, that's... :lmao:

Sidwell, Yes, finding each engines ideal ignition curve is a trial an error process. There is no specific curve that will work for everyone, but most curves for comparable set ups are good starting points form which to fine tune. Zmanco, how much was your P-90 shaved? If not much, then I'd venture to guess there is still some power left at WOT if you bump up your total timing in that region. Here was my EDIS-6 timing curve on the N/A race car, very mild Schiender cam, (only .465" lift), not fully dialed in and being a race car, I didn't put much effort into the part throttle region of my ignition map. At WOT, (102ish KPa) it was pretty close to ideal for this engine. I also like to set my MAP/Load scale with at least one more row above typical WOT conditions so as to cover those extraneous cold high pressure days and ram air. Due to the L-series inefficient chamber design, N/A L-6's with stock or near stock comp ratios prefer a little more ignition advance vs. a more efficient 2 valve combustion chamber, as much as 38-42 degrees total timing at WOT for a typical near stock comp ratio N/A L-6.

1) Ignition timing good! 2) Cam timing good! 3) Not the cam specs. The loss of power wouldn't be this extreme for a given boost level and the engine would still make decent power N/A, i.e. with the blower disengaged, which it didn't. Lots of boost pressure in the intake, but all that boost isn't getting the crank. i.e. not flowing freely "through" the engine and "soot" in the intake? I take it this is abnormally heavy exhaust soot, not to be confused with the normal black sometimes oily coating we will see in the intake manifolds of high mileage engines, typically from PCV. Two things come to mind, Rags mentioned one, Darius mentioned the other; 1) Critter made a home somewhere between the blower and exhaust tips. 2) Lifters! Are they collapsed not allowing the valves to open adequately, or are they pumped up holding the valves off their seat during operation, causing the "soot" in the intake?

Granted, the second hammering with “Try...” is a bit harsh. It was in reply to the fact that original poster still didn’t fully act upon the apology he was trying to make, (i vs I)! Titus, that was a bit harsh. Getting ripped a new one on ones own terms? Sorry this is not kindergarten. We expect members to abide to the rules they agree to. We don’t “hold members accountable” on “their own terms”.

Oh yeah! Glad to see the car is still here on this forum...

:lmao: A good pilot always performs a thorough preflight inspection of the craft he is flying.

In stock, Brand new still in the box, set of 6 intake stock replacement Intake valves for the '81-'83 L28ET $57.96. Make it $65 shipped to the Bay area. Will ship within 24 hours of receiving payment. PM me if you are interested. Curious, why not source these through the machine shop doing the work? Any automotive machine shop can get these for you.

Looks like a fun spin on the Oceans 11-12-13 series, with rookies! Definitely will be watching it.

Cool concept, but not something I'd put stock in for a "good" ign. advance curve, only very rough ballpark! In playing with it a little, the advance curve through the RPM range seems more emission friendly vs performance, i.e. lazy advance curve. Dave summed it up quite well;

This is VERY good news! Looking forward to updates.

Got your PM, thank you. The '78 cross-member should work just fine. Just curious, why do you want to replace the cross member? Is it broken/bent?

With the stock EFI, your only "best" option is the stock cam! Again, covered MULTIPLE times in the search I mentioned above. Anyone seen my spoon...

New aftermarket cast aluminum oil pan on the market, http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Cast-ls1-swap-conversion-oil-pan-lsx-l92-ls7-NEW-camaro_W0QQitemZ320447415312QQcmdZViewItemQQptZMotors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories?hash=item4a9c278410#ht_500wt_1182 http://www.retrolsx.com/forums/showthread.php?t=111 Courtesy of retrolsx.com

Use the search function and search for "cams with stock EFI"! In short, if are planning to retain the stock EFI, you will be going backwards with those mods. It might make a little more power, most likely wont! The only way to take advantage of any power increase those parts would yield is going to require after-market EFI or carbs. If you are dead set on those engine mods, you better put aftermarket EFI on the very top of the list, other wise you will be highly disappointed. Trust me on me on this. Seen it played out first hand far too many times to count.

DOHCD15, Please read our rules. #5 in particular refers to these 2 links. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=131518 http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=139501