Flexicoker

I just wanted to know if there was anything significantly different about the Torvec that would distinguish itself from existing ATB differentials. In my opinion the Quaife ATB is the best performing, and most reliable differential there is. It's even got a lifetime warranty for all applications, including racing. If this Torvec can match the performance and reliability of the Quaife, and be less expensive, then they'll have a killer unit.

how is this any different in operation than a quaife?

I'm running my '95 Camry on straight E85 right now. I haven't changed anything whatsoever. It idles a little rougher, and is a little sluggish under 1500rpm, but other than that and the faint smell of cheap tequila I can't tell the difference. I messed up my gas mileage calcs with my last tank of E40, but my best guesstimating says I only lost 1mpg.

it is. Thanks!! =)

hey guys, please check over my plan so I don't let the smoke out of the wires... Keep the positive side of the stock coil connected as the factory did it, but bypass the ballast resistor. Attach the negative side of the coil to S5 on my relay board. This should keep my factory tach working, and allow me to control timing with MSII (I already locked down the advance mechanisms), right? Will I have any problems with this setup? Thanks, Eric

Until there was an E85 station within a reasonable drive we used to mix denatured alcohol and gas to make our fuel. We did it 5 gallons at a time though, so I don't know if it was the most cost effective method of doing it. In formula SAE if you run gasoline you have to run a 20mm air restrictor, and if you run E85 you run 19mm, so that sort of shows the power output difference. As far as gas mileage 1.6 was the factor that they used as well to normalize the fuel efficiency of the gas and the E85 cars. I think that the vast majority of reasonably modern cars will not have a problem with corrosion due to the ethanol, Brazil has been running a significant amount of ethanol in all of their cars for a while, and all gas here has 10% ethanol in it. I plan to do flex-fuel on my 240Z with my megasquirt soon. I will probably only coat the gas tank, as it will have new rubber and stainless fuel lines already. I may or may not do something with the fuel rail, and I'm just running a normal walbro pump. I'm assuming that the injectors are all stainless, so that shouldn't be a problem. http://www.megamanual.com/flexfuel.htm Aluminum parts should be anodized, and steel should be stainless or coated. All new rubber fuel system parts should be compatible and I have heard that the walbro pumps, while not flex-fuel, will do just fine. JB Weld is NOT compatible... I know from experience.

I disagree with this statement, John. More caster (in conjunction with some scrub radius) is going to lighten the outside front/inside rear crossweight, and tend to lift the inside rear with increased steering angle. The advantage of this is to give the car more oversteer/less understeer with increased steering angle, reducing all cars tendency to push in tighter corners. The disadvantage is that you're going to tend to lift the rear tire, and have trouble putting the power down.

My Formula SAE team ran a turbocharged CBR250RR (250cc 4cyl, 20k redline) on E85. I believe we were pushing 15psi boost, on the factory 11.5:1 compression, and relying only on the latent heat of vaporization of the ethanol to cool the air. It worked most of the time, but we had many "spontaneous crankcase ventilations" There were some engine management issues involved as well, but I think it probably needed an intercooler at those power levels. 72hp out of 250cc is quite alot. Online you can find some 0-60 tests of flex-fuel tahoes, and the times are better on E85, so you don't 'need' more compression to make more power, but it will certainly help. I've been blending my gas with E85 in my (non flex-fuel) daily driver camry, and I'm up to 40% ethanol without any issues, I've yet to finish a tank and check the mileage though.

I don't understand how anti-dive increases 'bind' in the suspension. Its the same effect as raising your roll-center and producing a jacking force. You're raising your 'pitch-center'. In a properly designed racecar suspension with spherical bearings there should be no bind. It will reduce your bump compliance, but thats also a function of the geometry and not of bind.

Hey guys, I'm at step 65 in the megamanual for building my MSII. In the near future I'd like to use the MS to control spark with the stock distributor (and EDIS in the more distant future), but I want to let the stock distributor control timing at first so I can work the bugs out without having to worry about spark. So, is it alright to install this circuit and just not wire it up until I'm ready to? Thanks, Eric

ah, so does that mean that the MS will not control the N/A dizzy at all? Or can I still control it with a different wiring setup?

From DIY Auto Tune: MS230-K $247 Megasquirt-II kit with V3.0 PCB MSStim22-K $45 Stimulator kit MSRelay-K $64 Relay board kit MSRelayCable $70 Megasquirt to relay board cable LC-1 without gauge $199 I'm putting an L28E in my 240z, the engine is complete with injectors, sensors, etc. Other things: Fuel Pump 240sx throttle body (the preferred method of getting a potentiometer TPS?) GM temp sensors random wire, or possible the DIY bundle to connect my engine to the relay board Laptop Serial cable or USB-converter depending on laptop Am I missing anything? I am assuming that the existing MAP sensor will work and that the stock fuel pressure regulator will be ok (and that it still has the stock MAP sensor). I don't plan on doing anything fancy at the moment, just make this thing run reliably and efficiently, but I'd like to have the option of going distributorless, turbo, and flex-fuel in the future. In this article: http://www.diyautotune.com/tech_articles/how_to_megasquirt_your_280zx_turbo.htm They're connecting the stock distributor to the ECU, does this mean the timing on the stock distributor can be adjusted through MS? Or are they using it as an RPM signal? Thanks, Eric

The second videos are why front diffusers are legal again. I believe there is a 'spec' diffuser shape to combat what happened in the first video. But if thats 2008, he would already have it.

The UTA wheels are 13x6. It would cost more than $8000 to design and manufacture a different size of them. There is a significant amount of finite element analysis done to them, and a significant amount of trail and error in the lay up process. It uses a 4 piece aluminum and carbon fiber tool, so every surface is finished straight out of the oven. It just needs holes drilled and the resin flash removed from where the tool sections meet. You could cut corners and not analyze it in the computer first, and not use an outer tool, relying on vacuum bag instead. But they're going to be heavier than they have to be, probably not be as strong as they could be, and not seal very well. At 3.8 lbs, our wheels could be alot lighter if we had more advance analysis tools, FEA of carbon fiber is a huge amount of work because its anisotropic (different properties in different directions)

These are our own design and we have been running them for 4 years now, the only failures we've had have been tire changer accidents. They weigh 3.8 lbs including aluminum center and hardware.

black nickel!

hey, I go to UTA too! ME

you could have the exhaust exit at a low pressure point on the car, like F1 did back in the day by having the exhaust exit in the diffuser tunnels under the car. The problem with that is that your downforce is engine dependent, and your super exhaust scavenging is now speed dependent. A good solution is using a stepped header, but stepped in precisely the right spot(s). You can use the harmonics created by the closing exhaust valve to seriously change and augment your torque curve. For example... 2 Formula SAE cars, both with bone-stock, unopened Honda CBR600's. Both cars are relatively heavy, yet both scored well in the acceleration event at competition. The F07 car, however, seems much faster, is slightly faster, and is way easier to drive than the F05 car solely due to exhaust resonence tuning we did with Ricardo Wave software.

Ethanol is corrosive to steel, aluminum and some plastics. Ethanol is also hydroscopic and absorbs water. My theory is that the ethanol has corroded something in the fuel system, causing crud to plug the injectors, or possibly corroding and seizing the injectors themselves. I don't know of any additives that can prevent that, and the best solution would be to make sure everything in your fuel system is ethanol compatible: stainless steel, anodized aluminum, etc.

sweet, thanks guys. The reason I asked is because a couple of the things I found in my search results were inconclusive or conflicting. The square/round port thing I just missed entirely.

por flavor?

Awesome, I'd like to know how you like it. I have used FloWorks a little bit, and we just got a license of Star CCM+ as well. I have yet yo play with it though.

Nice work, what did you use for CFD? Very pretty welds too.

I have a few questions that I could not find answers for in all of my searching. I have a 1981 L28E and 5-spd. that I plan to carburate put in my '73 240z ('71 SU's and exhaust manifold) My questions are: Is the 5-spd a direct replacement for the 4-spd (provided I'm using the L28 clutch/flywheel) I had heard that a 5-spd needs a new driveshaft, but I think that was only the T5. Will the L28 exhaust manifold bolt to my MSA exhaust for a '71? If not, is it alright to use my '71 exhaust manifold (square ports) with the P79 (round ports I think) Will I need new needles for my SU's? Thanks, Eric

HAHAHA, I know the guy running the dyno... I would have liked to have gone and met you guys, next time. Its better that I stay off the dyno, it would be embarassing.