Scottie-GNZ

Chatted briefly with an older guy at the track who had a similar (I assume now the same) setup in a ZR-1. Said he had a ton of $$$ in the conversion and I expect he was referring to the tranny swap as I am not sure those cars came with an automatic.

Oldestzguy, belated welcome and glad to see another "senior" Z enthusiast in Orlando. Hope you plan on joining us on the weekend of 9/11 for the event at Reynolds, GA, whether you have a Z running or not. See the post on SEZ in the Motorsports/Events forum. To show how far I and my last Z go back, the flares were an original ZAP product, later copied by everyone.

Agree with this statement 1000%. They simply failed to build a tire for the track and a track that their teams have competed on for years. As for the chicane, I agree with the FIA to not put one in in despite the fact that it would have been the best thing for the fans. How would you feel if you went to race and the sanctioning body adjusted the rules on the fly to suit your competitor because they were not prepared? That is what the FIA would have been doing to the Bridgestone cars. How about Ecclestone's comment in a discussion on Danica's Indy 500 showing? "You know, I've got one of these wonderful ideas that women should be all dressed in white like all the other domestic appliances,". Hmmmmmm!

Knowing a little more about your intended setup, use and performance goals will help in understanding what might be right for you. $2K for a narrowed Ford 9" is only a part of the cost as you need fabrication to get the unit installed. The cost of the C4 IRS will depend on how much you pay for one, how much fabrication you can do yourself, cost of welding, etc. Click on the link below the pic in my sig to get access to my old, outdated webpage. It has the link to the C4 IRS swap. The R200/R230 mod has come a long way, primarily due this forum and should always be the first option for a hi-po Z car unless you plan on crazy HP with slicks or need a 3.0:1 ratio like I do.

You need to try and simulate the ECM control of the TCC lockup, so get in the habit of unlocking when the speed goes below 45mph. Also, if the 700 converter control is like the 200, then activating the switch at the line will cause it to lockup right after the 1-2 shift.

Trapping 119mph is hauling but some of that mph is the result of the lazy launch. An automatic with a 4000 stall is going to make your eyes bug out on the launch, IF you have tires that can hold it. Surprised you went with a TH350 unless you are willing to sacrifice cruising. A TH350 with a 4000 stall and 3.70s is going to make for a very busy, no, make that buzzy engine at 75mph. Remember that a 4000 stall, non-lockup converter will make those 3.70s be more like a 4.0 final drive.

I do not know enough about the 700 (had no need to) so I hope I do not pass on any misinformation. Not sure why the 700 should work any differently from the 200 so use this info with a grain of salt. The 200 as setup in the GN receives a signal from the ECM when 45mph is reached in 4th. This signal essentially grounds the TCC solenoid to lock the converter. The ground signal runs through the brake switch so stepping on the brake will break the ground and unlock the converter. The converter also unlocks if a downshift from 4th occurs. So, simply running the TCC solenoid ground through a manual switch such that when the switch is not activated it does not hamper the 4th gear lockup, also allows you to ground the TCC solenoid on demand. As Charles stated, it will not lock in 1st gear. I simply manually lock the converter in 3rd at a point where the RPM drop will not take the engine out of the torque range. How much the RPMs drop depends on how much slip is on the converter. A lot of turbo guys activiate the switch at the line and lockup occurs right after the 1-2. This will definitely bog the engine down but the Buick turbo engine loves that as it puts the engine under more load. Probably not recommended on an N/A, especially one with a 700 as the 700 has an undesirable 1-2 gear spacing with more RPM drop. Test it by putting the shifter in 3rd to avoid the 3-4 and activate the switch after the 2-3 in just normal driving. You should see the RPMs drop slightly and feel almost like another shift. If that works then try it about 2 secs after a 2-3 WOT shift and see if it makes any difference. Again, the less slip in the converter, the less you will feel it.

Great post and I agree worthy of a sticky or being easily referenced. If you were selling oil at $4-5/qt to gullible and lazy Americans you would be pushing 3000 miles also. My 9yr Saab 9000 turbo is pushing 210K on the odometer and gets a filter every 3K and fresh Mobil1 every 15K. Cannot remember the last time I did an intentional "oil change" on the Buick engine but it gets a fresh filter often.

Drove my buddy's Cooper S with a massive, sculptured ball he added for a shift knob. I was pleasantly surprised how it made shifting that car so much better. It obviously was designed specifically for that car. OTOH, the best shift knob I ever had in one of my cars was the big, black plastic one on the T5 in my 2nd V8Z. I would imagine some trannies with external linkage or internal linkages with worn bushings could get vibration with a heavy knob.

Mike (ZFan), MAS280 makes a very good point about the lockup. Here are a couple of things to ponder and while they are not exact science, consider them good rules of thumb. - You have the power to cut better than a 1.78 60' and take advantage of locking up the converter in 3rd. - I am all for lowering the weight of the car no matter how small, but at what cost? Here is another way to look at the 65lb weight savings by swapping the tranny. Rough calculation of your HP based ET/MPH/weight (not dyno) is 390rwhp, which equates to ~7.9 lbs/hp. That means the 65lb weight loss is equiv to a 9hp gain which will probably net you typically .1 on the ET (not factoring in the other positive benefits like parasitic loss mentioned by Corzette). - Dropping the 60' to even a 1.60 will net you about a .27 gain in ET. Key factors in making that happen is having the right converter to match the engine setup, tires that hook, taking advantage of the weight transfer and weight distribution and putting yourself in a zone to improve the 60'. That means seat time and completely ignoring the car next to you or the lights and just focusing on what you and the car are doing until you nail down a launch technique that works. IOW, while you are doing this you are not "racing" the car in the other lane. - While probably not fair to compare our cars, I have already cut a 1.51 on 255/50-16 MT DRs without much effort, so a 1.60 is doable. - Locking the converter will net me at least .2 and 2-3+mph in the ET. When the converter is unlocked, it is slipping and converter slippage is HP not reaching the rear wheels as evidenced by MAS280's experience on the dyno. - Being able to lock the converter while cruising is a blessing and your drivetrain will thank you. So you have a 10-sec car if you focus on those 2 areas. Mike (the other Mike) , I apologize for my comments on the dyno. If other people see the benefit, go for it, although I do not recall seeing anyone else supporting the idea. I am firm believer that the only use of dyno output is to compare results of the passes on that session only. I just see too many comments that indicate people are using it to compare one person's HP to another with no regard for variables. Having a SupraTT owner tell me their car makes 1000rwhp on the dyno means absolutely squat to me when their ET was not even close to mine with a measly 520 (estimated). I will leave my personal bias out of this from this point on.

JT, you are making great progress on the car's performance. A 460rwhp Z06 should run about 11.8-9 @ 120 depending on whether all the power is there, traction, driver, etc. I have never felt those types of car's (Hennessy, et al) performance matched the tuner's claims which sometimes are inflated or "measured" differently. I ran against a tuner s-charged Z06 at the track once with "600hp" badges on the fenders. Car ran 11.70 @ 126.33 (admittedly a lousy 2.097 60') which equates to exactly 600 at the crank. ??? Nonetheless, I would own one in a heartbeat and since you ran him on top-end, you are certainly doing some serious huffing yourself. What are the ultimate goals for the car? Hopefully you do not end up with something that can only run good from 70mph on up.

WHY? So we can compare apples to oranges?

It's possible, if he is revving the engine to about 8,000 RPMs.

Just returned from a little vacation last night and saw this. LIVE YOUR DREAM!

Another Porschephile on the forum! Congrats!

Pictures are worth 1000 words, so here are some pics of my install. Key for the installation of the pump is that the pump inlet must be at least level with the reservoir outlet or lower. Note that my pump is upside down and the reservoir and pump are installed behind the PS headlight mechanism, somewhat exposed to the elements. http://www.turbobuicks.com/members/scottiegnz/alkyinj1.jpg The pump outlet feeds into the filter which then feeds into the injector nozzle as close to the TB as possible. I am using a single M15 injector and so far seems to be fine. All lines are teflon-lined, steel-braided lines. The reservoir to pump line is -6 and the rest is -4. You will also see a plastic bottle in front of the radiator that I use to fill up the system. That bottle is 24oz and the reservoir is 64oz. That works for me as I am not concerned about consumption in everyday driving. At the track I used about 12-15oz/pass. http://www.turbobuicks.com/members/scottiegnz/alkyinj2.jpg Here is the progressive controller box and power supply. On the back side of the box are 2 adjustment knobs - the "turn-on" point of the pump and the ramp speed control for the pump (increases pump voltage as boost increases). Not had to adjust those from factory deafults. This is installed behind the PS footrest just above the ECM, currently removed. http://www.turbobuicks.com/members/scottiegnz/alkyinj3.jpg Next you see the box that has the On/Off swith, a button to test the system and allow additional fine-tuning on the fly. http://www.turbobuicks.com/members/scottiegnz/alkyinj4.jpg Last pic shows my boost gauge and EGT pod with 2 red LEDs. One LED lights up at the turn-on point and the other is the low-level sensor light triggered by a float that you install in the reservoir. http://www.turbobuicks.com/members/scottiegnz/alkyinj5.jpg I know folks can do DIYs for substantially less but with 25-26psi boost, a target of 560+rwhp and knowing how critical the fuel mixture is to quick spooling of the turbo and the 1st 60'-100', I want that infinite adjustability. Based on the kinds of questions and bad assumptions I see, this might be useful information. If you can see pass some vendor-specific sales pitches, there is some really good information here. http://home.att.net/~alkycontrol/page8.htm

.....said young grasshopper as he plotted to blow master's doors off. :D

Been almost 4 months and so I thought there was no further interest. As for a Z-specific kit, what would make it so would depend on what type of resorvoir is used, where the reservoir and pump are located and the hoses based on that. Everything else is the same for another engine. Why do'nt you figure out where the resorvoir and pump might be located and let me know and we can figure out what the rest might look like. He does not have a Z to figure that out so that would help. Keep in mind that the pump inlet needs to be at least on a level with the resorvoir outlet and have no concerns about the pump before exposed to the elements. I will be away from the confuser for about a week starting tomorrow night so I will not be responding to any posts or emails. BTW, he recently went 10.90 @ 126.5 in a 3650# TTA. I will save you the math and tell you that is about 565rwhp on 93-octane and a stock shortblock and MT DRs.

Very interesting post and responses. Let me quote myself from my old turboZ wepage of about 7-8 yrs ago: "I started off with the downpipe and 2.5†press-bent system and ran 106+mph with 15psi boost. After installing the 3†mandrel-bent exhaust and DynoMax UltraFlow muffler, the boost spiked to 16.5psi with no other change.The next successful run was 110.97mph at 17psi. The 3†exhaust, combined with the custom downpipe, gave me one of the biggest performance boost to date. If you do nothing else to your turboZ, this is the one to consider." If you have a 2.5" press-bent pipe making 2 90* bends, you probably have something a little better than a 2" system. ON3GO also made reference to a cutout and that is an excellent option when you take the car to track. Since I recall you not being one that makes it to the track often, probably not an option for you. I have a 3" DP and 3" mandrel that splits into 2 2.5" and I am getting ready to add a 3.5" cutout as close to the DP as possible. Expect a nice increase in power at the track especially with the expected increase in power of the new shortblock. Mine is electric and is probably not an option for the budget-minded, although you will be hard-pressed to "buy" the HP gain another way. Depending on what you are looking for from the car and how it will be drivien, just one upgrade might not be enough and sometimes you cannot do them all at the same time. However, if you really want performance, the 3" exhaust is one you will need.

That is correct and that is "Maz.." as in Mark Mazurowski.

Mike, the rollbar, like Z-Gad's is 100% custom as that is what they do. Would rather not talk about what it cost me as I got the "good friend" price break and since everything is custom, I cannot quote prices for them. If you plan on being here in FL, stop by and see them. What I can tell you is buying a pre-made kit, like S&W, and having someone weld that in does not come close to this. Jeff, shortblock still in machine shop jail and I am having serious withdrawal pains . Have to go to NYC this week so hoping for early-mid July. Have to assemble it then do a careful break-in. Mat, I used a Rustoleum brush-on and it will take at least 2 coats. Can get you the specific one if you want.

With the interior back together.