Daeron

Thats a GREAT idea!!! I don't know if I think it will have a great effect; I honestly have a doubt or two about that (but it wouldn;t be the first time I was wrong.) But maybe my doubts are just questions.. Why would splitting the intake tract in twain be beneficial, when it seems to be a detriment to install headers that do the same thing, and connect both output pipes to a divorced twice pipe exhaust system? Even if I am right, your idea is a FANTASTIC thing to try "as a tuning option," just like you said. You never know what sort of effect it might have and it probably isn't drastic enough to be judged as a "bad" enough change to outweigh any potential benefits. It is certainly easy enough to try the next time the engine goes to the dyno.

I know, and I'm cool with my role... ...theres just only so many ways one can say "Well, yah, THATS what I was trying to say, but he did a better job."

As usual, I open my mouth, only to get my foot stuffed in it I've always considered MAF based to be my preferred, and I have been considering posting to the effect of "I call MAF my favorite, but I can't give a good argument as to why. What are the manifest pros and cons of MAF vs MAP?" but.. I always come to the conclusion I'd be better off just reading up on it independently. Then I proceed to do nothing more than monitor such of the internet as I come across for that material. I know that ideally you run a blended MAF/MAP setup.. but since my "education" in this field has been limited to, well, this posting discussion here, I'm certainly in no position to step to the front of the class and start teaching. Still, I try, and in doing I wind up saying something that needs correcting, despite my good intent. I need a foot-in-mouth emoticon...

Yah, I know, but there is something about Mercedes-Benz in general that has consistently fallen just short of the mark of.. inspiring me. Not universally by any means; my buddy's 190E back in high school was the vehicle that actually introduced me to the concept of this nice posh, but compact RWD sedan (not that AWD is ruled out as an option.) Despite that, I just don't *feel* it with a Benz. I could go for an E30 orE36 BMW (my dad currently owns a 98 323ci) but my beef, as it were, is that Nissan never really gave me a better option than the homely (but IMO "handsome") early 80's Maxima. I know, I know, I'm already playing the world's tiniest violin for myself. I'll shutup.

I love that parting shot I actually loved my ex sister in law's 92 Maxima SE; but it isn't the same. I have actually pondered the ins and outs of putting a 300ZX driveline into a RWD Volvo chassis, just to get a combination of RWD and luxury, sorta build my own Mercedes.. ..but all of that could have been avoided if someone, somewhere had had some sense and kept a nice RWD sedan on the American market. Its easy to make a better version of a Taurus:twak:

Confession: I honestly rarely look much past the valve cover when I see pics of these engines that are just abstract JDM concepts to me; I didnt even look at the dizzy, or the block, and in my American-centric brain I forget Nissan ever made another I6. It has much to do with the fundamental grudge I bear them for taking my I6 away from me; the 300ZX should have had an RB in it and I will continue to believe that till the day I die. I am also angry that Nissan took their Maxima and made it FWD with a V6 while friggin Toyota of all people kept their flagship sedan RWD and I6 powered. Could you imagine if the 90-94 Maximas were RWD and RB powered? THAT would be a car worth owning. Cressida??? Bahh!!! /cranky old man attitude off/

The short answer is no. If all is sealed well then that means no air is being pulled that is not being metered. Air is metered in one of three ways (at least thats all *I* am aware of) in an electronic FI system: AFM, MAF, or MAP. There are technical terms (MAP I think is speed-density, and MAF is something else) but those are the three devices used. The AFM (for Air Flow Meter) is a flappy box, obstructing a channel. The engine pulls air though that channel, lifting the flappy box, which is specifically counterweighted and attached to a potentiometer. A potentiometer is like a volume knob. The size of the passageway and the counterweight of the flappy box are calculated so that the signal corresponds to a certain volume of air flow, and the computer works with that (and sometimes temperature sensors) to determine fuel need. The MAF (for Mass Air Flow) sensor is a pair of tiny wires that get heated up by electrical current passing through them. These wires are placed strategically into a pod on the side of an aluminum tube. The tube is the size of the air intake tubing and TB for the vehicle, and the air moving past the wires cools them down which changes the current draw. The computer senses this draw, and uses the data to infer the mass of air ingested by the engine. Since this is a more precise measurement of how much air has entered than volumetric metering, MAF is more accurate than AFM. The most modern systems use MAP sensors, (for Manifold Absolute Pressure) and take the pressure readings, the engine RPM, the throttle position (determined by a potentiometer; older AFM systems frequently have throttle positions sqitches which are NOT potentiometers at all, simply three position switches for idle, cruise and WOT) and usually other factors, and multiply them all out against each other, and determine the fuel and spark requirements accordingly. SO, to return to your original question: without vacuum or other air leaks, it is impossible to have "too much" air because the air ingested by your engine is used by the computer (or the carburetor for that matter) is used as a baseline to determine everything else. What you CAN have is unmetered air entering your intake tract. The difference between that, and "too much air" is semantic, but it is very profound.

I'll throw you a bone and let you know that the thermotime sensor is one suspect high on your list. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=135748&highlight=efi+bible+step

That swap is very very difficult; I would imagine custom headers, or at least modified off-the-shelf would be needed.

I have a Boss into whose rear I would like to shove a dipstick, but his name isn't Cedric.....

That is a U20 in the background here.. right? Looks like its missing carbs... And while I am posting, can you imagine being the guy on the bandsaw doing the cutaways on that DOHC 2400?

I drove my 280Z with an unidentified 5 speed (I think it was early 280ZX but I'm not positive, maybe later ZX) and a 3.54 R200 and it had a busted speedo cable for four years. I had my speed by RPM figured out pretty well, and at 2750 in fifth I would've been doing 65-70. My guess is 3.36, but as posted above, mark and rotate while counting. That (or opening the case and counting) is the only way to be sure.

Many thanks, Larry. I think the Mitty is going to be something of an Homage to old Uncle buck for us this year, since he had sold the BRE car about a year and a half ago and it should be appearing there restored. Me and Tim definitely plan on going, but I am not too certain what the scope of that venture is going to be. Tim was trying to run an event at Sebring this year (same week as the 12 hour) so I don't know who is going where, when. Anyhow, catch you there!

This comment was made in the context of what some people think. Braap and I both are of the opinion that this is a good year to go for; I personally prefer 74, 75, and 76 to the other years for reasons of my own. (One significant reason is that I see no reason to pay premium for "early cars" when my personal tastes lean more towards the cockpit, gauge and console layout of the 260 and early 280) His point was that there are reasons to go for ANY particular year of the car, "even though some might consider it somewhat of a bastard."

If I were you I would push the angle I mentioned about it being an automatic car and being spared any tough use. "Yah, sure, it is an auto NOW, but it has been for 30 years, so its been driven by old ladies!" Also, believe it or not, pictures of the keys (especially if they still have ANY paint left on them at all?) would be impressive. The words are there, but the pics do the *shiney* yanno? Overall, I would say the ad was good. I am not a good enough judge of market values to say whether the opening bid was appropriate, but someone bid it already IIRC so it must not be too high, and we will see how high it gets.

Awesome!

Larry, I don't know if you would remember me personally but my Dad, Uncle, and brothers and I used to play around with Equipe Rapide at the Fairgrounds in WPB, and at the Harness track and down at MetroZoo back in 99 thru the early 2000s.. Tim, Chris, Dennis Carey? (My name is Shawn by the way.) I do not know if you ever knew our friend Peanut, but he was a local Datsun guy for many years and he had affixed one of these Weber TBs to his Turbo project car years and years ago. I know this because my old man has his setup sitting on a bench. I've also seen at least one or two other people using them, since they are a fairly common performance part to have kicking around gathering dust someplace. 60-75mm throttle inlet seems to be good for up to 300-400 horsepower without breaking a sweat, so using one of these would certainly remove the TB as a potential restriction point. If you were using aftermarket EFI, you would have either a MAP sensor or possibly a MAF somewhere, and the AFM would be deleted. Six times 32mm ports on an N42 manifold works out to 4823 mm^2, (7.35 sq in) and a 65mm TB works out to 3316 mm^2 (5.144 sq in) 75mm is 4415 mm^2 (6.83 sq in) Even though I presented the numbers in a way that makes it seem like the manifold is way more than even a 75mm could match, effectively no more than two ports would be breathing simultaneously anyhow. I just like doing the math when it comes to these things, because it enriches a thread.

What year is this, '74? That is an interesting looking airdam and rear spoiler..(Unless its just a funny reflection off the yellow paint.) Could you possibly post more pictures?? Yellow is a tough color for a Z-car to pull off IMHO, but when it pulls it off it looks great. This one definitely pulls it off

That seems like a reasonable opening bid, but if that car is as nice as it seems to be after brief inspection it looks like a car I would love to get my hands on, to be sure!! It looks like a car that was spared heavy usage simply because it is an automatic, which is easily remedied. Definitely a fanTAStic starting point for... anything.

There are two "solenoid terminals" on your starter. One is a large stud (6mm diameter?) with a 10 mm nut on it that your battery cable connects to, and the other is a small square male terminal that gets a skinny wire from your car's wiring harness (ultimately from your keyswitch) originally, but with the relay modification, that skinny wire should be coming from your relay now. The lug on the solenoid connected to the battery cable should see full battery voltage at all times. That means, if your battery measures 12.55v but the other end of your battery cable only measures 12.1v, you have a problem. 12.1V would be enough on the little tab (because that circuit doesn't need a whole lot of current, that is just closing the solenoid.) but if it drops that much going through your positive cable, then the cable is a problem. The solenoid is itself just a glorified relay to operate the starter motor, in addition to pushing the gear forwards to engage the flywheel. So anything significantly less than full battery voltage into the big lug with the 10mm nut on it is a problem, but the other solenoid terminal simply needs a good 12 volts. Is that clear, or was I a little confusing?

You said you did the starter relay mod. I take this to mean that you have a relay being triggered by your key switch that switches current from your battery, through a fuse, and into the solenoid terminal on your starter. I presume this wiring is done and done well, the fuse is of adequate size and is not blown, and this modification has been tested as fully functional. In other words, you reliably get battery voltage at the solenoid terminal every time you flip the key to start, right? If that is the case, then no neutral safety switch is involved. If, somehow, the signal is being interrupted between the key and the relay, then you should be able to hotwire your relay (send 12VDC down the wire that normally comes from your key switch) and get perfect function. You said it was a new Bosch gear reduction starter.. New usually means remanufactured. I would not hesitate to smack it with a ball-peen hammer. The day I hesitate to smack a misbehaving starter is the day you can push me off a cliff. I also have lost all faith in all "remanufactures," and I am not the only one, so don't trust it implicitly. But let's assume it is not the culprit. If the starter is good and the relay is working right, then the problem must lie in your battery or cables. Cables CAN be too long, and they can be worn out and not look it. How much cable-wiggling have you done when the starter was in failure mode? Have you tried a different battery in the car altogether? Have you tried the battery in another car? Two new cables should cost around 20-30 bucks, and it is the most important part on your car.

So now, someone's gotta find a tune to sing all that to.....

I did a little bit of counter research once upon a time and discovered that Subaru uses clutches with the same spline count and dimension as the L-series as well. At the time I made a bit of noise here (and on my Subaru forum) that the gearboxes are made by the same folks, and the clutches would probably interchange... but I have never even been close to having a chance to check it out. Any chance someone here would happen to have access to both makes to check this out?

There is alot more to be read, but it boils down to what I quoted earlier, and the other post provided his opinion on piston machining. When I look at it in a practical light (IE, imagining myself with a box O' pistons needing to actually DO rather than just talking about it) I would be in touch with the machinist I plan on having do the work before purchasing my pistons, to get their opinion on the same topic. I'd hate to get pistons that I thought were thick ebnough and have my machinist refuse to mill them "that thin." You can also ALWAYS remove all the material you want from the underside of the piston, but it is MUCH harder to add it back, right? (Another trick I picked up from 1 fast Z.)

http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=130872&highlight=quench http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=119151&highlight=quench I take 1 fast Z at his word as my "quench and piston" expert, so his word is Holy Writ in this matter as far as I'm concerned.