Bob_H

Ok, I can take a lot, but one I can't let pass: Now come on! First, it is a misleading sentence, (or poorly worded), that the hp has anything to do with the weight. Second, even if you are generous, the SR20DET is at best 100 lbs less than the L6. You have to start with a 2000 lb 240Z. John Coffey is having a hell of a time getting his 240 down to 2100 or 2050. His is a stripped out race car with minimal "creature comforts". Most 240's weigh about 2200-2400. So 2100 with the SR motor if you assume my generous offer. Still, not much weight at all, but in reality, I'd bet the SR20 and all its turbo equip/intercooler, etc.. will weigh pretty close to a stock 240Z motor. Anyways, 1900 lbs is tube frame racer territory. And I do need to make one comment about power production with a turbo. First, the 4g64/63 hybrid refered to has great power. But didn' you say that was about 20 psi or more for the mid to high 300 hp range? The RB26dett will put that with 11 psi. Now that wasn't one of the original comparisions, but rather the RB20det. Still, what psi is required for the same hp? I really don't know for the rb20det. But the above was a big factor in my deciding to stick with the RB26 vs the 4g64 stroker. You see, I track my car quite often, and part throttle transitions are a little more tricky when you are talking about building boost to 20 psi vs 11 psi. While I would love to be either on or off the throttle, reality dictates on the track that I must have slowly increasing throttle areas, and the less psi to build, the more linear the response as I put my foot down. Of course, I don't think this enters into this conversation, for noone was talking about tracking their car. And next: Now we must be careful to seperate the real reason this happens. The stock Z body creates over 100 lbs of lift at the front end at 80-100 mph. Putting less weight overall on the front really doesn't change the front lifting. It just makes the car lighter, and thus overall more suceptable to the aerodynamic forces. There are a bunch of issues that play into that, and I don't think we can say a SR swap would make that big of difference. next: We are all in the skeptic mood. But yes, the iron blocked motor will hold more power than a similar aluminum blocked motor. Also, aluminum disapates more heat and thus in an exactly equal situation,(say a chevy v8, one head aluminum, one iron, C.R., etc.. all same), the iron headed motor will produce more power. The reason for using an aluminum head is to allow for higher compression ratios, which makes more power. But if all factors are held constant except the cylinder head material, the iron head will make more power. And the KA24 is just not as well built as the SR20 motors. And I would agree with the eaiser to source parts comment about the SR motor vs the RB motor. If you are going to stick with a 2.0 liter, go with the SR20. If you want anything bigger, go with the RB. Heck, with the right parts, you can directly bolt in a RB25det. Only the gearbox mount will have to be fabbed,(and possibly the body portion of the gearbox mounts). Enjoy, Bob

Alright, First, if you haven't already, read the thread in this forum about the best head for webers. It has something like 65 posts. Read it all. Then, and only then, come back and ask more questions. Next, you want high rpm power, up through 7400 rpm. The E88 is an absolute waste of time without EXTENSIVE mods to promote good airflow. The comment,(which I made), about all heads flowing about the same was refering to the N and P series, NOT the E series. They require work, (in some cases not insignificant) to get up to the N and P series flow levels in stock form. I am not going to tell you what is required to get an E-88 to work well in the situation you want. If you are dead set on using it,(a mistake in my opinion), send it to a well known Datsun engine builder and pay them on the order of 1000-1500 US dollars. Cam choice? You said you will be running 40 mm DCOE webers, a 2.8L block, an E-88 and want max power at high revs. You are starting with a poor combination and your cam choices are limited. See my suggestion at the end. 220 hp at the flywheel is achievable,(~180-190 at the wheels). However, take a really good look around at the types of motors that are putting that kinda power to the ground. Every one I know of save some race motors are strokers. The best 2.8 I have seen was 170 at the wheels, which is about 200-210 hp at the flywheel. Most 2.8L motors put from 140-165 at the wheels, or about 185-200 at the flywheel Yea, I know of a full race 2.8L that put 250 to the wheels, but you can't drive it on the street. It was built for a Bonneville speed record. And let me address RPM. I cannot count the number of times someone writes me from my webpage and asks: "So how can I get my motor to turn 8-9000 rpm like the honda's?" It is a fallacy that the L6 produces good power up high,(that kinda rpm), or needs to for that matter. However, in all fairness, you said 7400. There is no reason to rev that high to get the power you want. Above about 7000 rpm in the 2.8 and stroker L6 motors, the ring lands on factory type pistons, (i.e. not forged), start to pit and deteriorate from the beating they are taking. The rings flutter, don't seal as well, etc.. And forged pistons,(which combat the above) are not a good choice for something you will drive everyday. Next, 240 rods. No, don't use them. You gain almost nothing and they are not worth the headache w/o a different piston setup. You want 13 second 1/4 mi times. You won't see it with a L28 unless you put some serious time and money into your motor and everything behind it. First, with the webers, you must have someone who actually KNOWS what they are doing to tune them. Second, you really need at least the power levels you are talking about, which as I said above are hard to achieve. So, what do I suggest for a 13 sec 1/4 mi car besides buying a newer camaro or firebird? Go with a turbo L6. It is far eaiser to put the kind power down with a turbo than it is with a NA L6. Lets assume you are thick headed and absolutely have to do it with a NA block. Do yourself a favor and ditch your attachment to the E-88 head. If you don't want to do a lot of mods, the N-42 or N-47 are very hard to beat. If you are willing and know how to reset the valvetrain etc,(see the first thread mentioned), go for the P-79, P-90 or the Maxima N-47,(the last requiring valve work and combustion chamber work, again, mentioned in the big post). For a cam, you are looking for something on the order of a .500 lift and 300 duration to get what you desire. However, don't try to turn it over 7k for the previously mentioned problems. You'll break your rings or the ring lands with enough time at that elevated rpm. Next, BUDGET $$ for some tuning by a professional, on a dyno. Someone who knows webers. Otherwise convert it to FI or back to SU's and don't mess with the Webers. I still say it is cheaper in the long run to switch to a turbo. -Bob Oh, USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION! Your question has been asked about 1000 times in various forms and answered even better than I have. The reason you had to keep bumping the topic is b/c it comes up about once every week or two, and people get sick and tired of answering the same question over and over again. If you are a "newbie", lurk and figure out how to use the search function. If you can't find it, then say you tired before you ask the question. Tell us what you serched for. Maybe we can serch with you and help you find older posts. I say the above b/c if you had really used the search function, you would have already come to many of the conclusions I put above.

album empty says yahoo. I did get the ones you e-mailed. I assume that was the RB30 oil pan.

So did you use the curved crossmember or the straight one when you put your T5 in? I have already ordered the turbo diff flange. While I would love for it to fit perfectly, I have a feeling it will be about an inch off as you indicated, i.e. if the body mounts were about an inch further back it would fit. We'll see. I'll be working on it next weekend and should know better. -Bob

brad, file is not there.

Ok, here is one picture. I have having a heck of a time with my photo editor. Computer sucks. Won't save my changes and text inputs! Anyways, the top mount is the turbo tranny crossmember and the lower mount is the one I pulled out of my Z with the 83 ZX box. -Bob T5 vs ZX tranny crossmember

It appears to be the GT-R oil pan with the holes for the front axle covered with something like a brass plug and the mounting ears/etc for the front diff have been ground off. This should not be useable in the Z unless you eliminate the front crossmember and convert to AWD. One option is the Z31 RB20DET oil pan and pickup both modified. Another is the RB30DET modified to clear the cross member. Those two options are what Stony and Cuong did. I am still looking for alternatives. -Bob

wait, i'm still unclear on the max rpm at 150 issue. so do they both hit 6k at 150 or both hit their max rpm at 150. if the second is true, then their performance is identical as you said,(that is what I interpret your comments to be). However, I still think that if the first case was true, then car A is faster, unless you prove otherwise. -Bob

Or rather the AEM engine management system. I will be needing one that data logs, and Haltech is the best fit right now. A lot of people seem to be saying wait for the AEM to come out. Can anyone point me to a link that gives more info and maybe a price estimate? -Bob

I'll take more RPM any day. Ok, there are some missing assumptions. First, it is unclear if by saying both cars have an identical rpm limited top speed of 150 mph that you mean both have the same xx rpm limit, or one reaches 150 at 9k and one at 6k. So I checked out both. I plugged it into a standard 83 zx tranny with the two ratios and the 6k and 9k redline. well, for the 9k motor to redline at 150 it took 205/50/15's. for the 6k motor to redline at 150, it took 325/50/17's. ironically, this negagted any gearing advantage of the 4.11's vs the 3.54's, making the two identical. So lets assume they both are rpm limited to 6k at 150 mph. However, with the same tranny, to reach a 6k 150mph on the 9k engine combo,(read 4.11 diff), you need an unrealistic size tire of 345/60/18 vs. the 325/50/17's of the 6k combo,(3.54 rear), and that is close to 150 and 6k, but not quite. Now for the interesting part. Redline speeds in each gear for the 6k motor combo is: 49/81/115/150 Redline speeds for the 9k motor combo with the "imaginary" tire size is: 73/120/171/150(6k) So, for Motor A, second gear is good for 120 vs. 81 in the other car. Now the fun stuff, torque to the ground in each gear. Motor A: 1st-3674.767 2nd-2229.82296 3rd-1569.5 4th-1200.12 Motor B: 1-3674.59 2-2229.603 3-1569.678 4-1200.06 Basicly identical if you round. So with Motor A, you can apply 2230 lb-ft of torque till 120 mph. In motor B, you can apply the same amount of torque till 81 mph, where you then drop to 1570 lb-ft of torque,(I am obviously using 2nd gear for this example). So Motor A will clearly outrun Motor B due to RPM capability. But both put the same torque to the ground in each gear(answers #2). Shuey wins by a landslide in the Motor A combo(answers #1).

No cross posting. One forum and one only. I would suggest either the L6 forum or the for sale. Not every one you think it belongs to. -Bob

You ran the dyno in third gear? Did you try fourth? Usually the 1:1 in fourth makes the best power. Not always, b/c the drivetrain behind the tranny can have an impact. -Bob

Thought on your exhaust problem. The shape of the exhaust tips play a role in this, and I don't know if you have covered this before. The idea is to make it at 90 degree cut,(or angle it down) and if you were not fashion sensible, extend it just to the end of the bumper, or just past. With the pic you posted, your exhaust is pointed right up into the turbulent dead area behind the car. So any leaks in the rear will allow it to infiltrate the car. I have also been told, that at lower speeds,(less than 60-80), there is back flow up the sides,(above the fender, below/at the roof), which comes back to the corner of the window, and is the source of much of the "exhaust smell". It is not so much back flow as it is turbulent air not smoothly flowing past the windshield. Pointing your tips down might make enough of a difference to eliminate your problem. It is an easy thing to change and try. The traditional 45 degree cut on the tip is just as bad as angling it up into that dead spot. I can't explain enough about the crazy flow behind the Z at the speeds we encounter the "smell" or about 30-70. I think your exhaust tips are a major contributing factor to the fumes problem. Think of it this way, the air leaving the bottom of the car,(talking close to the ground) has more energy than the air closer to the the bottom of the car. If you dump the exhaust fumes into the air with more energy, it is more likely to contiune on with that air and go behind the car. If you dump it into that area with low energy, it has a tendancy to stay where it is, right behind the car. Give it a try before you go nuts with difusers and undertrays. I think you will be pleasantly surprised. I have worked with several Z's and had them change the exhaust from a 45 degree cut to a 90 degree or an angle down, and it usually eliminates most, usually all of the fumes with the window down. -Bob

Well, I am swapping a T5 into my 73 240. I haven't completed the swap yet, but I ran into some interesting items,(will post pictures next week). First, I took all the "others" that attach to the turbo tranny when it was in the ZX. This includes the transmission crossmember. What I had never seen before was it is curved vice straight like my 240Z one. So I know the tranny sits further back, and from the fabricated mounts I have seen, they are about the same shape. Soo..... here is some food for thought. As far as I know, they didn't move the transmission tunnel mount when they went to a turbo. They all had the same L6 with the same motor mounts. The later 5 speed,(we'll say '83), fit with a straight tranny mount. The T5 fit in the same body, with the curved mount. So it is reasonable to assume that the T5 with its curved mount might bolt right up into the 240Z. I put the two tranny's side by side to see how close it was. I saw less than a 0.5 inch difference in where the outer parts of the tranny crossmembers were,(again, I have pics, but won't post them until next week). And the overall length including the driveshaft for that tranny was within 1 inch, with the real difference in the driveshafts themselves. It may be that once I get the T5 in, I will have to shorten the turbo driveshaft. But maybe not... I had pushed both driveshafts all the way in for the comparison. I know the 83 NA tranny has the driveshaft about 2 inches back from full in when it is in the car. I am rambling a bit, and will post the pics next week. Unfortunatly, I will not get to work on this till next weekend, maybe two weekends from now. So who knows? It may be we can bolt the T5 in w/o any fabbing.... -Bob

Yea, it doesn't take up space, but it is annoying to look in several forums and see the same exact post. Tomahawk put it well. I also see it as a cheap way to get attention for a product. If it is that good, it will sell. If you want a lot of views, and don't feel the for-sale forum will do it, the L6 forum is where most that would use that book would be. But then you start to push the rules of the board. Think if we let everyone put their for sale in the forums. Why have a for sale forum then? No biggie, we'll let it go this time. -Bob

Hey Mike, HUGE FLAG RAISE! low 12 second car, 11k budget, but I quoth: ACK! Sorry, you just hit a sore spot for me. Anyone who wants a car with that kinda power and acceleration, but doesn't want great brakes has something wrong. The stock Z brakes can be made to work well, actually pretty good. But pushing somewhere over 300 hp to the wheels as you are talking about and saying you don't want brakes is nuts! I realize you may have meant "I don't really want 911TT Big Reds all the way around", but I wasn't sure. I cannot, and will not, endorse to anyone doing a project to put that much speed into a car w/o safety. I am talking at least some form of roll bar, and even better a full cage of some kind. Serious brake upgrades and suspension work to ensure you are not riding around on 30 year old bushings and such. Plus newer seat belts would be great as well. And if you notice, Darrius has a full cage...... I realize this comes out from left field, but if you don't feel like I do, I have no sympathy for you. Again, you may already think that, but that is not the impression I get. Old school is cool, as long as its safe. With that being said, and knowing you are A) in college, and on a budget,(even if it is rather big), and C) you are "a poor college student not making enough money to do crap like that" I would suggest the following: First, you need to plan money for basic suspension work. I would suggest replacing most of your bushings with G-machine or something similar,(poly type, better for daily drivers than fancy ball joints and such). I would also budget for all new shocks and springs. Next, some form of brake upgrades for the speeds you want to run. Some form of vented brake upgrade up front followed by either a "green stuff" type shoe on the rear drums or a conversion to rear discs. Brakes and suspension will likely eat about $2k of your budget, about $1k for brakes and $1k for suspension. I would spend more on brakes b/c that is a bigger safety issue. Next, figure on a $500-1000 paint job. You still gotta pick up the chicks you know, and they won't ride around in a hoptie. Next, you will need some form of interior, figure basic seats, a carpet kit from somewhere like Victoria British and other misc. interior items,(new belts, possibly a harness, maybe an autopower roll bar, misc. plastic trim bits and such). That will run somewhere in the neighborhood of $500. Realize I am quoting realistic prices. Yea, you can do an entire interior for $50 and it can look very good too! However, for a budget, you need to make sure you are putting aside what you need, not what you think you can make it work on. Otherwise you will have an empty wallet and maxed out credit cards when it is done. Next we have gauges and a radio and speakers,(gotta have tunes), talking another $500 or so here,(can be much more if you go nuts). Oh yea, tires and rims, there goes another we'll say 260 for rims,(65 each), and $400 for tires. Ok, now we might be ready for the engine and tranny! Oh wait! There is the rear end. For the power you were talking about, you will need an upgrade to an R-200, and would prefer one with a LSD. Arizona Z has them for 750. Lets say you get lucky and score a LSD R200 with the ratio you want for $500. We'll assume the half shafts are in good shape. Ok, now we can go on to the drivetrain and engine! The total thus far is.....$4660. Man, some are saying, that is a lot! "I built mine for XXX, not XXXX...!" Yea, but am I really that far out of line for a decent car? Lets say you are frugal and figure out a way to do all the above on your stripped car for $4000. And I used the lower side when I had two figures for one thing... So that leaves ~7k for your swap. But wait, you are a poor college student with no job, so you siphoned off $2k drinking and paying bills that you couldn't cover with your poor paying job,(again, is this unrealistic?). So now you have 5k. I say, for the $$, you will be hard pressed to beat a 2.8L turbo setup. Build it smart, with an aftermarket turbo, a good intercooler and a good ECU or aftermarket FI system and you should have 300-350 at the wheels and be running in the 12's no prob! If you went V8 and used the JTR stuff, you would approach the upper end of your budget. A used LT-1 and a 6 speed,(you can always go for a 4L60E), will eat a bunch of your remaining budget. Now you have to install all of it... Oh yea, a shortened driveshaft, linkage for the shifter if auto... You see? A V8 is a great way to get power in a Z, but I think the L6 turbo route is eaiser. As a matter of fact, I would suggest putting a Junkyard aquired,(excuse me, salvage yard ), 280ZX turbo motor and tranny in right now and start driving it while you do the other things. With the above, you will come in with a few thou to spare. Trust me, you will find a way to spend it all, even if it is not drunk! Driving a project is much more fun than working on it for 2 + years and not driving it,(or 11+ yrs in Pete's case!). If you start out with a stock turbo, you can slowly upgrade and learn the system while you work on things such as brakes, suspension, interior, and paint. I think you will be much happier in the end. Just be sure to set aside your budget money and not touch it. You might look into buying someones abandoned L6 turbo project, or a completed one that someone decided to move on to something else like a V8 or a RB etc.. Good luck. The key is planning, planning, planning. And stick to your plan. -Bob

Hey all, time to weigh in again. JeffP and others, noone said the turbo stroker is not good. I said, and was backed up for the next three posts that it was not cheap And JoshB said: Josh, that is awesome! BTW, I did not quote this to prove my above point, I just loved the comment. But regardless, you backed it up with your bottom end cost. I love the stroker, but it is most certainly not a cheap route. And for the hp goal that hoodwink was looking for, (300 hp), I cannot reccommend a stroker unless he just wants to spend extra money,(you are welcome to be my sugar daddy ). That is an easily atainable power level with the stock type turbo setup and a decent intercooler. And Josh, Lockjaw was right on for his power estimates at the wheels. I have seen strokers from 160 to 255 at the wheels. The 160 was a poorly tuned SU setup. Most are in the 170-190 range. It cost quite a bit of money and tuning time to get over 200 at the wheels in a NA setup. I am sitting at 180. When I get a heat shield on the car and stop boiling over the rear carb, I should be about 185-190, and about 200-205 on torque. That is pretty normal, about 20-30 lb-ft and about 15-20 more hp than an equal 2.8L. As for the P-90A with hydrualic pivots. I have run mine for 15k miles on my stroker with an aftermarket cam and many trips to 7k with 0 problems. I love how quiet the head is and that it requires NO adjustment. I'm lazy, what can I say! If they are in good shape, I say go for it. Post and find awd92gsx. He has a tech bulliten for Mitsubishi's and their hydrualic lifters. He can tell you how to check if they are good, and how to "fix" them if they are questionable, (by "fix" I mean soaking in diesel and testing). -Bob

Quick and dirty. First, your subject heading is misleading. That is part of the reason for low response. First, I will make some assumptions, since you didn't put it out. I assume you are looking at building a stroker turbo setup for your 240Z. I am sure you have checked out my webpage, and I will say it again, there is no cheap stroker. And a cheap stroker turbo does not exist. The guys out here who have built good stroker turbos have a bit of money in their engine. I'd do some more research on the turbo's. Right now, JeffP has a great "stock" turbo setup. He is pushing up near 400 hp to the wheels. It is all in the tuning and setup. His model is a good one to follow that shouldn't break the bank. Second, I would plan on finding a chassis dyno around you. If you have a turbo setup and are changing it from stock, consider it a must to put it on the dyno and tune it. Budget at least $500-1000 for that. Sure, you won't spend it all at once, but at $1-500 per session, it will add up. Next, you really don't need forged pistons for the power levels you are looking at. Stock pistons can live up to just over 400hp if taken care of. If you haven't already, check out my website, the Datsun Workshop. It may answer some of your "other" questions such as rods/heads etc.. Plan on the P-90 or P-90A if you are turbo-ing your motor. It is hard to beat for a turbo. -Bob

Oh really? -Bob (resident smart ass)

Well, I've got some request for engine pics. Basicly some similar to Cuong's. Some side shots of the front area of the motor,(looking at motor to radiator clearance). A shot of the turbo areas to see how the twin's sit down there and how close they are to the strut tower. A shot of the rear of the motor and how close/clearance issues with the firewall. Any shots that show your wiring with the SDS unit. And that brings up the ignition, are you running the coils from a SDS unit or are they RB parts? If you get a chance, a shot of the modified transmission crossmemeber and the driveshaft would be great. Basicly the modded parts are the high demand for pictures parts b/c they show what had to be done to make it work in the Z. Lastly, you have mentioned before that the Z31 RB20 mounts sit the motor forward. With what has to be done to the Z31 oil pan, I take it not much room is there to lower the motor,(or is that not an issue? Again, a pic of the oil pan to crossmemeber pic would be great as well). But how far back do you think the motor can be sat? (meaning how much further back than your setup) If you ever had access, a corner weighting scale would be great to show your F to R distribution. Actually, you can cheat to check this at a local CAT or truck scale that measures the axle weights. You park it half on one and half on another scale and get the break down. It shouldn't have to be exactly centered btw the two and should give a rough idea. The only real problem is the min resolution on these truck scales is usually 100 lb increments. In a 2400lb car that can be a few % difference. Thanks, Bob

This was actually covered before, search this board,(the Alternate L6 board). While I know it is an incredible engine,(I drove the Trailblazer), think about the engine height. It fits upright in a trailblazer/envoy. Our Z does not have that kind of vertical clearance in the engine bay. The height was posted somewhere, and unless you are into serious cowl hoods, it appears to not be an option. Second, you are locked into the automatic it comes with unless you spend a pretty penny to have an adapter and custom flywheel made for some manual tranny. But your right, a great design, and I think we will see more about this engine in the next few years. My biggest complaint was you needed to get it above about 4k before it really started moving. But take that motor and put it in a Z that weighs half as much... There are much better options for the $$ it would require to put it in, for they aren't exactly populating junkyards yet. My bottom line: I don't think it is a good candidate for a hybrid conversion. In addition, take a look at the oil sump. It is a forward sump, which would sit right on the front crossmember. You are talking about a custom oil pan to make it work in the Z. Any motor can be put in the Z, but some just aren't good ideas. The jag V-12 is an example. I think this falls into this category. Next question. You say you are looking for a 240 to modify? Does that mean you are not going to be driving your Dad's, but rather want one of your own? I would not reccomend a serious swap for your first experience owning a Z. I suggest to people that they buy a good 240 and mod the motor lightly learning the brakes/suspension, etc.. about the car. You learn to appreciate what your later hybrid is if you start that way. And your dad's car doesn't sound like a slouch either, esp. with 4:38 gears. If you tackle a conversion first, you will have a lot of down time with your Z before you get to drive it. I suggest buying a driver, and working on it with keeping down time to a few days at most initially. Drive it for at least a year, then you will know what you really want. -Bob

Ok, now my curiosity is peaked. The engine is rated at a conservative 280 hp and 271 lb-ft of torque. Now you said that dyno plot was Stock. What exactly is aftermarket/different from a R-33 RB26DETT? I know you have a monster intercooler and an aftermarket downpipe and exhaust. IS that it? I knew they were underrated, but you are talking about 400 crank hp vs 280. Do you think your SDS made a difference? Second, the torque upped with the R-34 to 293 from 271, still at the same rpm. What model did you pull yours from? Does it matter if you get it from a R-32/33 or 34? I would think that a R-34 RB26 would be your better option. Is there a significant price difference btw the RB's from newer R-34's vice the older R-32's? I realize you may not be able to answer those questions, but I appreciate what you can address. BTW, screaming 1/4 mi times. And on a stock motor no less. Well, it is only fair to credit how cold it is up there in Alaska compared to say, Texas or Florida. That surely helps the turbo setup. What are the temps when you run? I remember your comment on the cold and rainy day. -Bob Hanvey BTW, on your webpage, the wording/links overlap. You can still select your various pages, but they are on top of each other.

Mike, by "professional equipment" I meant just that. You can rent a fender roller from some places. It bolts to the hub when the tire is removed. It has a roller on the end which you adjust and work it back and forth. You progressively increase the amount it rolls. As long as you don't have a bunch of bondo down near the lip, you should be fine. If that lip inside the fender is straight metal w/paint, I believe you can accomplish it w/o damaging your paint. It leaves about .25-.5 inches to the edge of the fender so its not like it becomes a sharp edge. The following page shows what it looks like. Plus he rents his out if you can't find one somewhere else. Fender roller page I would check with your locak body shops first. I think you will be happy with the results. -Bob

can someone point me to the post where it said how many amps this drew and what approx. cfm it was? Thanks, Bob (I know it was recent, but its late and I'm hoping that someone has it bookmarked!)

Very well. Will do. It wasn't just about being a better track car, but which one has more emotion for me, i.e. which one do I keep. Being a better track car is an issue, but in the end will likely have little effect on which one I keep if I sell one. It, as always, is an emotional decision. But in deference, I will not continue it. Right now my mission is to find a way to keep both. I really, really want to go FI and a good size sunbelt grind, (same size as you Dan). I just put the M coupe on the dyno today to get a baseline to help myself. 219 hp and 225 lb-ft of torque. Flat as a table.. Just imagine that kinda power,(or more!) in the Z...... . I have done a lot of thinking on this subject for the last few weeks, and something tells me I will not sell either one. But I promise John, no more car A vs. car B discussion for my two cars. We'll just call me lucky to have both. -Bob PS- thanks for your input on the suspension tuning issues.