Daeron
-
Posts
2148 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Daeron
-
-
I think you'll still want to put a heat shield of some sort between the intake and exhaust, especially since the intake is powdercoated black (more heat transfer). You could just fab a simple sheet of aluminum and maybe wrap it in a heat barrier mat, like the stuff you can get from Thermotec for wrapping turbos. I know that will block the view of that very nice looking exhaust manifold, but it will make a difference.
Didn't we just come to the conclusion that the color of the intake manifold only matters if that intake manifold is being exposed to heat in the visible spectrum?
Not trying to be an ass, I only pose it as a question because I cannot recall whether it was hybridz or my Subaru forum where it came up.. The only effect any coloration of an intake manifold can have on its heat conductivity is basically the insulating qualities of the material used to coat it.. for instance, a thick coat of white paint might, in fact, result in lower intake temperatures.. but that is from the thick coat of paint. The fact that the paint is white has virtually no bearing (practically speaking) on anything at all.
Dark pigments absorb heat in the visible spectrum, light colors reflect heat in the visible spectrum. Outside of the visible spectrum, coloration has no impact whatsoever. The pigment ITSELF might have some slight change, but "slight" is an understatement.
All that being said, a heat shield is never a bad idea on our beloved, non-crossflow heads.
-
I can't remember now if I posted in this thread or not about engineering for reasonable eventualities as opposed to every eventuality, but this indeed goes along with what John is saying: there will always be something so horiffic so as to draw your attention and make you go 'I don't want that to ever happen to me!'
But you can't live like that---life isn't safe. You just have to take your reasonable risks. Reasonable doubt has turned to 'beyond any shadow of a doubt' today. And that's unreasonable.
Prep soft, belt tight, and minimize impact angle to draw out collision time. When it comes down to it, take the hit anywhere BUT the driver's door, and do whatever you can to position the vehicle like that. Sometimes you can, sometimes you can't. You do what you can, when you can, and that's all you can hope for.
A-men. I just wanted to clarify that any comments I've made thus far in this thread were made while bearing ALL this in mind first and foremost. I accept every day in this world as a risk that it might kill me.. (living in south Florida, with drivers from every different part of the world AND the US.. it just blunt reality.) In my mind, if you don't wake up every day prepared to die, then sooner or later you're just going to be surprised. It isn't morbidity; I consider it my POSITIVE worldview....
and as for this...
...... the doorbeam is pretty darned low to do any good against anything but another Z on the track...ach!! tragedy such as that should never be spake of!!!! Fie!!
-
Its next to impossible to get OEM crash data and the data for the 240Z is long gone. Our only real source of safety modification data for our 35 year old cars are the racing sanctioning bodies. Look to their rule requirements for side impact protection.
John: I couldn't agree more, thank you for the response.
Welding a bar into the door that's not design to handle the additional load is foolish. Welding a bar into a rocker panel that's below standard bumper height just adds weight to the car. Adding a door bar to a roll bar (6 point setup) without additional floor pan reinforcement or a knee bar is a leg crusher.
SCCA has this stuff figured out. GCR section 18.
Thank you for chiming in; Your data are sufficient and your reasoning for relying upon that data is probably the safest way to proceed in any case.
I never personally thought much of tubes inside the door.. I was thinking something more like the stock reinforcement. Basically a thin gage sheet metal "box" or channel, about a half inch "thick" (thickness between one face of sheetmetal and the other) to attempt to absorb a small amount of inertia; no more than a pound or two of steel added to each door to give just a tad of additional metal in there to help resist SOME deformation.
The point made about the door shape was my greatest hesitation for any in-door reinforcement; but I couldn't phrase it well enough to make the argument here. As for the rocker reinforcement, I quite simply hadn't thought of the fact that bumpers are higher than that.
I guess that image of the one that wrapped around a telephone pole/tree is really stuck in most of our minds.. and thats about the only time reinforcement that low would help at ALL.
-
eh, six of one, half a dozen of the other. "print screen" involves fewer steps and is simpler IMO. hope it helps.
-
I hear you.. and I was aware of all that. I was just saying my thoughts on the subject.. Lord knows they've run through my head about eight thousand times by now...
-
Back on topic...
What do ya think?
Well, ACTUALLY the idea would look better IMO on a front end looking like this. This type of body would allow you to run the teeth along the front line of the hood (understated there, just to complete the all round image) and then wrap the teeth around the hole in the the "smiley" of the car.
Here is a quickie of a Z with a GT40 nose.Or this one.
I already explained to veritech that my idea was based on a one-piece fiberglass front end that my dad pieced together out of a damged front end with a stock-shaped valance area, and a damaged fiberglass air dam. The air dam is more of a perpendicular dam than a spook shaped "cow-catcher" style, and has had many of the curves removed from its face. Use the headlights as the "eyes" (maybe even do some sort of tracing, vinyl, or etch work on the acrylic.) The image in my head (I *think) may also be more of a bugs bunny style version of the plane, with less of a pronounced "corner" to the mouth that would be more conducive to being painted on the relatively D shaped side edge of the hole on a stockish Z.
I *really* hope my dad or my brother can come up with a photo of this front end; its very blunt and judging from what I have gleaned thus far from the aerodynamic threads, seems to be about as ideally shaped as is reasonable within my little box of what I like My Z to be shaped like.
I made these comments after having abandoned this thread for sleepytime a few weeks ago when I started reading it.. and I abandoned it just before veritech mentioned the plane (I can never remember what its called! and I have a head for WWII aircraft, shame on me!)
Now I am determined to try to draw some of this stuff on my own, but not now. And to think, I just threw away an old beer sign that would have made a perfect lightbox for tracing purposes... D'oh!
-
I am a smoker, and these guys sound like plain assholes. it sucks to call the cops on anyone, but it might put the fear of god into them if you forced them to have to flush their stash one night. Talk with the neighbors first, and talk to them face to face and give them the proverbial "one last chance." Maybe send them the brownie mix and tell them quiet down, or else.. kind of a joke and a threat at the same time.
But generally speaking, from the smokers standpoint, screw these jerks. They make those of us who are peaceful and respectful citizens look bad. Not wanting to smell weed at a concert is one thing, but not wanting to get a contact high in your own house is another. They are invading your personal privacy with THEIR habit in behaving this way, and its natural for you to want to defend that privacy. On behalf of other "dopers," thank you for being so tolerant of them thus far.
-
BRAAP: just a totally off topic PC note:
Instead of taking a photograph of your screen to simply capture part of the display as an image, you can hit "print screen" which copies the entire screen to a bitmap image on the clipboard. Then enter paint or any other graphic program, and paste it into a new file, cut and paste the section you want, save it as a jpg, and bingo.. no need to deal with silly lines across the screen from a photo
-
280Zforce: Thanks for getting out the shovel and finding this!!!!!
-
Not sure what you mean. I thought the 240s and early 260s had the doors with no reinforcement, and the 280s had the reinforcement. I have not verified this in any other way than moving 80 something doors to my brother-in-law's place and noticing how much heavier the 280 doors are than the 240s, so maybe I'm missing something. Not sure what the ZX has. Maybe that's what you mean by "later 280s"???
The 240s have a completely different latch mechanism on them from the 280s. Was it hard to get the latch to work?
Well, as has been mentioned and made abundantly clear, the striker mechanism changed in (quoting an above post) 6/76 and he doors are not interchangeable between the two sides of that divide in time. That was all I meant by "late 280;" I would have said 77-78 except I was uncertain it was a model year specific change.
After jmortensen's comment, ron tyler said he believes that the latch change, and the addition of the reinforcement, went hand in hand; then bjhines said that there WERE some earlier (pre 6/76) 280Z doors that had the re enforcement, and unless I am mistaken tonyd was just clarifying that the "later 280Z door" classification primarily referred to the different latching mechanism..
but (and maybe I am being pedantic here) two relatively less-than-certain statements that basically contradict each other dont really constitute an answer to my question.. I suppose its not important, but I was curious. I shall have to examine any doors I come across in the THOUSANDS of Z cars I find in the junkyards down here (that last comment was a bit of sarcasm, because i don't exactly have a surplus of doors to choose from so it kinda makes my question moot point,
)I wonder how difficult it would be to add a similar narrow "bow" of sheetmetal to the existing door? Thanks for the excellent photos of the difference.
-
This one's for Daeron. Is that what you were thinking of?
My thoughts had envisioned the "mouth" encompassing the airdam line, utilizing the hard "jawbone" of the car to provide the illusion, and the headlight for the eye (maybe trace something onto an acyliric bucket?!) Basically, 90% of the profile view would simply be the dark olive green, but the "face" or "mouth" would be the mouth that the car actually has. The airdam on the front end we discussed is basically a smooth plane, perpendicular to the ground with far less change in curvature, or "spook" degree that my Ureflex airdam has. It was a damaged fiberglass unit that my dad "repaired" into the stock shaped fiberglass front end. I have always stumbled over the difficulty in setting the proportions up mentally to make it look at ALL right.. but the "cheekbone" so to speak, the area behind and underneath the headlight bucket, yet in front of the wheel, seems to have more meat on it than in your drawing. (in my mind's eye, on the front end in question, at least.)
but YOUR drawing is most certainly a wild take on the very concept I had been envisioning, yes. Thats great work..
I need to get some pencils together.I always liked the idea of drawing when I was a kid, but I could never honestly think of something worth drawing... and recent reading has actually convinced me that its worth giving it a shot, even if all I ever learn to draw is Zs. My current plans for my car are simple; but to the best of my knowledge my "idea" is relatively unique so I don't want to spill it until I can make a visual first. I may try to pencil together a VERY rough outline on the specific placement that I was talking about in the PM, but I love the drawing. If only that face were from the japanese planes, and not the american ones!! it seems almost totally inappropriate to ACTUALLY put a design like that on a plane made by "the enemy" on some levels...
I started reading this thread some time ago, but the sheer number of posts daunted me. I got about 30 or so into it and had to pass out.. its time to re visit I suppose. Thanks man!
-
Those side impact beams were a 280Z thing. 240's have a door frame and skin and a window regulator in them. They're basically just sheet metal.
by "280Z thing" do you mean all 280, or later 280 with the totally redesigned doors? I would check, but my 75 280 has a pair of 240 doors on it right now.. They aren't the *greatest* but they are easily repaired. However, if genuine 280Z doors of the earlier style have that metal reinforcement in them, I just might be convinced to source a pair of doors after all....
-
i hate to be a stick in the mud, (we kinda got a little flame-ish about tthis but we resolved that already, right?
)but have you checked any FSMs?? I am certain they would have the answer.. http://www.carfiche.org -
-
injector plugs are one thing I always eyeball when in junkyards.. any number of cars could have the right ones, and you never know when youre going to find a car with a beautiful wire harness.
-
this is a relay write up that I made on my subaru forum; it came up because my ignition switch no longer could handle the current to actiate the solenoid on my subaru, but it has info in it for headlights as well.
http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showthread.php?t=74632
There IS one error in it that I have yet to fix; the five prong relays I mentioned, I am wrong about the output of the 87a prong.. you would understand if you read the write-up, I am not going into it here. PM me if you like the write up, but want more info on my error; it will probably suffice to get me to just fix the mistake.
-
That Z photo really has me thinking about putting heavy bars in the rockers under the doors to help stop that. Any comments?
I get the same ideas, but I also wonder about stronger braces between the rocker panels and the transmission tunnel. I think that probably the best idea would be minimal strengthening of both fronts.
I want to clarify something, though: I am almost home engineering a crumple zone with my idea, and that is a DANGEROUS zone to try to walk. If you make the car TOO rigid, you risk transferring too much energy to anything potentially loose in the cabin, like that big melon flopping around on top of your neck. I certainly would stop short of welding a pair of 1" pipes "supporting" the rocker and a pair of similar pipes "reinforcing" the "seat-support" area; but I think that probably the addition of some mild channel to complement the steel that is already there would be a wise choice.
Another potential risk in doing this could be the door. I could see where strengthening the lower support areas might embellish the weakness of the door, and the older gen (pre '77) doors do not have the strongest latch mechanism, so integrating them into any sort of "re-engineering" outside of a full race cage seems over the top to me. However, I don't know that strengthening the doorframe area would weaken the door; it might have the opposite effect as well. Just thoughts I have been wondering myself.
I am curious to see what other opinions are on this, though; this is just what I have been mulling over and it is all pure conjecture. Anyone think much about this idea?
-
Too bad you didn't save enough on the cover to afford a little air for those tires...
too bad, too many things to list. My Z has languished for almost three years because of too many other complications to list, not the least of which being three hurricanes. (One of them inadvertently led to it's demise in the first place.)
The tires were junk when I put them on anyhow; they're trailer tires (Goodyear Marathon series, big silly donuts.) I have a completely different set of wheels that will be going on it eventually.. but yes, I know; I need to fill them up. All I have at home is the 12volt cheapo inflator pump and I dont frequently park on that side of the house, sue me
-
sorry about the bad quality pics, better ones soon!
Yes, Please!!! that s130 is JAW DROPPING!!!!!!
-
Eh, there wont be gas in thrity years, atleast not affortable, so who cares!
+1
-
I went to pep boys and bought one of their top notch covers ahhh.. well over a year ago and I havent had a SINGLE problem with it. It holds on in good wind, its thick, heavy blue material similar to the NISSAN 300ZX cover that my uncle has.. I am 110% satisfied with this purchase. I will go snap a pic and post it up here shortly, it fits like a DREAM with bumpers and airdam installed on a 2 seater 75 280Z. The ONLY problem is that the mirror covers are NOWEHERE near the right spot, and in my book that is a non-issue.
The rear quarter anel area looks a little bunched up, but it has held in some significant winds.. If I were to use a bungee cord in the middle I suspect it would hold much better.
One other drawback is that it only has one grommet on either side, right in the middle.... but as well as it holds I have never even bothered using THAT pair. I forget exactly which "size" I used but there were only a handful of sizes to choose from; and I believe that the Z (maybe it was a zx) WAS listed on the box and given a specific size to use; if not I used common sense. It was certainly under a hundred bucks, and no shipping.
The material is a LITTLE thinner than a top-notch cover, but I was given a Nissan branded 300ZX cover with two small tears in it and I gave that to my uncle because this one fit so well already. Minimal care not to rip it is all it takes to keep it well; I HAVE torn two or three small holes in mine and they show no signs of worsening.
I couldn't find it on pep boys' website, but it was the only blue one in the store
-
and throw the rest of your easy outs in the garbage.
-
I will also add that an electrical fire can be insidious.
You ask for data, and we are doing our level best to provide it. Someone above mentioned that nobody was going to bother going to the expense of performing extensive crash test analysis on the S30. That means, the only way to gather data is to listen to primary sources: your fellow Z drivers. Here is *my* anecdotal evidence in favor of having a fire extinguisher; it mostly shows that it is not necessarily a thirty second window in which to act.
Almost three years ago, one night, I had an short which burned a fusible link. Somehow I replaced it with an oversized fusible link, and that night the car had some strange running problem. I immediately drove back home (two blocks) and drove my landlords car; The next day I tried to see if I could get the symptom to recur in the daylight, to no avail. I had driven around for ten minutes with the lights and stereo on, no problems.
I park in my driveway, and not ten minutes later a kid who was playing ball in the street was knocking on my door, telling me my car was on fire. There was a small amount of smoke coming out of the hood, I smelled plastic/electrical fire, and my windshield wipers were stationary, halfway up the windshield. (read: as opposed to parked, as I had left them; I didnt use the wipers on my little test run)
The fusible link tried to blow, but it was too large. It heated up, and melted the plastic cover (I had JUST found nice ones in the junkyard and put them on like two months before!!
)which then caught fire. In the end, the entire link block, right up to but not into the main wire harness, got fried... but nothing else. Now, I did NOT have a fire extinguisher; so all that was handy in my kitchen to put out the electrical fire was SALT. Naturally I rinsed it, but the effects still show there.. and unfortunately the car has been parked since then. However, my point has nothing to do with the salt; my point is, MY fire had to have been burning for five minutes or more by the time it was extinguished; and it had barely managed to necessitate a maxi-fuse upgrade with corresponding internally regulated alternator swap.
Personally, I kind of like living. If I can gather enough anecdotal evidence, that *I* feel carries enough depth and wisdom and reliable opinion behind it, that a roll bar and a fire extinguisher are worthy additions to help "just in case" then that is the only yardstick I have to go by. You must do the same; plenty of people thus far have chimed in with at least a few stories supporting the use of unibody bracing and roll bar (if not complete roll cage, for obvious and already stated reasons) and a few stories of helpful and handy fire extinguishers. IF anyone has any evidence that they are un-needed or somehow frowned upon, it would be nice for them to chime in.
-
Allright, I will open my mouth, and if I HAVE to insert my foot than I shall....
..but MY uncle still has about 80% of the water injection system installed on HIS 240, with a 280 motor in it. Anti-detonant, is anti-detonant... it helps to allow the driver to avoid detonation. It can allow you to use low test gasoline on a car that would otherwise require 93 octane; it can allow you to unlock more power through less ignition advance, and it can allow you to run a higher compression on pump gas than you otherwise would be able to. (okay, so the first and last items on the list are virtually the same thing, re worded..)
My uncle used it for YEARS, but some time ago it got dismantled for some reason and now what is left on his intake manifold just sits there.
BUT yes, it can be done, and it DOES have positive effects as I listed above. Is it worth the expense and hassle? Apparently, the consensus thus far is a resounding no.. but my uncle seemed to think it made a difference.
The water or alcohol injected serves to help discourage pre-detonation; whether the car is breathing naturally or a forced induction system is used. It is almost certainly not worth using with a stock NA motor, unless for some strange reason high test is not sufficient to remove your pinging. HIS car was running something like 10:1 compression ratio, with an N47 head and an unknown (to me) aftermarket camshaft.
In all honesty, I *do* have to say that recent advancements in my own knowledge are leading me to believe that my uncle doesn't know too much about camshaft selection; SO that may have something to do with why he needed the additional anti-detonant... but to GROSSLY over summarize what I have already mentioned FAR too briefly, using a water injection system is not entirely dissimilar to running higher octane fuel.
)
I need to get some pencils together.
)but have you checked any FSMs?? I am certain they would have the answer.. 
)which then caught fire. In the end, the entire link block, right up to but not into the main wire harness, got fried... but nothing else.
E85
in Nissan L6 Forum
Posted
I was fully aware of everything else you posted here, tonyD....
but NOT the octane ratings of CNG/LPG.. and I have been in love with the idea of converting a car to run on LPG for over ten years.. since I was thirteen or so.
you just had a major impact on my life. before I always thought that the idea of a Z on LPG was a pipe dream.. now, it may not be. Finally, a way to pass my Z on to my grandkids!!!