BRAAP

My oldest and youngest daughters building their four level snow dude 3 days ago; I'll post a couple more in the post your photography thread..

280z4me2, First off, welcome to HybridZ. Secondly, we do ask that you title your threads with some description of the topic within; The complete list of our rules and guidelines can be found here; http://forums.hybridz.org/announcement.php?f=135&a=2 Looking forward to reading about your Z project as you progress. Paul HybridZ staff.

Excellent. Thank you Mike.

Hope you gents don’t mind, but I have a few questions about the GM LSx DBW. 1) How seamless is it’s function, i.e. do you notice any lag between pedal application and engine response? 2) Are you guys also using GM speed sensor in the trans? . a.) If so, are you using the cruise control or is that not part of the GM PCM? . b.) If so, what speedo are you using or can you use? 3) How do you know if the GM pedal assy you installed is using its full intended travel?

Yeup, that should be the PCM.

Pictures would GREATLY help! Without pictures, we need WAY more info. Any latches and cables, could be installed OE or installed by a previous owner for God only knows what purpose, etc. need to what car, what mods etc. Again, pics make it much easier. Cables in the engine bay of a '70-'74 Z car, if it is stock with stock carbs, would most likely be the choke cables. Early '70 car, could also be throttle hold cables. Hood latch looking things, on either side of the car? One passenger side, the other driver side. Hmm… In the engine bay, in front of the radiator, in the foot well, door jambs, on the side of the trans tunnel, rear strut towers, tail lights? By chance when you said “Hood latch looking thing” did you really mean “Hood latch release handle looking thing?” If so, I take it you are referring to the ones in the foot well near the door hinges? Just follow the cables attached to those handles to where they terminate and watch the little door they actuate as you pull/push on those handles.

After removing the 5.3 from my wife's 2001 4wd Burb, 1500, I would think trying to remove the engine with the transmission/transfer case still attached would be a HUGE hassle, not sure it can be done without a gantry crane. Personally, I think it would be easier to remove the engine first then drop the trans out the bottom. The engine comes out by itself extraordinary easy, (the only "easier" engine extractions I have done are the L-6 out of an S-30 and L-4 out the 510!) The only real tip I have to offer is to remove the intake manifold when you are ready to to access the bell housing bolts and wring behind the engine. Allows access to the upper bell housing bolts. Intake mani comes off easy and quick! Not to mention, if you leave the intake on the engine during removal, good chance you'll bust the rear of the manifold during extraction. Exhaust manifold collector bots are easy to get to. Torque converter bolts are easy to get to, (leave the torque converter in the trans), All accy up front are easy to get to and remove prior if you so desire. Engine mounts bolts are easy to get, all wiring is easy to get to, (removing the intake eases access to the oil pressure and am sensor and block ground in the rear). The only special tool needed is the 5/16” and 3/8” fuel line disconnect tool. Other wise, Metric sockets, 3/8 drive and ½” drive, a few end wrenches, (10mm, 13mm, and 15mm are the most common sizes used). A few 3/8” and ½” drive extension in various lengths. A quality wobbly, (I prefer the Impact style wobbly as it is more of a CV joint instead of that cheesy offset U-joint….) After you see how easy that engine comes out, and how well GM engineered its design so that everything is easy to get to, maintain, etc, you’ll appreciate the LSx on a whole new level.

Alright, first I want to apologize as my L-16 comment above wasn’t constructive, It was meant in humor and FAILED! Sorry gentlemen. HBZ Rule #12. We do NOT tolerate name calling on this forum PERIOD! A blanket statement calling one engine better than another with no qualifications is ludicrous. The original poster asked about the KA24, not the SR20. If you feel the SR20 might meet the goals of his project with less compromise, then by all means offer that as a viable option, but please also include how and why you feel that way. HBZ Rule #6 If you have any real information to add to a post, please post. The original poster clearly stated he wants to get rid of the VG30DE, by default rules out VG30DETT. Your personal “hatred” of the KA has no relevance here. Thread title is "z32 power ka24de????" This is HybridZ, One persons idea of a possible engine swap should not be beat down because we harbor some ill feelings towards a particular power plant that others have been successful in using in other applications. Again, my L-16 comment above was out of line I apologize.

Here ye be... As far as I know, regarding ALL Z cars in the US market, if the TB doesn't have the BCDD on it, then it was on the bottom of the intake manifold as pictured below. Started at some point during the 280-ZX run, possibly 81+?... This particular one came off an '83 N/A ZX.

Richard, Incredibly pics. What camera you using? I see you've been down to Oregon, just North of Florence, Heceta Head. If you make it back to Oregon, Portland region, look us up.

Squealing/whining BCDD. Could be broken, out of adjustment, or just carbon build up. Regarding your ignition advance. The BCDD wont advance ignition timing and should have NO affect whatsoever on your ignition timing during decel with the throttle closed, whether it is operating correctly, broken, or non existent. What you are describing tells me your vacuum advance is connected to the wrong vacuum port. In short, if you have more ignition advance during decel than you do at part throttle, your vacuum advance is hooked up to the wrong vacuum port. Vacuum advance should only be active during cruise conditions. Not at closed throttle at any RPM, not at WOT. It should NOT be hooked to the intake manifold directly, (see that a lot), or it will advance your timing more during decel with the throttle closed. Your vacuum advance should be hooked to one of the ports on the bottom of the throttle body. Technically, that is called a “ported” vacuum source. To know which port is the ported one, it will be the port that does NOT draw a vacuum at idle, but will draw a vacuum once the throttle is cracked past 2-10 degrees or so. It will be the vacuum source connected to the small slit or small hole just in front the throttle blade itself. You can use a vacuum gauge to verify which port that is or just use your finger over the port on the running engine, (beware of the spinning fan!). If it is sucking at idle, wrong port. If no suction at idle, then as you start to open the throttle it starts to suck, that is the correct port. Hope that helps.

Dadsvenom, On behalf of the staff and membership of HybridZ, we welcome you to the internets only dedicated extreme performance Datsun/Nissan Z car forum. Within this forum you will find literally a never ending fountain of performance technical information pertaining to modifications for our beloved Z cars. Everything from mild OE upgrades to full tilt 200+ MPH Bonneville cars. From 8 second street driven drag cars to record setting road race and autocross cars. Areas of discussion range from engine and transmissions, to tires and suspension. Bodywork and aerodynamics to electrical, fuel, and ignition systems. Roll cages to suspension geometry design to exotic over the top power plant conversions. Let your imagination run wild. We have discussed a lot of things already and I’m sure you will be valuable asset and offer forth ideas and concepts not yet discussed. This particular Z car forum was founded around V-8 Z conversions and since grown from those humble beginnings back in 2000 to include all walks of extreme performance Datsun/Nissan Z cars. We ask that you read over our rules and guidelines. Granted, most of it is common sense but there are few things you all need to keep in mind when posting which will help keep the data base uncluttered. #11 addresses V-8 conversions specifically. Click ME for the HybridZ Rules and Guidelines. At the top of each sub forum are threads referred to as stickies. Those stickies are topics pertaining to the most common questions, issues, tips, hints, etc regarding HybridZ cars. We also recommend that you spend time getting acquainted with the search feature. As mentioned above, our database is chocked full of incredibly in-depth technical information waiting for you to read and apply or expand upon for use in/on your own car, and hopefully you will share your experience and knowledge with us as well. Click ME for how to use our search function. Thank you and welcome to HybridZ, HybridZ staff.

Yes… yes… YES!!! Except… This is supposed to be a street car, as nice and pleasant as it was when it came off the showroom floor and the conversion is to be as much of a “bolt-in” as possible, quick and easy, preferably no cutting, in particular, no cutting of the bloody firewall.

Thanks for the input Cary. Gives me some things to think about. I would like to plot out the front suspension geometry and then possibly look at possibly dropping the cross member/rack 1” and see if that will have much of a negative influence. Sorry, no further updates on the VH fitment yet. Probably wont happen till some time after this coming weekend. Weather is little colder than I prefer to work in right now, plus a few other projects that need immediate attention are taking my time as I didn’t adequately prepare for the cold snap we are under. Temps hovering around 23 deg. Fahrenheit w/5-15 mph gusts. ... and the Z-32 mockup mule is outside!…

Happy 20th Birthday to HBZ’s “not-careful” member, aka Raff.

Here is the most complete list of LSx oil pans that I can find, with pics and measurements; http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/conversions-hybrids/817787-lsx-oil-pans.html Yes the GTO sump sits forward of the cross member. Though now after setting an LSx in the engine bay of the Z-32, I'm not so sure the GTO pan will help in keeping the engine centrally located in the engine bay as the GTO pan would require the engine to move even further forward, (Radiator would have to be located forward of the core support and T-56 shifter would have 6"+ dog leg). The LS-x powered 240-SX crowd and a few LSx powered BMW 3 series conversions are utilizing the GTO front sump oil pan for their conversions. Here are just a few of the different pans from that thread. Pics courtesy of LS1tech.com Truck pan; F-body pan; LS2 Corvette pan; Cadillac pan; GTO front sump pan;

The intake manifold itself is the biggest red flag I see, especially when looking at your torque curve. Your torque curve is indicative of typical OE L-6 EFI intakes. Keep in mind that the OE EFI intakes, ALL of them, have a runner cross sectional area that is only 53% the cross sectional area of a 280-Z intake valve! You can see the bottle neck here. Now there are couple/few members that have been able to produce torque curves biased more towards the upper end of the RPM band with the OE EFI intake, but most if not all of those have some form of modification for enhanced flow, and those examples are the exception, not the rule. Once you swap out to different intake, whether it be an SU intake modified for EFI, a custom scratch built intake, or even the 4bbl intake set up for EFI, with everything else you have, just retune the MS for optimum power, your torque curve will be much more robust above 3600 RPM which means your HP figure will be much higher, if not being a larger number than your torque figure! Regarding cams. For Turbo L-6 engines, cams are still in the magical black art realm. With what little documented development regarding Turbonic L series cams, it seems everyone has an opinion on what lobe specs work, many have had a custom cam ground, and as far as I can tell, pretty much all of these have worked successfully for that particular application! Even David Vizard talks about a wild beyond belief cam profile with NO overlap that produced over 1000 HP on street driven SBC! We have members here that have made great power and run phenomenal ¼ mile times with the Z-gad grind. Garrett has ran low 11’s in his Turbo L-6 powered street 280-Z car with the stock Turbo cam and Thagard intake manifold! Another credible source prefers a particular stock N/A grind on performance Turbo L-6’s! If it were an N/A, Supercharged, or Nitrous charged L-6, or even an SBC, I feel comfortable with coming up with cam specs for those application as the variables involved are pretty consistent and fairly well known. Make it a Turbo and with the continually changing intake to exhaust pressure ratios involved, the optimum intake and exhaust valve event timing now is going to be totally different, and depending on the always changing int-exh pressure ratios within the RPM range, throw in differing intake and exhaust Turbo housing designs, different turbine and intake impellor designs, just slightly changing the cam specs, lobe separation angle, etc, will alter the intake to exhaust pressure ratios again therefore requiring a different cam lobe profile for optimum performance. You can see how this becomes a viscous cycle, akin to a dog chasing his tail…. I will offer this tidbit of advice, first time mentioned publicly anywhere regarding Turbo L-6 camshafts. I keep in touch with Rebello Racing on a semi regular basis. In those talks with the owner, the discussion of L-series heads is always the core topic. Being as he has probably more L-6 dyno time than anyone in the country, I personally put a lot of faith in his opinion regarding what does and does not work on the L-6. Regardless of the absolute numbers his dyno declares, it is within those numbers of what combo produces more and most consistently that I’m interested in. In his playing and tinkering with the Turbo L-6’s on the Dyno, he has developed an affinity for one of the stock N/A L-6 cams. Which one? Well, "A" grind N/A cam. He prefers it over the stock Turbo grind and even the other aftermarket Turbo grinds he has tested. (we are currently building a very custom P-90 head for a Turbo application, with 1mm oversize Ferrea exhaust valves and one of these cams with Rebello springs, which will be up for sale, very soon…) I short, I recommend you leave the cam alone and spend your money/time on an intake manifold. Then, if you are not satisfied, look at a different cam, possibly a stock N/A Cam... Hope that helps, Paul

:lmao: Ron, Good point. I see two things here; 1) The front of the sump could remain flat eliminating that trap. 2) Add a separate drain plug to that forward “trap” section, just as the SBF oil pans pictured below. (Looks like the SBF might be an easier bolt in for a Z-32?...)

You are an engineer right? As such, when is empirical data being presented, not only in text form but with photos as well, that is clearly answering the question asked, regarding the difference in weight between two ENGINEs, deemed as rough, and shouldn't be preached? The question asked in the very first post was; Then this claim; That claim is being made all over the net in many other forums, becoming urban myth, just as the JATO equipped car that smashed into the side of a mountain! I am in no way knocking or denouncing the VH45DE as an inferior engine in any way shape or form. The VH is an incredible engine! That is why I bought the Q back from Insurance, because I really like this engine. In fact, my personal opinion is that I prefer it over the VG30DE and VG30DETT in pretty much any application! Per this discussion, I presented empirical data answering the question asked! It is not lighter, though if measuring displacement per lb, the VH45DE wins hands down! In fact, I am doing a V-8 conversion in my Z-32 and my VH45DE is one of the engine choices that I am considering along with GM LSx! Either way, the VG30DE is coming out, for good! Just as side blurb on overall vehicle weights during an engine conversion, many aspects of the “car”, outside of the scope of the engine conversion are typically altered. In most cases, various items, such as wiring, vehicle sub systems etc, are removed such as Air Conditioning, ABS pumps and related ECU/wiring, sometimes the interior stripped, etc. which therefore alters the weight of the CAR. Those changes will make any weight change as result of the engine alone, irrelevant. You could install an all Iron Big Block Chevy in a Z-32, completely gut the Z-32, then another guy can install a Geo Metro 3 cylinder in his Z-32, not touching anything else and the BBC car could weigh less. That does not mean the Big Block Chevy would be lighter than the Geo 3 cylinder. Again, Per the title of this thread, which ENGINE, so yes, in closing of this sermon, I still preach, MYTH busted! Regarding "preaching", when listeing to a sermon, some words of wisdom... Man who fart in church, sit in in his own pew...

I spent a few more minutes studying this truck oil pan and what regions of the pan I need to modify for this fit. Here is what I came up with. Area in green needs to be removed, Magenta is just reference boundary points.

Okie Dokie.. Stabbed the 5.3 in the Z-32 mock up mule, took some pics, posted my initial thoughts an opinions in this thread linked below… http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=142025

Okie Dokie.. Stabbed the 5.3 in the Z-32 mock up mule, took some pics, posted my initial thoughts an opinions in this thread linked below… http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=142025

Stabbed the 5.3 LM7 into the engine bay of the Z-32 V-8 mock up mule. Short story is that it fits just a terribly as a traditional SBC! Even tried it with a T-56 bell housing on the block, couldn't get it in the car with the bell housing attached! 1) 5.3 motor mounts lined perfectly up with the Z-32 mount pads on the cross member, puts the bell housing approx 1” off the firewall. 2) Engine is sitting on the oil pan, on the rack and pinion. 3) Engine needs to drop down approx 2-3” from this elevation, meaning a cut out in the mid section of the pan to drop the engine. 4) Sump is currently 2” below the cross member, which means the sump would need to be shortened approx 4”! 5) The F-body sump runs too far forward and would need to be cut way back, ending up like the truck pan once it was modified, shallow and not much sump left. 6 one, half dozen the other I guess. 6) The GTO front sump pan might work, again after being modified to allow the engine to sit lower, and if the cross member was left alone, would move the engine forward approx 6-7 inches! If the cross member was modified such as another member did for his Z-32, the engine would only need to be moved forward approx 4-5 inches, (I think he did it to clear the front sump of the SR20, but ended up going Turbo LT1 instead and kept the modified cross member). At any rate, The damper would be close to flush with the front core support. Radiator mounting location will take some savvy strategery, and then having the engine that far forward?... 7) With the bell housing mating surface flush with the firewall, the T-56 shifter will need a 2” dog leg to come out in the OE location. In its current position as pictured, it will need approx a 3” dog leg. In using the front sump pan, it will need?... and end up with more of an up and down motion rather than fore and aft. Unless some form of extended remote shifter can be fabricated like the Z-32 uses currently? 8) Dropping the cross member to gain some clearance and set the engine at the correct elevation looks ideal on the surface, but doing so also affects the front suspension geometry, especially when wanting to drop the cross member 2”! Would stir up all kinds of geometry issues… Friggin rack and pinion is too darn high and too far rearward in the engine bay making the Z-32 not so Hybrid friendly… ARRGHHH… Having now stabbed an L-26, a traditional SBC, and now a Gen III 5.3 in the engine bay of a Z-32, for those willing to gut out under the dash, possibly loosing some of the OE climate control ducting, etc, cutting the firewall is hands down the best alternative from many perspectives. This stubborn Zed Head is dead set on NOT cutting the firewall, even if that means installing the brides-maid instead of the Bride!.... Up next, the VH45DE, and will revisit the traditional SBC mock up, weather permitting. We are supposed be getting a big storm over the next few days... Top view; DEEP sump of the truck pan; Driver side pan perspective; Passenger side pan perspective; Again; Trans perspective; Bell housing wont fit at this elevation!;

Alright boys, take a deep breath and ... So I get the impression that amc_oldsarge feels that not all AFMs are created at least somewhat equal and he is looking for a "Z specific", N/A to Turbo AFM guts interchange write up? I can appreciate the desire for accuracy specific to his project. With my experience in tuning, tinkering, and altering, the OE Z car EFI since the late ‘80s and in looking over that link, I feel very confident is saying that write up directly applies to your N/A to Turbo guts interchange. It is very concise and should serve your N/A to Turbo guts interchange well. For what its worth, I spent a great deal of time messing with the OE Z car EFI, tried eliminating the AFM all together from the air stream, built a throttle actuated AFM, added switches to the throttle linkage to fool the ECU to adjust the injector pulse widths under specific circumstances, played with different TPS’s that have the WOT switch kick in at different throttle positions, fuel pressure pulsation dampers, etc. Most of my hair brained endeavors have been covered on this forum over the years. At any rate, early on, I learned that essentially ALL AFM,s whether they be original Bosch units used in BMW, Porsche, Volvo, or the Japanese knock offs used in Mazda, Toyota, Nissan, (our Z cars), etc, are essentially the same in architecture and design. There were subtle differences such as different resistances across the wipe boards, volume of air they are designed to measure, i.e. physical size, etc, but physically are all pretty much the same in design and the techniques used to swap parts from one to other pretty much applies to them all. If anyone knows of an instance or application this doesn’t hold true from personal experience, please share as I have been making this claim since the late ‘80s and would hate to keep perpetuating inaccurate info. Hope that helps and good luck with your project, Paul