Daeron
-
Posts
2148 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Daeron
-
-
A thing of beauty is a joy, forever. That is a well dressed little engine, there.
The 1600 is no drag racer, but it is at least as fun to drive as a stock miata.
One might say its just about a ton of fun..... plus it feels like youre driving an antique down the road, about ten times more than it does in a 70 240Z.
Gary, do you have any good interior pics to illustrate my point about the antique feel?
Not to mention the fact that it is just like any other internal combustion engine.. if you put solexes on it, high compression pistons, the right camshaft and valvetrain.. suddenly you're dealing with some serious horses. I don't want to quote butt-dyno numbers, but the car CAN be quite potent.
-
I will not have any 80 mph burn outs any more hopefully
.Hopefully.
Because, seriously, it really is a very special kind of pain-in-the-ass feeling when you break those rear wheels loose at 85 miles an hour, AGAIN.
I really hate having too much power to maintain traction entering fourth gear; it TOTALLY kills the experience of driving for me.
-
ftw:D
-
I was planning on sacrificing an old oil pan sump to do the same thing with my 280Z tank.. I even considered setting up my second FUEL warning light* on my 75 280Z to function SOLELY on the sump, heh...
Looks great! Nice to know it shouldn't cost too much to get the intermediate steps that I can't do myself (the welding etc) taken care of.
Minor threadjack, does anyone know what kind of metal is the tank made of (steel I presume) and, are the oilpans the same type of metal, or am I boned on that idea?
*I have no idea why I have two fuel warning lights; neither worked during the entire time I DD'd the car.. one is at the top of the center control area above all the HVAC controls, and one is down in the center console just below the stereo
-
pistons are NOT the place to scrimp.
I know ALL about the zero budget build.. but live on one meal a day for a month for your pistons. JY every other part if you want.. but new pistons, specifically designed to your application, will probably make more difference than any other single (times six) part other than the camshaft.
-
ye GODS, what a pipe dream.....
-
my vote for CareBear's title is Palmela Handerson
I suppose 2thumbs might work too, but thats beyond obscene
Since I am making another post in this thread, I would like to chuck it over to a serious note and request the title "Altruist" for myself, because it reflects me better than just about any other one word I can think of.... and if that is true, then its rare enough that I seriously would like to request it
-
First off, Jon, Alan, thank you both for not taking my comment in the wrong way.. I kinda came down like an overbearing big brother there, but you guys understood my overall point, I think.
Secondly, this....
I'm just happy four other guys showed up at World Finals in Bonneville this year with a G-Nose! When G-Noses outnumbered non-G-Nosed Z's, the tide was turned and they decided it might not be good to disallow it...pretty well sums up my POV on this subject; beyond that, its a matter of opinions and their proverbial diversity and olfactory essence.
-
are you aware that some R-200 open diffs are 2 pinion and some ar four pinion? I am not 100% positive I fully understand the difference yet (i still havent reached a point where I can see a differential spinning and functioning in my mind, but its just because ive been too lazy) BUT I know it makes a HUGE difference in the strength of the unit. A welded, four pinion R-200 is "strong enough" to at least get you onto the track and started, and its a junkyarders special, so it barely matters how many of them you break.
just a thought.
-
This
That's a gas tank. I don't even think F1 was using diffusers in the early 70s. This is really the very beginning of trying to use aero to produce downforce and I think it took quite a while for the things that CanAm and F1 was doing to trickle down to the lower racing classes. Looking at these old pictures to try and justify your own use on a vintage race car is OK, but looking at these to try and figure out what the best aero solution is might not be the wisest move.immediately followed by this
especially since people tuning the same cars to produce considerably better downforce by todays standards are employing entirely different aero tech into new designs of old cars.a friend was in my garage the other day and said "this is a 76? but look at it... it's so aerodynamic!"
to which i replied "aerobatic, maybe. it could probably do a backflp if if i made it try hard enough"
Resulted in this comment:
"....to try and justify....." ? What a strange way of putting it. You make it sound as though building and using a period-correct and period-legal race car is in some way just a strange affectation.When all is said and done, the "best aero solution" is to start off with another car entirely........ Perhaps something designed and built within the last two or three years, instead of something nearing forty years old?
"....new designs of old cars." ?
That one went straight over my head, I'm afraid.
The important part was the very last line. Jon, you simply said that 30-35 year old photographs are not the soundest, most up-to-date technical information source, especially in an aerodynamic sense.
Alan responded saying that he never intended the photo collection to be an end-all, know-all Final Word on the subject.
Then everyone started pulling words and statements from LESS informed posters, and putting them into each others mouths.
Nobody really disagreed over anything until peoples points were misunderstood.... Alan, I am sure you do not doubt the validity of more recent information sources, and Jon, I am sure you see where the wisdom in using the vintage racing experience as a stepping-off point is....
..and thats it! why get panties in a wad over such a simple matter? Ignore the cretins, and the clowns like me who know alot, but don't really Know yet, and relax. Flame wars are bad for the stomach lining.
-
WOW I like the looks of that!! Its very reminiscent of the Roadster consoles actually, and it might not be all that difficult to find a genuine datsun center console to bolt in for an arm rest instead of building one. I have to start looking at parts with this in mind now, hmmmm......
Did you bevel the leading edges and corners of the two side pieces, or is that just a "blunting" effect from the vinyl wrapped around it?
Here is a thought as far as reproducing this is concerned.. How about making patterns for the pieces of MDF that you used? That way, if you would be so kind as to distribute them freely, anyone who wants could do the same thing on their own rather than take your time to do so.
One thing I might have done differently would be the material used for the "face" of the console.. I would have tried using either a piece of plywood or possibly some sort of fiberglass sheet, and cut square holes out for using the stock switches and indicator lights from that section of the original console.. but thats primarily because I am almost obsessed with the stock look inside my Datsun
-
=42 would be great, but Anomalous is nice and Wagnerian-sounding.
On another note, thinking about this inspired me to one of my best license plate ideas yet.. I GROK Z
-
“… Check it Yo.. Was driftin the ole ladies Mustang in the Wally World parking lot, and those darn light poles with the concrete base?…Yeah, mad skills kicked in mid drift, then committed CFIT yo…”
all right, this thread is funnier than a bag of kittens (seriously, try it sometime.. its freakin hysterical) but THAT was the bit that caused me to spray iced tea all over my monitor.
Thanks Paul, always good for a laugh.
EDIT and before I got from post #35 to the end, my title was changed to Anomalous. Works for me!
-
Of course you would need a before and after spectral analysis.
Well... of Course!
-
mopar... I am not a big fan of the hood (I6 for me) OR the wing, OR the 2+2, all for primarily aesthetic purposes. However, the lines for the rear fenders that you put on that car turn the 2+2 body shape into something I have NEVER seen it... the wing and hood are neither here nor there. My point is (strictly speaking aesthetically) that is probably the nicest 2+2 concept I have ever seen! It somehow evokes the huge rear fenders from say, a 70s corvette, without looking REMOTELY like anything but a Z. In fact, it looks more like a 2 seater Z should than many flared 2 seater Zs...
bah, im just babbling my opinion away. Nice drawing!
-
DIRECT flat top pistons, with .022" Piston to Head clearence
Thats just a hair over half a millimeter. Less than half of the 0.050" that you had stated OTM, and that is a COUNTRY MILE when you are thinking of flame kernels.
You could probably slip a fingernail clipping in between the piston at TDC and cylinder head on 1fastZ's engine... but I doubt you could fit a big toenail clipping in there. (If that is a little gross, forgive me, but it was the simplest real-world grounding I could think of
)Obviously I am no Quench Sage, nor am I the omniscient Master of Combustion... but I have gathered from discussion here that 0.050" of clearance is not squish, its more like squash.
-
I have a question for you datsun guys that have been around for a few laps longer than I have.....
IS there any other engine that has quite so much of a combination of real-world miles, plus race-engineered knowledge, other than your standard pushrod american V8s? the turbo ford motors are extensively run, and the rotaries are a rather simple equation.. VWs might contend, and the mini cooper motor (As I understand it) was made in such ridiculous numbers that it might also be on the list... but my point is, collectively, SO MUCH intricate knowledge of the various combinations of part runs for the L-series has had such a VAST "trickle-down" from countless hours and years of racing success.
Are there any other engines that might be on this sort of list that I am missing? Is my point getting adequately conveyed at all? Or am I just rather limited in my exposure to real in-depth knowledge of various specific engine families?
-
just like the coelacanth.....
-
Too Cool!!
(and stephen colbert welcomed all of his writers back onto the show tonight (writer's strike is over) with a big she-bang, had them each come out one at a time, greeted them by name, had them walk to the side stage for a "Team Photo." Mr. Met was the last "writer" to come out, but the other shoe what you KNEW was gonna drop came out a face or two before Mr. Met.. and guess who??? Kevin Bacon! Ka-POW!)
-
I know nortons and triumphs came with SU carbs, but my points were all in the past tense. IMHO, not recognizing an SU is about on par with not recognizing a weber..... but thats just me. Obviously everyone isn't going to be barking up every tree.... it just kinda blew my mind.
Spilling oil out of the carb is another thing; we all make mistakes. Ever tip a datsun manual transmission bellhousing end up without a drive axle in the back? Get the kitty litter out
-
does anyone have a picture of the non-speaker fiberglass panel installed on a door?
I NEVER Would have thought I would even CONSIDER something like fiberglass door panels, but you can't FIGHT them at this price!
-
how much were those motor mounts? They look reeeeal purdy in the picture.
As for your buddy's teacher.. must be an american car guy
SU carburetors are on many many english automobiles and motorcycles, and I have also seen them on Fiats. They probably came on other makes as well; they are almost as common as webers in europe, and probably as common as any other brand (solex, dellorto.. and I know im forgetting at LEAST one that belongs on this list) PLUS, the hitachi SU ripoffs were used on virtually all datsuns sold with sidedraft carburetors... (The More You Know: datsun "SU's" are most assuredly NOT genuine SU carburetors, but instead direct copies made by hitachi.)Sorry, I just had to rip on a shop teacher who "had never seen an SU."
-
GREAT drawings, and thanks for the plain word confirmation that the piston comes asymptotically close to the cylinder head on that "squish pad" (dunno if I am using that term right, but at least you know which spot I mean)
If you'll forgive me, I took that "quench" jpg and cut out the combustion chamber, the first image is a straight horizontal inversion of it, and the second is both horizontally AND vertically inverted:
inverted X axis:
inverted X and Y axis:
now, the plain and simple version of it ALL is....
On a closed-chamber, "Quenching" or "Squishing" head, you would want a Flat top piston with a combustion chamber carved into it corresponding most closely to the second picture; that is, flipped on two axes.
Right?
-
I have been reading this post and have a few questions??????.
I am in the process of porting my p90. While performing the task, I was
confronted by my 72 year old neighbor who claims to have modified engines in the 1954. He overlooked my p90, and advised me to have a
Custom head gasket made to fully have the shape of the peanut shape
chamber due to the fact that, the original gasket only covers the round
area of the chamber and leaves a gap in the peanut shape area.
Therefore this causes gases to remain in the peanut shape area, and this results in burned and unburned gases in the gap area. According to Him it
also causes detonation, and loss of power due to the shock waves of burned and unburned gases in the gap area as used with the original gasket. PLEASE ADVISE ON THIS ONE I AM LOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
I think your neighbor is failing to realize that our pistons are built to all but impact the cylinder head in that section where the combustion chamber is flat and level with the deck of the head. the PISTON keeps gases out of that area (effectively enough) and prevents the "badness" he is seeing.
That is based on two IFs: IF I understand what you are saying your neighbor is saying;
and IF I am not HORRIBLY misconceived on piston to head clearances. I *am* still a n00b
.
)
Going Rate for Used Door Glass?
in S30 Series - 240z, 260z, 280z
Posted
I just checked victoria british and motorsport auto to be sure. (Vic Brit's website wouldn't display that page of the catalog, or I would have made an image to lay this to rest permanently.)
This all applies SOLELY to 2-seaters; to the best of my knowledge the 2+2 was the same but DO NOT quote me on that.
The 77&78 doors were wholly different from every other S30 door; hence, the entire window was also different.
The 260 and 280 (thru 76) windows were all the same; the 240 windows apparently were different, and I do not think you can swap parts, altho the doors themselves can be exchanged. So, the short version on the window hardware is, "240 type," "260-early 280 type," and "late 280 type."
I want to say that the glass from a 240 may well work on any of the early style doors... it *might* require re-mounting the glass into a "later" piece of metal to put a 240 glass into a 75 280 window regulator, but I think I have heard tell of this before.