John Scott

Price? My engine is a package deal, but I originally wanted to stay in the range of the 195 AFRs with spring upgrade. I won't be that much over. He gets bare heads and machines them to his specs, so price can be competitive. We're using a 2.05 intake. I don't think the runners were changed that much. Just the right places. Brett said the same thing the other day, about the 215s ability to flow just under the 230's @ .600. But said the 230 makes up for it in the low lift range. Says he loves the Darts because they are so responsive to port work. I'm sure 18 or so years experience porting heads doesn't hurt either. He recently tested the Dart CNCs, well into the 300 cfms, and was really impressed. Outflowed his port jobs on earlier model heads with same runner size. Had a few clients switch to the cncs this year. Again, The 227 cncs were too big for what I had in mind.I believe they use a 2.08/ 160. I wanted a small runner high flowing head to maintain velocity. JS

Last time I went in, Brett Bower had no fewer than five cam company's master catalogs out studying lobe profiles for my heads. No decision by the time I left. When I started this project, I went to Bower's Racing engines, armed with the AFR catalog, 500 hp tests, etc. and said I want these heads. He said AFRs are a fantastic head, out of the box. Sure we can run what ever you want. AFR also has a very effective ad campaign. He claimed the new 215 Pro 1s are very similar to the 190 AFRs runner cross section, but had a much greater flow potential through out the lift range, when ported. Add in a spring upgrade to the 195s or see how much a 290- 300 cfm AFR will cost. The 195s were perfect for low/ mid lift #s, but really fell short after 500 lift. Any AFR close to 290cfm was way too big for my application. Bowers racing really caters to drag racers, but he enjoys working on any make model or application. Its cool to see exotic $10K heads, Pro mod engines, sitting right next to your streeter, getting the same attention. JS

The 4.3 isn't noted for being silky smooth. As long as you haven't changed any of the stock reciprocating pieces, using the stock flexplate/balancer...Probably why they added the balance shaft in the later years. They claim the oddfire crank is smoother at really high rpms than the even. Why? My mount system used the stock 240Z motor mounts which were soft, pretty good at absorbing the bad vibes, but it was buzzy at low rpm, like you mention. I noticed a little improvement after my third round when I had it balanced, added a fluid damper. Tied my Procharger bracket into the strut tower after reading a supercharged mustang tip. Big mistake. Felt like I turned on a blender! Did you ever get your carb. figured out? JS

I'm still going for a pretty healthy cam. Since the high lift flow is so good we'll probably keep it slightly below .600. (300 cfm was seen with a 585 lift) To take advantage of the top end flow high 240s. Maybe a 4 degree duration spread. A safe 7000rpm. Can't wait for the dyno test. First trial assembly next week. JS

Grumpyvette, you weren't kidding when you said the 215 pro!s had more potential when ported by an experienced professional. Got my numbers off the flow bench today. Measured at 28" Intake: Exhaust: 200=136 113.5 300=197 160 400=253 196.6 500=287 217 600=301!!! 227 Note the exhaust to intake ratios: .8-.75. I was hoping for around 290 cfm on the intake. After the final clean up they should flow around 305cfm at just under .600 lift. Made my day!! Now we can pick the final cam profile. JS

If you do and they fit a standard trans, I want to hear about them too. I think there was a post stating the ones availible from S&S fit automatics.JS

Thanks for the additional info, Grumpy. I'm not a welder and fabrication is expensive around here, so a bolt in is preferred. I thought the Hamburger might be OK since it included directional windage, scraper,trap door baffling, and notched side rails for stroker cranks. Price is $199 at summit. I'll look into the claimer pans mentioned as well. JS

Not the one for frying, but the 7" rear sump 7 qt w/windage and scraper for sbc. After getting BLKMGK to lie on his belly like a reptile on a cold garage floor (thanks Jim) for ground clearance measurements, I've concluded anything lower than 7 inch sump is going to be too low. I don't want to change springs/ wheels tires yet. I want to have a good oil supply and control, so I don't think the stock pans will cut it. Don't want the expense of a roundy round Canton. The Hamburger looks deeper in front than a stock pan. Don't know how close the front of the pan comes to the crossmember in the JTR position. If it clears, it might be one to consider. JS

Maybe, how fast are you planning on going? Plenty of superfast open end rears out there. Way faster than I'll ever go with my soon to be 383. Thats the beauty of the irs. I'm finding there is way more to this than just building a bolt in set. I'd guess that the ZXT cvs with the adapters are a good tried and true method for those of us with "moderate" 500 or so flywheel hp that don't want to build the rear suspension rock solid. I'd bet the Vette rear doesn't just bolt in, Right Scottie? JS

Along the flexplate lines, loose converter bolts can mimick a deep engine knock, hope its somethin simple. JS

Yes if its a 4.3 V6, the mounts are the same location as the V8. The JTR kit will put the front of the engine in the same place as the V8, but pulls the transmission about 4" into the engine bay. For best handling, make your own mounts or crossmember and keep the engine back against the firewall. JS

Geez, maybe this is too abvious? I guess I need to do some reading. I have a set of 1/2 sahfts at my driveline shop and seeing if a bolt in CV 1/2 shaft as well as a really stout u joint 1/2 shaft can be made for a reasonable fee. Just don't know how standardized the rR200s and stub axle mounts are. JS

Help! I'm trying to learn more about the availible Z 1/2 shaft styles. I have a R200 that my 180 1/2s bolted directly in. Four bolts flanges inner and outer, simple. I see the Cvs came in different styles, the turbo model preferable. What's the difference in the turbo model and what makes them a stronger design? Also wondering if all 200 rear stubs were all equipped with the four bolt mounts or otherwise? Lengths all similar? JS

Jack one tire up (assuming non limited slip)mark outside of tread or valve stem to some reference on fender. turn tire two complete revolutions and count the driveshaft rotations. Can usually get it close enough. 3.5 times is 3.55 and so on. JS

Thanks, Don. I was hoping it would be obvious, but its pretty gunked up. John

1fastZ, inboard or outboard? If you've never broken an inboard, I wonder if Darius' set up with a CV inboard would be of any benifit. Not saying he doesn't have the solution, but curious if he has ever put his through a 1/4 on sticky tires. Otherwise a custom made set of stout u joint 1/2s still might be the answer. I'm looking into cost. JS

OK, Aeroquip AN -8 bulkhead, aluminum line, nuts, locknuts. How does the sending unit come out?? I don't seee any fasteners. Still have my tank in the car, just trying to get a game plan. Anyone with the answer....? JS

Doing a little research, when you blow a u joint 1/2 shaft, where is it breaking? Is the body of joint itself coming apart or is it due to bearing bind in the cap of the u joint? Also sorry for the ignorant question, but what is the preferred model/year for the cv joint axle replacement w/adapters? 280zxt? Thanks! JS

As the JTR manual states, The V6 T5s are too weak for the V8s, different input shaft, and a really too low 1st gear, 3.76. A wimpy 220 lb-ft rating. JS

Richard, mine is BRIGHT orange, with polished 5 spoke centerines, 3 1/2 exhaust tip.., usually hear it a block before you'd see it, now on jackstands in the garage. Usually in a white 99 F150 4x4 ext cab longbed. If I spot you I'll be sure to flag you down. I'm sure I've seen your car, but usually going another direction. JS

Thanks, all, for the replies. Grumpy, sounds like I'm still on track with my selection. I'm not going to exceed the .600 lift, by much, but as you said if over 600 lift your compensating for something wrong. Oxygen @ almost 5000ft! Other than that, solid roller design, not a daily driver, and using a Victor Jr. The cam companies I talked to seemed to all like a high .500 lift with the duration of 246/48. We're using a .600 or just slightly larger because we've found at our altitude the higher lift and slightly larger intake valves, when combined properly, give better overall results. Often we have a 20-25% loss in hp over sea level. I'm looking at the option of using CC pro magnum 1.52 AND 1.6 rockers as I have access to both and not a complete set of 16 of either. Cam will be custom ground accordingly, I'll post specs when its ordered, as well as corrected dyno results to see how I've done. Keep the tips coming! JS

Richard, So you were the Z bluring by me on 10 st? Gotta have good stoppers for those RVs in the canyon One of these days we'll have to get together. JS

You can get away with no return line. The preferred method is having a return. This way you always have a constant pressure at the carb, a constant supply of fresh fuel, and your fuel pump runs with less effort, only when its needed instead of constantly pushing against a dea head style regulator. You'll need a return style regulator, and usually a line that equals the pressure side or larger to return. I use the 1/2" fitting on the drivers side of my fuel tank for return The Mallory site has a good article on this. www.centuryperformance.com/fuel.asp JS

Tempting, Mike, but I like my 4 lug centerlines. JS

Like the article begins, perhaps if we stop thinking of torque vs hp and instead think about torque and hp.Thanks Grumpy, I love this subject. I wish we had a 1/4 mi calculator on the site with regard to accurate curves, not just peak figures. Its amazing how sometimes the engine with more average torque under the curve and lower hp wins over the higher peak hp motors. Great topic. Note to myself: build the next one of "Unobtainium" JS