Daeron
-
Posts
2148 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Daeron
-
-
You haven't the foggiest idea how badly I needed that one. Passed along, and re hosted.
-
So a pair of these twin blade bodies would be more than enough breathing for a good, hi-po motor, AND it would make drivability much nicer if you had, say, an SU manifold altered to use fuel injectors, and aforementioned pair of siamese throttles. (Nicer compared to "some huge by large affair" that only has max HP in mind.)
This makes me have ideas about a plenum to toss onto this setup that I don't want to talk about for fear of being beaten to the punch. I've already said too much.
-
You mentioned throttle body, mine has the twin throttle plate setup and both are about the same size.
Sorry if I am nagging, but I would presume that you have, then (in the context of this thread) "the throttle body on the left?" What size are the butterfly bores? "About the size of a dime.. [or a] ..nickel" is vague to say the least, and it would be nice to get better data.
-
World finals going on at the salt now, Got these images off landracing and SCTA site. only info I have is Victory motorsports, made a run so far at 161.95 mph. maybe someone here knows the car.
Gary Cole DCWATERJET Z
Wow. That thing could almost be stock plus full moons and headlight covers. A buck sixty. That sends a charge down my spine:burnout:
-
Which includes: Custom crank with an 88mm stroke (be interesting to see if this would fit in the block, and if not what kind of work would have to be done), around 150mm long rods (haven't looked into if any forged OEM rods would work or not) and custom 31mm pin height pistons in a sleeved LD28 bored out to 89mm (leave some room to clean up the bore if needed later) with a dish allowing for a nice big turbo to be placed on it....Yes I would love to have a 3.3L turbo'd LD28....Likely to happen? Well we'll have to see XD (My more realistic goal is a car very much like Garrett76zt's, which while not cheap is much more realistic for most)
I do not think the LD28 block can even come close to an 89mm bore.
I haven't got a moment to look for posts to show, because I am speaking from what I have read (and not first hand knowledge) but I am still pretty sure your ceiling on an LD block is significantly less (in terms of potential bore diameters) than the gas L6 blocks. Sorry I can't recall specifics, but I know I have seen multiple threads where brian (1_fast_z, the guy who built his own DOHc head for the Z engine out of 240SX heads) repeatedly stated over and over that the block he sonic tested couldn;'t be bored out to over 83mm?
Again, I am fuzzy on the details, but I know I have seen pipe dreams of 3.4 liter engines based on that super tall block with an 89mm bore, but it just aint going to happen.
-
One word of advice when playing around with soobies:
NEVER underestimate the possibility that a Nissan part might fit.
Tony D has told me a couple of times that Fuji Heavy Industries was actually subcontracted by Nissan to do alot of component manufacture, including (possibly) some L6 cylinder heads (!);
I have seen time after time similarities between my old 87 GL-10 and datsuns/Nissans in general; so.... what I am saying is, you never know. Both cars use Hitachi transmissions and final diffs, (the auto gearbox in the 240SX and the pickup are RWD variants of the same 4EAT that Subaru has used in their cars since around 88) both used Hitachi-mock-Bosch EFI through the 80's at least... You neeever know when a Datsun bit might fit.
In a way, a Subaru is what happens when a Volkswagen and a Datsun have a postwar reunion and things get a little out of hand... Drinkin all this modern Ethanol fuel, inhibitions are lost, and O2 sensors get preheated.... Steamy.
Edit-> Advance apologies, but I really couldn't delete that once I typed it. I never claimed sanity or tact were my strong points.
-
And what I have understand is that it is easier for rods with bigger r/s than smaller r/s.
That is the truth of the matter, but if you could assign a number to "how much easier" and then factor that into the equation, more power will almost always be capable with more displacement. Changing the r/s ratio and making it "easier" is an exercise in tweaking your powerband to be what you want it to be, with the equipment you want to use.
Now, to know what you are doing with that, requires about 10-20 different iterations of you L-motor with differing strokes and differing rod/piston combinations, as well as piston crown/head combustion chamber combinations, and induction combinations. I am saying about 10-20 longblock combos, plus the added complications of the induction setups (camming and portwork included with induction) and then make about oh, 50-100 dyno runs comparing your numbersfrom each change. (Finding a good dyno, good operator, who can keep his machine somewhat consistent for this project, etc etc... ugh) It is something that takes DEVELOPMENT.
Les Cannaday burst my bubble on this idea by telling me that electromotive did something similar to this at one point, nd did durned good with it.. after they dialed it in to a T. Using resources that pretty much NOBODY here has. Did it kill my interest in the project? Heck no, it made me want to do it to study it. It made me certain that I was wrong in thinking it'd be some whiz-bang junkyard combo that no one had found that screamed in a way that convinced you to chuck the practicality of the stroker out the window. I thanked him generously for bursting my bubble.
But if you take a block, bore it out to 89mm, and get some LD28 rods and an L20 crank, youre around 2.6 liters and you are at one end. Get an LD28 crank, and L24 rods, and the KA pistons and you can re stroke your de stroker. I think the de-stroker might require a slight alteration of pin height from the standard KA, but at most two sets of custom pistons, two different cranks, one block, and one head (unless you wanted to have two heads ready to go, so you wouldnt have to change cams.) All it takes is an L28, an L20 crank, L24 rods, and an LD28 reciprocating assembly. Plus the pistons, so maybe 1K for the stock parts and maybe 1K for two set of pistons (could be cheaper.)
All that needs to be done is to try it and you start building the experience that you need to REALLY know this stuff. The important part is empirical records tracking improvement.
-
deleted
Sorry, but that went up in the wrong spot ENTIRELY. Go back to the main sub forum branch, and go into Z31 subforum, and post a new thread of your own, there. You might want to search a bit before doing that, though.
-
The Cost method of deciding whether or not to DO this seems to be the consensus of many others with whom I have spoken about. However, whether or not it is worth it; ie, can I make more power per cubic inch to the ground, is a matter of tuning not just the engine and its powerband, but the gearbox and final drive ratios, all TO THE TRACK in question.
In other words,
The thing is, THIS motor is going to be a picky picky picky picky bi-atch. It will take LOTS of time on a good dyno to tune it in properly to eke every bit of power out of it, it will need to be geared to whatever track you are running on (because this is a race motor I am proposing here, and a durned specific, oddball at that.. this is all a hypothetical to take your idea to its fullest extent.Engineering a racecar is a tricky thing, and when you are "optimizing your rod ratio" you are playing in the sandbox dreaming of the day you will be a Big Boy. I say you, I mean "we" because I am right there in the sandbox with ya. Some of the guys here are Big Boys, and I haven't seen a single one of them maximize their rod ratio unless they were class-limited to be under 2 liters of displacement. If you can find a class where you don't have to keep the stock recpirocating assembly, but you have to stay within or below stock displacement, then this is an idea to bat around with.
But nobody has done it and changed the world with it yet. It HAS been done, and the earth kept on spinning.
-
Next time I'm offered a $100 USD LD, I may grab it and sell the crank to a yank for 400% clear profit
+20 bonus points for using the terms "crank" and "yank" so close to each other in a sentence, WITHOUT making it about... well, you get the idea...
-
I didnt know they made a Z in 1772 LOL JK
That was back when they replaced them with those fancy backwards lowercase f's in script
-
One type of L20A crank has a smaller big end journal (45mm's), like the L24E Maxima's. The larger L20A crank is 50mm's like the rest of the L series family.
I wonder how many rods you could find/use on the smaller L20A crank?
Hmmmm.....
I *did* know that, but couldn't find the specs anywhere (easily) so I just ignored it. Trust me, I was definitely aware of that one
Its one of the reasons why, upon discovering a dearth of rods with 53mm BE bores, I still posted the info that I did up.tony, your comment about offset grinding is appreciated; when Komdotkom mentioned grinding the pieces to match something seemed odd, but I couldn't put my finger on it. Another Rookie mistake from yours truly
The 1-3 mm potential increase in stroke can be taken care of using the VG piston now rather than the taller KA, and the honda (and 'yota) rods give us some real estate between 133 and 140 to play with.But I gotta say, Honda engines are some of the best damn engines out there, and for anyone to hesitate before putting a honda rod into their engine because of a bunch of idiot post-tweens with more spoilers than brains, really doesn't fit this website. Ever since I started driving my CRX HF about six months ago I've started taking affront to anyone who assumed Honda parts were crap because Honda enthusiasts are largely wasting skin... so I;ve been meaning to get that one off my chest.
-
Grind you crank to match the toyota rod, centre the rod on the crank during this process. This will not weaken the crank, anyone who tells you this is not talking from experience.
You will then need to mill the pin end of the rod 2mm each side to fit the piston. Simple process, any competant machine shop should be able to do this. The pin diameter is 22mm for Z31 and 3sgte
Well, see, I was imagining a straight pull, not needing to modify the rod or your crank.
But this discussion motivated me to look a little deeper and i found this...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7376862/Conrod-Application-July2408
It is a company's catalog in a digital, searchable document format.. I searched "53" and also "21" searching for rods that would only need to be altered at one end. Most (if not all) rods with 53mm big ends are too long to use, but there are some honda rods with 48mm big ends and 21mm pin journals that might work in the 136 and 138 range it looks like.. B16, B18, ans B20 motors.. Okay!! Listed: H23/B20A/F22 rod, 141.75mm length, BE is at 51mm, pin at 22mm, combined with a stock VG30 piston puts the piston .5mm above the block using that L20A crank, and the rod/stroke ratio is still above 2. Interesting document, I thought it might prove useful.
-
What toyota rods fit onto the L-series crankshaft? I did some googling and it seems like there is conlficting info out there.. the 3SGTE "crankshaft rod journal" is listed at 48mm, but the "" is listed at 51mm. The L-series rods are 53 mm. Also, 22mm wrist pins on the rods, which matches the Z31 piston but the Z31 rod BE is also 53mm. SR20 has a 51mm big end and a 22mm pin, maybe that is what you were thinking? Or am I missing something?
-
Wow.... nice photos!!!!!
/sarcasm/ I think your throttle body might be a little on the small side.../sarcasm/
-
This has nothing to do with Detonation and rod stroke ratio, but I can tell you the engine in the video has an L20A crank, L20A Block, and L20B Rods... do that calculation boys and girls. Maybe move this one to a new post now that I've mucked this one up totally throwing that tidbit out there...
I kept shut because A: i didn't do any of this and B: I couldn't even come close to relating it all right anyhow, but I was hoping you would chime in after I threw your vid here.
Looooong rod, over 2:1 ratio, tight tight tight tight ring pack on the piston.
There are in fact, TWO replacements for displacement. One is boost... but the other is reciprocating frequency (RPMs)
2 liters at 9300 = 6 liters at 3100, right??? -
Unless the L20A is fully counter weighted (none of the other L6's are so I don't see why It would be) it would still be missing the same 4 counterweights on 2 and 5, leaving the surrounding counterweights to make up for it. I was reading in my "how to modify you're 510 & 240Z" books that at a bit lower rpm than what that L20 was running the cranks still died fast due to harmonics above 8k.
I'm not saying that it is physically impossible to do, or shouldn't be done... but what kind of gains would you get in that rev band and what kind of longevity would you see?
Thank you for clearing that up. I knew the points you brought up in response, but when I read your initial post it just... went over my head.
-
I'm still not sure why people want to make a high winding monster on a compromised crank (unless nissan added 4 counterweights for posterity on the L20A?) .
Huh??? How is the L20A crank compromised? (Aside from the two facts that A: I was just speccing out the furthest this gentleman's idea could be taken with existing parts, and B:
)Edit: 1. The question was a legitimate one, and not intended to sound as smart@ss as it might.
2. Point B above was just to illustrate how totally wicked-badass 9500 RPM sounds
Don't take me TOO seriously. -
Same thing happened to the PO of my Z, but he never fixed it. Which meant I got a Z with a 10k mile Rebello engine that had never gone WOT
Solid!
-
Check out this site for quite a few of these "conversions".
http://www.jtruck.net/misc/4x4cars/ I think the Z that Daeron is talking about is pictured there. http://www.jtruck.net/misc/4x4cars/S_DatsunZ.jpg
Yup!! Thats it, or it is as like it as two peas!!
-
Given that Z-cars are out of the question....
1. 88 Honda CRX HF with an NA EJ22 driveline, 1800 pounds, AWD, 140 stock NA horsepower.
2. LD28 powered, intercooled, Dual Range 4x4 Late model 620 pickup
3. Subaru XT powered by electric.. AWD, FWD, RWD, whatever. CD of 0.17 ff the factory floor, thats the important bit.
If we let Z-cars in, then a BMW V12 swapped S30 is right at the top, an RB powered 1986 300ZX 2 seater would be schWEET, and ANY engine in an S30 that has been chopped and worked into looking like a Datsun Roadster. Or, I guess, an SR powered roadster would be sweet. HEY, that one can go on the top list... aww crap.....
-
I believe in order to achieve the sound I want, I am going to need to run dual functional tail pipes. I think running a different length to each side will create the harmonized sound I am looking for.
In my mind the system plays out like this:
- 2.5" mandrel bent downpipe off of the turbo
- Custom SS "Y" from 2.5" to dual 2.25"
- Dual 2.25" each into a 12" long resonator box in the tranny tunnel
- One 2.25" pipe exits at the outside face of the box
- One 2.25" pipe exits 8" into the box, making this path a different length than the other
[*]2.25" pipe runs to the back of the car, one exit on each side, each through a muffler.
[*]Dual tip exits from each muffler.
- One 2.25" pipe exits at the outside face of the box
- My rationale is that the staggered exit from the resonator box will allow the same pulse to split and reach the tailpipes at different times, therefore smoothing out the exhaust note to a degree.
- By running 2 larger mufflers (than the current 1 smallish muffler) I should be able to control the volume a bit better.
- The dual tips are more for show, but if I can stagger the paths between the muffler and each of it's tips, more smoothness should ensue.
- Dual 2.25" is effectively larger than the 3" single I have now, and probably easier to package under the car as well.
I might be way off base with these assumptions, but I welcome any input those with experience on exhaust tuning or exhaust design may be willing to share.
This is almost exactly what I had in mind when I wrote up the little graph on pipe sizing that is now a sticky in this subforum. I am SO glad to see this, and wish I had caught the thread earlier. I haven't even read beyond your first two posts yet, but am excited
- 2.5" mandrel bent downpipe off of the turbo
-
Good post, thanks for pointing out the mistake!
-
I would love to see what intake manifold he wound up going with....
Its one of the reasons why, upon discovering a dearth of rods with 53mm BE bores, I still posted the info that I did up.
2 liters at 9300 = 6 liters at 3100, right??? 
Hypereutectic Cast Pistons
in Nissan L6 Forum
Posted
Sounds like someone is using too long of a connecting rod......
GROAN......
I wouldn't bother trying too hard to press this point. The more people you convince, the more people you will be competing with for pistons. Kinda a lose/lose situation.