jeffp

By the way, about the LD pump, I may have bought the last one in the US 2.5 weeks ago according to Courtesy Nissan (though I hope not). I bought it after reading this thread again. I just need to find the time to install it. > The thermostat will fit the Nissan housing closed I am sure, however open it needs more space, so what you can do, and I have already done the same, is to make a spacer plate to provide the debth needed to open the part. Easy build, all I did was get a piece of flat plate, cut it to the approx size. I did the hole in a 4 jaw layth then after that was done completed the outer dimensioning to the thermostat outlet on a belt sander. That worked very well, and I was able to keep all of the stock components intact in the process. The LD pump, if you bought it a few weeks ago, then more then likely it was the last new part from Nissan. Tom told me when I bought two, there was one left in North America. So it just may not be available any longer. <...which looks very similar- its basically a Robertshaw high flow unit with some bypass holes drilled in it. With this thermostat I had some serious problems getting the car to operating temp, especially on cool nights when the temps often wouldn't go above ~165 degF (195 degree stat). On warmer days the temperature would often swing from 170 to 200 degF for no apparent reason. Surprisingly, I tried putting a stock thermostatstat back in, and it worked just fine. I had installed the high flow unit when I was trying to use the electric water pump - apparently it wasn't helping but I couldn't tell. It could be that the bypass holes were contributing to the problem, but I suspect that the opening gain for the high flow stat didn't match the characteristics of the engine. > I checked out this part and bought one bypassed, and one not bypassed. The pictures that you see are when the parts are up to temp and open. I thought the new part closed a little slow as compared to the MSA part, so you may have something there. But it seems to me that a spring designed to open and close the thermostat based on temp can be regulated well. Also, I did the electric pump to STOP the cavitation of the pump. I figured if I could stabilize the flow rate with the electric pump then problem solved. I will give this part a try and see how it goes in my car. The fact that you could get the temp to stay low is a good thing I think, at least it is an indication that you can keep the engine cool, maybe not temp regulated as good as you like, and me for that matter, but now there is some head room right. I have never been able to keep the engine as cool as I needed to. One time with two pulls back to back my engine got to 110 degrees C or so and that was to hot, the engine started running differently. The part needs to respond to the engine temp and modulate the thermostat accordingly to maintain the correct temp. It very well could be that this part will not sufficently regulate the temp. I have two parts to try. < The aluminum bodied AMOT thermostat will allow FULL bypass from the head back to the inlet of the pump until cracked open and you start running water through the radiator. The opening for the AMOT will be radiator hose size when fully open. The flow improvement using the AMOT will be the total elimination of the external bypass lines and internal passages. Jeff has found already what I noticed long ago...there is a shunt from the head to the inlet to the pump that is almost 10mm in diameter that goes from the hot side of the engine straight back to the inlet of the water pump. Add to that the external bypass line which is anywhere from 8mm to 10mm, and on earlier engines there are sometimes two internal bypasses of identical diameter at the front of the engine. This is a considerable amount of flow that is stopped from going through the engine instead of the radiator. Plug those holes, give the water some place to go while warming up, and you get more flow through the block when you need it. > That just may be the best answer Tony. Getting the part installed is a different story though, but the part is a good design in my opinion. I have been looking at the hole in the block, and I think the bypass can be plugged on the front cover, so there is still water in that area, which I think is also important for heat transfer in the front of the block. I don't think the front bypass is beneficial, but the rear bypass, now there is something there possibly. I do remember, that some configurations or applications did not have the two outlets on the rear fitting to the head, and it went directly to the heater core hose. I have the hose that goes directly to the inlet of the pump from the rear fitting at the rear of the head. That may or may not be helpful. Also Tim, since you could not stabelize the temps with the bypassed thermostat, maybe the thing to try is getting the part that is not bypassed, and drilling you own bypass hole in the part. The part I have has a significant change in the bypass flow rate over the MSA part. That may get you where you want to go. I guess it is time to pull the Z down again, Frank and I blew the head gasket again, but nothing like it was the first time. I was able to drive the car home, god knows what that did to the head, but it can be welded, and skim cut on the surface to square it away again. Anyway, the thing to avoid is dead heading the pump when the engine is not up to temp. So maybe by plugging the front bypass and using the bypassed thermostat will be the ticket. And Tony, the rear bypass on my engine will have to be addressed also to stop the recirculation of the water without the water passing through the radiator and getting cooled. I have also completed some R&D on the cylinderhead mating surface and noted some changes in block design from the N42 to the F54 blocks. Seems the F54 block is missing about 6 holes that the N42 has for flow directly under the spark plug, you know right in the combustion portion of the chamber. I will have that hammered out here shortly. I just need to decide which block will get the work. Then there is the issue of the head gasket used, and that to will have to be addressed, and I have also noted the differences between the steel Nismo head gasket and the standard felpro, and Nissan stock gasket that will be adressed. Lots of stuff going on with this topic to say the least.

I had an opportunity to speak to an individual that by far is the most knowledgeable on the topic of keeping the engine cool. Very nice conversation, very nice man. One thing that I found that really helped the cooling was to increase the water flow through the engine. I mentioned the LD28 pump and he agreeded that was more then likely the pump to use. Good on that one guys. I was impressed when that tid bit of information made it to this post, where the knowledge will be utilized and not continually debated! Maybe thats why I am posting here first? Anyway: I was sugessted to me that the water flow through the engine could be increased by 3 times what it is stock. Now that made me start thinking again, and that can be quite expensive LOL in order to increase the flow of the water we need to make some observations regarding blocks to start, and gaskets next, the proper flowing thermostat next, and this is what I would like to show what I have been able to come up with for a replacement part that will flow much much better. I took some pictures, as a comparsion, (to the MSA 160 degree thermostast, the nissan part is better) to a part I just bought, primarily as a sample part to compare, and boy what a difference in parts! Here is the pictures of the parts next to each other with a set of calipers to see the difference. First comparison: and the second comparison: NOTE: I have never posted pics here, sorry if it doesn't come out correctly. Here is the link to their web page. http://www.stewartcomponents.net/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Category_Code=Therm I believe this is an ideal retrofit for the Nissan period. Take a look and let me know what you think. REGARDS:

I set my car up with 2 1/4" pipe in and out. I haven't had any problems making boost or power. I run a GT35R on the car and @ 26psi of boost the engine was making right around 700hp. the dyno @ 22psi indicated my power to be right at 658Hp. I could only run 22psi on the dyno, but after I was finished I ran it to 26psi on the road and not surprizingly, the engine was going lean. So in short, 2 1/4" pipe will get you to 600hp no problem. Is it the best efficiency, maybe not, was it easy to install, no it was not, but plumbing in a 2 1/2" inlet and outlet would have forced me to plumb the car with alot more mods and longer piping. I say 2 1/4" is the best all around sixe to run. Now if you have a race car and are not to concerned with routing, then by all means go with 2 1/2" pipe.

I know there are a few guys running the ATI unit, and it works well with external sump configurations. The thing I did not like about ATI is that they had no viable belt pully attachments available when I contacted them. Everything weas bolt on, and I did not mind that to much, but when I got a quote on the pullies I would need to have made, the cost of the part ended up like $700.00 completed. That was a little pricy to me seeing that the ATI damper is designed to basically attenuate ONE frequency. I then tried to get something going with Fluid and they to would not take the time for R&D. That would have been the IDEAL part to run as it attenuates any frequency at any RPM. Hands down the best part to use. I contacted BHJ Dynamics, two weeks after Rebello contacted them to build the equilivent ("Euro Damper") and got going on a 280ZX application. I worked with them on my engine, and the damper was tested on a high RPM Rebello engine (8500 RPM's) and the harmonics were checked. Oh and BTW the harmonics are about 125Hz-200Hz measured on a race engine, so you can see clearly how the "Harmonics" can quickly destroy the rotating assembly, but for the most part what happens is the flywheel bolts grt lose, and the damper bolt gets lose. I would go with the BHJ part if there are no special belt requirements. Who knows, now that I have t test block and head to use I just may buy a fluid damper, and come up with a belt pully system to use on our cars. anyway, don't limit yourself to just an ATI unit.

If you want to run a quest ECU, and I really don't know why you would want to, but get the CAS and chopper wheel from the Quest. You can drive the CAS like it is driven on the 280ZXT. I have a Z32 and a VE30DE cas and they are identical, same chopper wheel which is nice as getting the wheel from the VG32 Z32 is a pain in the butt and poses a number of mechanical problems. The VE distributor is the best to start with, you get the CAS, chopper wheel, and the spacers and mounting stuff to install into the zx distributor. So chances are, that if you have a 6 cylinder with independant coils on the Quest, I would be willing to bet they trigger the exact same way. The Z31 triggers differently then the VE or VG Z32 fuel management systems. The Z31 has a watch dog timer that is triggered by the bigger slot to reset the timer. The fully sequential systems have an all together different setup. The first slit is about 1.3mm wide and the last slit is about 6mm wide. The slits increase as the engine fires each cylinder, and you start the counting all over again. The single O2 is most convienent, the VeE maxima has one sensor. The Z32 has two sensors, but I have gotten a circuit that will drive both inputs to the box from the single O2 output. Problems solved. The hard part is wiring in all of the sensors, but once that is done it's all down hill. Then all you need to do is tune it LOL, all you got to do.

I will agree with you that MOST of the techs working on a newer car really trouble guesses the problem, that along with the shot gun approach to repairs. I have seen this many times, perts that were replaced, charged to the customer, and it did not fix the problem, ESPECIALLY WITH electronic EFI systems. Nissan boxes are advanced with all of the functions such as memory and check summing, or a learn function. These features came out in the early 90's with most of the manufacturers. Nissan and BMW now have variable cam timing adjustments for performance and fuel economy. I haven't seen any fords or gm's with these types of features in their systems. I am use to the Nissan method of calculating fuel and to me it seems very strait forward. I just got a bad taste in my mouth with the later 80's ECU's from them. This was the transitional time between OBD I and OBD II systems and boy what a mess, at least for the few cars I worked on. So after looking at all of the sensors involved with a few systems, I decided this was not an option for my car. The hardest part of the whole thing was getting the harness built correctly and mounting the CAS, but other then that, all of the sensors I had stock still work on the newer boxes. There were added improvements like the TPS resistor, along with the TPS switch that indicates off idle. The coil on plug is excellent and drives just about any coil you can find to fit the application. So for me, I will run with that for a while. I have done a few installes of various ECU's testing them with the L28 and I have found the Nissan solution to be the best fit to the engine, and the car. anyway

I have run a Z31 box single coil system, and that unit has difficulty running power over 500Hp after 5K RPM's I also did not like the single coil with a turbo application. I tried all of the common stuff to stop misfires, and I am sure there is an answer, but I got sick of spending money on ignition components. I do think the MSD 6A and the MALLORY Hyfire coil is the best setup. I also have installed an run the VE30DE twin cam unit. I liked that unit and still do, but it is a ytpe III board and there is no eprom to reprogram like on the Z31 box. The variable cam timing output is really cool, because you can adjust for RPM and for LOAD, when the output is enabled. Well that workes out VERY well for a secondary pump for HIGH boost applications. Very nice option. The CAS will fit into the stock 280ZXT distributor, and if you can get the ( A ) build maxima distributior (OR CAS) it has a steel lid that you can use on the 280ZXT distributor. That was the mitsibishi built unit for the maxima, wonder why they changed? The maxima has ONE O2 sensor and it is the Titania type O2. That was also cool for the L engine. There are some tuning issues and lost tables that have made me go to the next setup the Z32 box. if the tables I need to have acess to are found, then this box is ideal for the L engine. The Z32 uses the same CAS, turning the same direction, and after you have your wire harness built, the maxima and the Z32 boxes are both plug and play. so you can swap them out with no additional wiring changes. As you know the Z32 box has been hacked to greatest extent, and there are guys running 100Hp with the unit. I am now running a 1990 N/A Manual FED box I got off of ebay. The Z32 does two O2 sensors, both the Titania type sensors. The wiring from the maxima is the same for the left bank O2 and the wiring for the right bank obviously is not wired in. That is the big difference in the two. So there are two options I think that are the best ones. Since the O2 sensor is a resistance based output, then it would not be very difficult to use a decade resistor, with the help of consultant, to set the right bank O2 at a FIXED 14.7 AFR with a resistor. Then you are free to use the single O2? I have some people I can email about that question. Then there is the other option of just turning the O2 off in software all together, this is the option I have used. All of the other fuel and timing related tables work, and it is very possible to get an excellent tune and run without O2 sencing all together. I do want to look into building a parallel input circuit and use the O2 in the future, but for now it is off. I still have the variable cam timing output that is the same output as the 92-94 maxima VE30DE box, so I still have the option of a secondary pump enable based on RPM, and LOAD, now that is slick. The single coils will give me any specified length of fire at the plug (2 milliseconds or less) that will still fire, with the right coils under HIGH cylinder pressure. NOTE: with single coil nissan systems like the M30 and Z31 boxes, at 7500 RPM, your effective spark duration is about .9 milliseconds or 900 microseconds, and that is very near the failing point of the ignition under high cylinder pressures like a turbo application. I know this to be fact, that was one of the problems with the Z31 boxes, and I verified that on the bench. Example, I was trying to get the car going the first time. I ended up flooding the car so bad that I filled the bottom EGR portion of my stock manifold with fuel, enough to RUN for 10 MINUTES with no fuel pump running. The car was running 10:1 and 11:1 AFR's the whole time @ 750 RPM. The plugs did not foul out, and I am still running them right now. I am not saying they are good, but they run the car because I have a hefty coil feeding each plug. I wired the maxima and the Z32 box into my car using all of the stock connectors to the 280ZXT that the ECCS harness plugged into and built my own EFI harness. The system looks bone stock Nissan equipment and it runs very well. My problems with fuel management I believe are solved finally. I am in the tuning stages, and by the time I am done this will be a fully intergrated Nissan system for the L engine, works for me. The last thing about the Z32 ECU is that it is a type 2 box, so it has a removable eprom, if you can solder good, so when you are done tuning, pop the reprogramed chip back in and you are done. I did do a couple things with both of the boxes. I put a 500M resistor across the Knock sensor input to stop the ECU from faulting the knock. I also put a 1K resistor on the fuel temperature sensor and fixed that value to 44 degrees C. I dont have ANY trouble codes now from the boxes. Good to go, tune away and be happy. Also, after looking at all the BS ford and GM have done to their EFI systems, you could not get me to run one if my life depended on it. My opinion is that they all are JUNK, and the engineers that developed them have bandaided them to make them run soso, but pass smog! I think of the two, the ford box is much better then the GM unit. Any design engineer that believes he needs to have MAP based sencing, AND MAF based sencing all in the same ECM is out of his mind! and the MAF is a frequency based output, totally STUPID! anyway, the whole thing cost me less then megasquirt. The cost was getting all of the wires for the wireharness and the blue connector terminals, I got racked on those parts, but it sure is nice.

I am not sure from your post, but a single GT35R will cost you less per unit then that. I had my turbo housing jet hot coated as well Good spool and Good flow especially if you are running twin turbo's

I just got a new setup going on my car. I decided the 92-94 Nissan Maxima VE30DE ECU is the winner. The system is totally sequiebtial for the injectors and the coils. I built my own harness and did the install. After I was able to resize for the injectors and for the MAF, then pull latency and K value out the car runs not bad at all for what little tuning I have done. So far, this ECU looks really promissing. I did some bench testing of the unit and found that the unit will spin to 12,000 RPM's and then it loses it's marbles, but how many engines out there are going to spin to 12K? Anyway, this unit works very well to this point, and you can get Nistune for it for tuning. Sounds good to me.

I think that just may be a little to agressive given the surface conditions. The torque just might make it unusable for stability and traction.

Well I am glad to say I was sure it could be done! I don't think I am going to go for anymore hp that the GT35R will deliver the engine. I am very happy with the spool @ 3K or so and don't want the turbo to spool any later. I did consider the GT40 for a specific application due to altitude concerns, but that is in the future. I am pleased to see that Tim you have gotten so much power from the engine. I have had fuel management related problems for some time and I think I just may have a good viable solution for about 400.00 or so for all of the system. I am still working on that. I ended up detonating the ring lands on my engine, Tony can tell you about it, but to make a long story short. I have decided to take this opportunity to run a stock bottom end and make a comparison of the stock engine to the stroked and increased compression engine. So I am working on it right now to get the car back together here in a few weeks. Then I will have complete data as to what modification did what and if it was an improvement. I am also looking into upgrading the fuel delivery as the current setup is taxing the system more then I would like it to so that is also another matter to contend with. Anyway, good job Tim, I was sure it was possible provided some of the trouble areas you addressed were taken care of not only for your car but everyone, if they want to do it LOL.

I have a set of roller rockers that were installed and run on the L engine. I havent really started to build a cylinder head, but I have all of the information to build a setup. I also want to go with a roller cam, and that is the hard part, getting the cam with the cam ground to specifications. I also decided on getting the bearings roller Nascar style. I do have to build the towers and get the bearings, but I have all the design specs ready to build a head. Anyway, yes it is possible, and it has been built before, so go for it.

I sent you a mail on this, but I was wondering what tire you are running. I have learned the M/T 8.1" wrinklewall is not quite wide enough for me to hook up the car. Since you are doing what I have been wanting to run I thought it would be a great place to start with tire upgrades. I want to avoid spending a good deal of money on the wrong tires, like I have already done.

>As for the FAN affecting the MAF readings? What about a 80 MPH wind, does that effect the reading, or only a fan?? Hmmmmmmmmmm.< Yes there is a difference between a 4' fan blowing on the front of my car then driving down the road. The hood is open on the dyno, and there is a much smaller amount of air going across the radiator on the dyno. AND I am very happy that is the case. The car will run into the 100-110 degree C water temps in no time on the dyno, interesting enough, I don't have that problem on the road. And yes there are times with a good cross wind on the freeway I do get the occasional surging. That is just the nature of a MAF, and it's location. >658HP??? Any actuall documentation of this? Pure speculation on a guess of what drivetrain loss there actually is, or is this a verified number on a engine dyno, or????< Ok 5% loss through the drive train @ 658hp=625hp 10% loss=592hp 15% loss=559hp 20% loss=526hp I posted a run that stated 537Hp @ the wheels with 509 foot pounds of torque, that was not the final WOT run, so you tell me. I don't build the dyno's Brian. So if the guys running the dyno tell me the car made X amount, and give the graph, or in this case show me the readout then I tend to believe what they say. Now they also had an engine dyno at the shop they test engines on, I did not want to take the time effort and money to dyno the engine that way. I don't know what your problem is other then your age for one, but I don't have a thing to prove to you or anyone else for that matter. The car does what it does. You really seem to have this need to be the top dog, well be the top dog Brian, not that I believe I am. I built my car to acheive a result and it has done that, with all of the things a number of people said I should have done this or that yada yada yada. Your comments are not welcome nor are they helpful to anyone except your ego. You in my opinion are basically calling me a Liar, well so be it, I don't think I will lose any sleep over it.

I have done tuning on both load bearing and the dynojet dyno's I wont have anything to do with the dynojet again. I ran the car and it did very well on the dyno, on the street however the car did rattle the pistons when driving the car. So yes you will have to do additional tuning on the car after you completed the tuning on the dynojet. The load bearing dyno has it's place, and I believe it is a better dyno to tune with. The one thing that you will have to contend with is if you are running a MAF type system. Most people put the air cleaner in the front of the car, so when you start blowing air from a big fan on the front of the car you just may see incorrect readings from the MAF. That is one consideration to keep in mind when tuning. The higher rpm levels, and boost seem not to be affected to bad. The other thing you will have to deal with on both dyno's is the air temperature into the engine. I was seeing 25 degrees C change on both dyno's the air was much hotter then running down the road. You will tend to go rich somewhat because of it. AFR's, under power (boost) you will want to keep the AFR's in the 12.0 to 12.5 range, FOR BOOSTED applications. The N/a car you can run into the 13.1 AFR's and get better mileage, but you will see a slight loss of power because of it. the 11:3-11:5 AFR's (for boosted applications) will turn your turbo exhaust housing glowing red, or in my case after jet-hot blue, PINK! that is way to much unburned fuel going out the exhaust, that is basically igniting in the exhaust turbine housing of the turbo. Very bad for heat and longevity of the turbo, not to mention the water temp will be around 100-110 degrees C not good for the engine in any stretch of the imagination. Keep in mind, that the weak spot of the L engine is in the rear cylinders of the engine, they run the hottest there. Ever wonder why Nissan did not put the water temp sensor in the thermostat housing, care to take a guess? These engines will give you well 658Hp that I know of for sure. I did that @ 23psi of boost with my car. The car would not make more power on the dyno with 26psi of boost, but that was WOT, and air temps that were much hotter then running down the road. The car did just fine @ 26psi on the road and did make more power then on the dyno. You know, it would be in your best interest to do like Tony suggested and get the drivability going after you have max power set at WOT. Get a friend to tune the car while you are driving, and find the steepest, longest hill you can find so that you can populate each tuning block with the correct AFR settings. then it's all downhill LOL. Whatever you do, you are better off running rich then lean, so be careful, and make damn sure the management is operating correctly before you start. That includes the spark plug wires and boots as well. I think that covers it.

http://www.angelfire.com/extreme/280zxt/page2.html This setup has worked out very well for me.

I agree with Brian, you don't want to use aluminum spring reatiners or stem inserts. I have run them and to date have lost two valves with the PERFORMANCE valve train components. You want a good part, speak to Dell engineering for Titanium retainers and cups, these are light weight and will last forever.

First thing i know is incorrect. The Racer Brown cam is not a regrind cam. They bought unground cams from Nissan to get their billet stock. So in answer to your question, that cam along with a stock Nissan cam is the best part to regrind. The difference is in the heat treating of the billet. Nissan made the best stick out there. I wont even comment on Schnider. Next thing, the cam duration will determine how responsive the cam is going to be. GENERALLY! for the street you want a cam with a realitively short duration, and high lift. This will limit the redline of the cam. The lobe centers will also affect how responsive the car will be. Your cam is bumped up to 110 lobe centers, from stock of 109 lobe centers. A little more improvement there. I would also encourage you to read the WHOLE article from Racer Brown. ALL of the information there will affect the power, power curve, maximum rpm ranges and torque peek. There seems like alot of information but to build the correct application of the L28 you will want to think long and hard on this topic. Myself for example, I have yada yada yada on my car, but I cant run on strait 87 octane fuel from the pump without it pinging above 3-5 psi of boost. The cam is conservative, meaning it will redline at 7K power will start to fall off about 5500 or so and be very peppy off the line for the car. Fortunately, Ron Iskiderian is still around to ask some questions. Believe me he really knows his pop on L cams. You don't hear to much about him though, which is surprising to me. Schnider? not even close to Isky. So like Tony said, this is not new stuff, and I have said the same thing, I am not developing new yada yada yada, but rather relearning what has already been learned, it's just information that has been lost. I don't want an arguement, or am I intending to start one, but these are the facts. Racer Brown did do significant work on the L cam, in fact, the first cams that came out of Isky were ground incorrectly by Rons uncle at the time, he was playing war. So he had to literally model a cam to get the data he needed to properly grind the cam, because Nissan sure was not going to give up any information, not even for the race team that was running their car. That much I know to be fact as well, so in reality, you are short on expertise for a good Nissan L cam. There are a number of people who think they understand cam dynamics and what makes a good cam, but in reality, they know little and use the knowledge base of others that know how to grind an L cam. I kinda like the old nostalgic components for my car, and I would regrind that cam in a heart beat if I needed it.

Twin turbo this and twin turbo that. TOTAL waste of money and time. That setup will not get you any more power then a single turbo will. But what you do get is double the cost of the turbo's. A PITA exhaust system that will only frustrate you getting it to work correctly. To pull more power you will have to do all of the head work and all that jazz, but some people like to do things the hard way just for the bragging rights. I run a GT35R turbo, I get full boost (26psi) @ 3200 rpm. The car ran 658Hp @ 22psi of boost, and at the time, having completed 15 pulls or so the engine did not make any more power @ 26psi. But the engine intercooler and everything was running about 60-62 degrees C on the intake charge. As soon as I had it on the road, the temps went to 40 degrees C and the car was running lean at the top for a short rpm range. So do you, or would you want to go that route, I sure would not want to. anyway.

Myself I am looking for 100% recovery going strait line. Cornering the car is a little different. What I like is a 1 Degree camber static, and about 2 degrees when the car is cornering hard.

Seems now you are running down the alternator hole like I did. I tried three versions of alternators in my car and the AD244 unit has been the best part so far. I did the 100 Amp upgrade to the stock unit. Not enough current at Idle. I then went to a moded GM alternator to 150 Amps, and it also was not good enough at idle. The AD 244 was the best, but it also doesn't seem to provide the advertised 95 Amps at idle, but it is close enough for me. When the battery is fully charged, I can run the lights, the stereo and all the other electrical stuff, water pump, electric fan, fuel pump. So though the unit doesn't provide the ideal current for me at idle, it does work when the battery is charged. I was shooting for an alternator the would still charge if needed at idle with all my electric stuff going, almost got there. I have it posted on my web page if you want to take a look.

Sorry to hear about that Brian. I just went through the same situation on my car. I found the chain had some wear on the inboard links and did not want to go through all of the problems you now have. Sounds crazy, but my disassembly is about what you described less one turbo. Total pain in the butt! I think it really would have been better to pull the engine. I had to take just about everything else apart including the cross member. I have to give you a call and get your shipping address for that wideband. Anyway, take your time, the show is over this year.

All good answers guys. Here is some engineering behind their specifications. I have taken my bottom end apart two times, the cylinder head three times. I use the ARP studs in both. The ARP studs can be utilized a number of times with your engine. The bolts and the nuts are designed to do so. The torque specification is what it is, meaning even though the torque spec is less then what Nissan did, really makes no comparison. You will note that ARP recommends a specific lube when installing the nuts on the studs. Buy what they sell for their parts. The lube they sell with their product is designed to work very well with their products. The engineering aspect of the install is that with the lube they use, the torque is significantly more then the stock bolts. The reason is LOWER friction between the two threads because of the lube, so even though their specifications are less, there is in reality more torque on the contact surfaces due to the lower friction of the contact surfaces when tightening the bolt. Over torqueing the stud will stretch the thread farther then it is capable of safely stretching, it will cause micro fractures in the thread and the part will fail prematurely. I can tell you one thing from experience, the ARP studs are very hard, I bought some 10mm studs for my bell housing and had to cut and tap the ends of the studs. They wore out two hack saw blades and they were by far the most difficult thread I have ever cut. The steel is hard. trust what ARP recommends and you will not have any problems. Over torqueing the bolts may or may not break the stud because every good engineer provides for headroom in their design. It would appear ARP has followed this design concept. Normally the failure of a rod bolt/nut assembly is failure of the bolt, and not the thread and nut. That is the reason for better bolts in the first place. Hope that helps

I don't have a fragile whatwever in any stretch of the imagination. I realize there are a number of people on this forum that make significantly more power with their builds. I am speaking of the L28 specifically. I am quite sure there are a couple people here the really understands what it takes to build 600 + hp with the L28, not many, but a few. So in recap of my first post: Shaving the cylinder head to the extent that was mentioned .080 in my opinion not good for high hp and relibility. A N/A application I am sure will be fine. The thing is that you take so much of the mating surface off of the head that I for one would never consider that as an option. I would get new pistons to suit my compression requirements. A turbo application, NO WAY is this an option for my builds. You know when you are tuning your car and people who tune daily, yes daily, engines and cars that are making three times the piower as my car start heading for the nearest cover when you do your pull there is sometning going on there. Lance has been in the Nissan group of people since the early 80's and he has not seen the power to many times the car is making, but he is also the same guy that started stepping away from the car when I fdid my last pulls. Timing on the L engine is a pain to do it correctly. You do need to use the a n adjustable timing gear to get the timing correct. (this is also correct that the timing of the cam should be finalized on the dyno to get the correct power band you want and to make best power from the cam. EVERY engine will be different) The chain tensioner is als a requirement in my opinion. Every head on the L28 had been surfaced, maybe some have not in the dark debths of someones shed. But for the most part lets say the majority of the heads have been surfaced for this discussion. So you will need to correct for timing of the cam. There are a number of ways of doing this shims under the cam towers (but I must say 5 shims is almost funny ridiculous in my opinion) the other way is to get a cam gear that is adjustable, and for extreme cases a tensioner to correct for the change in geometry. That is what got to me, people who try to do a change and do their best to spend chump change to complete it. This seems to be a trend in the Zcar world (don't get offended guys that have spent some good amount of money) Example: I found a shop that did a very good 240mm clutch for me. The assembly cost me 325.00 but the clutch held at least 100 dyno pulls and at the end of the day held very well 500 foot pounds of torque. Try that with a center force, So I am all happy I found a good clutch guy and reffered him to others. I call Robin to congradulate him on his part. I thought this thing would have been toast a long time ago. I talk to Robin and he has a very bad taste in his mouth from the Nissan guys that have called him for a clutch, except one guy in the midwest I think. Robin tells me that he got the old it is to expensive, center force sells their ............ Then they have been more concerned with the color of the pressure plate then the operation of the unit. Now that makes me look bad for one, the Zcar guys are pretty much SH!! in the street with this guy, WHY because they want performance parts for cheaper then stock units. This is a perfect example of what I am talking about with the Zcar community. I have seen and read this concept over and over again, and you know after have spent upwards in the 75K range on my car I have little time for these shade tree mechanic mentality. So I don't know maybe I should have said nothing on the subject and let it go like I always do. anyway

Brian, do the calculation, that is about 526Hp. I think that figure was a little higher on previous pulls. Yes the one pull I did have previously, when the car was misfiring it got 537.77 Hp the torque was 487 foot pounds. Then the last pull that was not complete on the graph got me 509.75 foot pounds of torque. Either way, I rather get higher torque numbers and go with that in stead of the Hp numbers. I was wondering when you were going to chime in Brian. What has your engine been able to run? I would imagine with your setup, you will be able to make better power with less stress ojn the engine and associated components. I don't take this as a personal attack of my abilities, but there is a sticky on the cam and how you set up the cam and all of the considerations to complete the task. The thing that really gets me is that someone (one one particular) will not take the time to get the hard line data from testing and measuring to get their answer. Seems to me that when I needed hard line data, I have always had to get the data myself. I have listen and asked a few questions of people (not mentioning names) that turns out the reply was totally incorrect when I took the time to do the testing myself. I am not the end all bay any stretch of the imagination when it comes to the L28, in fact I get a kick out of seeing just waht this little six cylinder will do before it blows, crazy I know, but what the heck. I have said it before and I will say it again, building an engine is simply a mathemitical calculation based on some variables. Do the math and get the answer it's just that simple. Good example: Should I build a 3.0 liter engine or should I build a 3.1 liter engine? Do the math, and you will find there is not enough improvement, or increase, to punch the cylinder walls out so far. Questions like these are not the questions that should be asked because you can come up with hard line figures. So anyway, hope to see all of you at the MSA show this year, and Brian, I want to know what your engine is doing. I am very curious to see how much power it will make with your cylinder head configuration.