X64v

Hopefully enough to keep me semi-satisfied after being bit by the turbo bug, until I can build a proper turbo engine. :lmao: What did they do to them? Change ramp rates?

Ah, I didn't know that about the SCR relating to bottom end performance, thanks! I'll be at about 9.2:1

Thank you guys, that answers my question. jmortensen - Yes, I agree that the stock cams are puny. I'm looking at a regrind (specifically a .495"/290°), but could only find info on how it would perform on an L28 with regards to drive-ability, useful powerband, etc. Since this is going on an N/A L24, I wanted to make sure that a .495/290 on an L24 would act the same as a .495/290 on an L28 (come in at the same rpm and all that).

I've finally grown tired of beating my L24 to hell with a turbo (it was fun, but I really don't need to sink any ring lands in my daily driver during my first year of college), so while I build a proper L28et, I thought I'd at least throw a cam in the E31 I have laying around to get a little pep back. My question: With comparably dressed L24/28s (same headers, induction, SCRs), how do cams sized for an L28 with it's bigger valves perform on an L24 with it's smaller valves? I would guess that with the valves being smaller along with the decrease in displacement, a cam would feel about the same in both motors, but I want to double check here. Bottom line: Would the same cam feel 'bigger' on a small valve L24 than a big (normal) valve L28, or would it feel about the same? I'm not really looking for a cam recommendation for my particular set up, just the relation as asked.

Yes, I agree that the ratio is right, but the number that is coming out of that still is not. Atmospheric pressure times boost pressure does not equal a set horsepower addition. Kevin - I apologize for making my initial response so harsh. I don't mean to be at all, mathematics is a fun thing to play around with and I like testing out theories as well. Just simply saying that this will not work for all cases, it only seems to work in the narrow horsepower band (400-650) that you tested it out in. An example of how numbers can seem to work out, but not actually mean anything at all: Take your waste size in inches and multiply by your height in feet. For me, that makes 168. Could that be my weight in pounds? Sure, and it might work for a few cases, but by no means does one calculate weight that way.

I don't see how any of that math is based in reality whatsoever, especially where you account for boost. According to your math, a certain boost level will add a certain amount of horsepower on any engine, always, which is obviously incorrect. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that your N/A HP calculations are correct (I have no clue if they are or not, but it doesn't matter, they don't factor into your boost calculations at all). So your engine is making 400 hp and you want 500 hp. You say to take the difference (in this case, 100 hp), and then come up with a boost number to make that horsepower. Let's take another example as a test. Say I'm making 5 horsepower on my engine. If I want 155 horsepower, according to your calculator I need 10.2 pounds of boost... The problem is in multiplying atmospheric pressure by boost pressure and coming up with horsepower. Where did you come up with that one?

Heh, thanks. Yeah, you don't see the louvers around too much anymore, but I'm so used to them I can't look at my car without them, it's just part of it. The wheels are old American Racing wheels I believe, 14x7. Good luck finding them, I have no clue if they're in production still or not. I think my car actually started out as your car is now. Kinda crappy condition, needed pretty much everything worked on, mine wasn't running though, at least you got that. I don't think I've put over $2000 in the whole thing, if you exclude the fuel injection and turbo parts, which weren't needed to get the car driving well.

WizardBlack, I did not come up with a direct relationship, just took measurements of temperature and noted the pulsewidths needed. I am aware that I made no account for thermal expansion rates or anything of the sort, which is why I simply noted those numbers. However, since you brought it up, according to nist.gov, the thermal expansion rate of gasoline is .00069/°F, making the expansion with dT=40°F 2.76%. I think I'd need someone like z-ya to come in and explain the effects of small resistance changes on fuel flow and what the ecu does/thinks it's doing. For what it's worth, I'm running low Z injectors with NO resistor pack. V3 megasquirt takes care of that for me. My guess is that it would only slightly change the opening time of the injector (and with injector opening times being variable by only 10% or greater at 1ms, I'm not sure of the impact of injector temp changes on it's function). Zmanco, I have tried running O2 correction at idle, and it does seem to work, though I was hoping to try something to fix the fuel temp problem rather than just running O2 correction. It can hunt at times with correction on, causing my idle to bounce up and down a little bit. And 15:1 afr would be way too lean for my motor at idle. It seems to lean miss starting at around 14:1, and really really likes about 12.5:1 or so (really really likes meaning highest idle speed and most vacuum).

I see that you've been looking through the MSA catalog for brake and suspension upgrades. Nothing against MSA, they supply some good parts, but if you really want cost effective upgrades, and some knowledge to boot, take a look at these threads: jmortensen's brake and suspension FAQs Brake upgrade FAQ Suspension Modification FAQ auxilary's brake upgrade thread has some good info as well Help! What brake options are available for S30 Z cars?

Also interesting that it's made of crush-bent tubing instead of mandrel bends... Very ingenious though.

Xnke, you have misread the information out there. The e88 will cause knock on L28 engines, not your L24. When on an L28, compression can be 10:1 or higher, depending on the specifics, and with it's chamber design, it doesn't seem to do so well. On an L24, the e88 yields just 8.8:1 CR, which you can happily run on low grade 87 octane all day long without a problem. I run an L24/e88 under 10psi of boost, without an intercooler, on crappy 91 octane, with no knock.

Clifton, that's on your 7m, right?

Bam! http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=123325

Woops, never did link my other thread in this one. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=126299

Greg's got it right on. Get that thing handling and stopping correctly before doing anything else. I got my 240 running reliably on SU carbs, did my suspension and brakes (not huge upgrades, just lowered with good bushings, and properly set up stock brakes) and then got into the addiction that is boost. But if you're just looking for a little umph, and not looking to turbocharge the engine anytime in the future, I highly recommend carbs over fuel injection. They're simple, reliable, and they just work. The only reason I went F.I. is to run a turbo. I think sometimes the big numbers of the turbo crowd can make people overlook the N/A crowd on here. N/A z's can still be fast, and can certainly be a blast to drive. If your goal is not to race or have an über-super-duper fast street machine, but simply to have a fun car to drive, and not have many problems with it or any down time, a nice N/A l28 would certainly be my vote.

Nope, there isn't really any specific one you need, there are many, many possible ways to trigger MSnS-E. If you've already budgeted for EDIS, do it. I just used the VR dizzy because I had one already, so it was free. I'll be upgrading to EDIS eventually, when I get a chance.

I used to work at Target, so I'll tell you their secret. No matter what day of the week they get their wii shipments, they hold them locked up in the back room until Sunday morning. Show up at opening time on Sunday morning, and if they have any, they'll be there. If they're not out on the floor, ask the electronics guy/girl, he/she'll get one for you. They usually sold out before about 1pm or 2pm, and through these months I wouldn't be surprised if they sold out well before noon.

I'm not intercooled at the moment, no. I do plan to be eventually, but with school getting busy I just don't have time. I'm running 338cc Ford CFI injectors. Some info about them can be found in the sticky at the top of the fuel delivery forum. I've been running 24-25 degrees of timing at 7psi for a good few months now. 22 degrees seems to be fine at 9psi. I give thanks to Clifton for helping me with my timing maps, I didn't really come up with those numbers on my own. This weekend I'm going to tune a little more and set things around 20-21 degrees at 10psi. If you're wondering how I'm controlling spark, I'm running MSnS-E as in my sig, triggering via an '82 N/A VR dizzy, with mech. and vac. advances welded up tight. Oh, all this on 91 pump gas. It's a stock 280zxt T3. I have not rebuilt it. I was told it has about 100k miles on it when I bought it. I've put about 5k miles on it No axial play and just a little radial. My best guesses for whp are 160-170 @7psi, perhaps 180 or so at 10psi. Not staggering numbers, but keep in mind I'm almost half a liter down, and it's a bone stock l24 longblock. And those are guesses, I could be waayy off. Any other questions about my set up, timing and fuel maps, whatever, ask and ye shall receive.

I'd totally buy that as a poster, too. Looks great. In my opinion the simplicity of a drawing vs. a photo is an artistic element, not an inaccuracy.

For what it's worth, I run a turbo on an L24 with an 8.8:1 compression ratio. Original flattop pistons and e88 head. I just megasquirted the engine first, got that running well N/A, and then bolted on the turbo (with all the additional stuff like oil return bung, etc). It really wasn't very hard or very expensive at all. I've got all the responsiveness of the stock motor off boost, with the power on boost. I'm running 9psi at the moment with no problems. As for cost, the biggest cost to me was megasquirt, but that's only because i needed injectors and the manifold and all that, because the car was carb'd. The actual turbo swap cost me no more than about $250. Sometimes you can find donor 280zxt's for $300 or $400, but I had no way to transport or store a non-running car, and didn't need most of the parts off it anyways.

Ads and surroundings not work safe, though main content isn't a big harry greased up shirtless dude playing guitar... http://www.collegehumor.com/picture:1757901

Elastic deformation is like gently squeezing the sides of an aluminum can, the walls move back into shape when you let go. Plastic deformation is like crushing the same can, it doesn't return to it's original shape, it stays crushed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deformation

Larry's word is law around here, so I moved this to another thread. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=127908 As for this thread, back to our 5.126" rods.

And my next reply: If "MASS IS THE ONLY VARIBLE", and we "Look up what a variable means", then by definition the 1000lb car and 10,000lb car have to accelerate down the track at the same rate. Are you saying they do?

This is carried over from 1 fast z's dyno thread, to help keep that one on topic. The posts so far, in order: In chronological order: Dave