Six_Shooter

If it were me, I'd cut out and replace, either with a donor piece cut out from another car, or made from scratch. The 3 threaded holes are easy to replicate, weld nuts with the proper thread in the right spots. You may not make the piece exactly like factory, but close is good.

Try tightening the wheel bearings again, this time without loosening them off 60 degrees. I've never heard of anyone doing that before, honestly. I always tighten my wheel bearings by feel, just before the point they start to drag from over tightening. I also never loosen off the bearing to line up the castle nut with a cotter pin hole, if need be I'll tighten slightly.

What I read in this thread would indicate that the early rack has a quicker ratio. I haven't heard of any of this, until I read this thread. I'll have to take a closer look at my rack, since I haven't noticed any "service ports".

You need it unless you ocnvert to an alternator with an internal regulator.

I didn't add a sump to my tank, but I did tap the drain plug for 3/8 NPT and added a fitting there to to pull fuel from, and have not experianced any issues with fuel starvation, when the tank is above about a 1/4, and I'm not corning hard. I haven't ran any track days yet, that's not really my thing, but for daily (spirited) driving and drag racing this seems to work well. BTW this is on the original '73 240 tank.

$400 is pretty decent even if you don't get the ECU and such. I probably spent close to that on just the Nissan specific external parts for my conversion. Exhaust manifold, intake, Cam cover, electronic dizzy, wasn't a "turbo" dizzy in my case, just converting from points to electronic to be able to run the GM ignition control module I needed to use, thermostat housing, I had to change that for fuel rail clearance in my case. In your case you would bet getting all of those parts, along with the complete long block, and turbo for that price. I'm not saying to not ask for the ECU and such, but even if you don't get them included in that price, it's still a decent price to me. I also wouldn't be too worried about getting the ECU and wiring harness, swapping to MegaSquirt or a GM ECM (which is what I use) would be a step above the original Nissan EFI for the L-series. Also the Z31 turbo ECU seems to be a popular choice for updating the ECU for the turbo L-series.

Stop reading turbocharging info from the '60s. 9:1 SCR is not very high at all, even when it comes to turbocharging, these older L-series engines. I'm currently running 11 PSIG at max boost non-intercooled, on an 8.8:1 L28, and no "problems" with knock. The only time I seem to get any knock right now is when I A) turn up the boost to 14 PSIG (Highest I've ran so far), get the intake temps up real hot, 150*F+ (directly related to A)), even then I only get a couple degrees and C) When I get real agressive with the tune, to try and squeeze more out of it. With the better controls (EFI) available today, the engines can be run closer to the "edge", witout ever going over, with better driveability, and manners than ever before.

Wow, you had around 1500 lbs of stereo, tools and CDs in the car? Approximate weight loss to E.T. reduction is 100 lbs lost is about one tenth of a second. So 1.5 seconds would need 1500 lbs dropped off. You would likely get down to a 14.9, maybe a 14.8 with everything you mentioned removed. BTW, reaction time has absolutely no effect on your E.T.

Intake temps can rise a LOT more than 5 degrees. During some short runs I've made I have seen the intake temps rise from about 100*F to over 150*F, then return to around 110*F, that one run. On a particulary hot day a few weeks ago I saw intake temps over 180*F! I've seen one engine that is is possibly more indestructable than the L-series, and that's the GM 60* V6 (with the large journals). I had one that I built from a bunch of parts kicking around for my 1985 GMC Jimmy, and the knock would get so bad (too small of an injector and not enough control of tuning), that the truck would literally fall on it's face because of all the timing being pulled by the ECM, then lift the front end again when timing was put back in. I tore it apart after a few years of abuse, and the pistons still looked like new. Crabon on them obviously, but no indications of pre-ignition or detonation! You'll be surprised just how much can change is a short amount of time, when it comes to temperature and related parameters.

I have a very similar set-up on the '70 Chev truck that I work on/play with (belongs to my Grandfather, at least it's his name on the ownership LOL). We used a hood release cable, ran it and because the hood release cable had a nice mounting flange at the pull, we mounted it in a semi-hidden spot.

Yes, that would be correct. The GM 60 degree V6 uses a firing order of 1-2-3-4-5-6, and the paired cylinders are 1-4, 2-5, 3-6. Just verify the coil order (A-B-C, or A-C-B, etc) to make sure you have the correct order of coils firing to cylinder firing order. I drew out the Nissan firing order, and GM 60 degree V6 firing order side by side a few times to make sure what I though was right for re-ordering the coils was right. Basically I wrote the one firing order above the other, and matched cylinders this way. In essence: 1-2-3-4-5-6 - GM 60 degree firing order 1-5-3-6-2-4 - Nissan L-series firing order I then went to the coil pack which was mounted to the strut tower at the time and ran each cylinder number to the coresponding coil tower numbered on the coil themselves. (60 degree GM coils are labled for each cylinder) So what I ended up with was coil tower 1 connected to cylinder 1, coil tower number 2 connected to 5, coil tower number 3 connected to cylinder 3, coil tower number 4 connected to cylinder 6, coil tower number 5 connected to cylinder 2 and coil tower number 6 connected to cylinder number 4. It's sometimes easiest to draw things out to better visualize what you need to end up with.

That sounds like a Supertrapp muffler. Looks like this:

Yeah, I have my Fuel level, voltage and O2 (NB ugh) gauges where the radio should be. I will be moving the gauges so I can once again have a radio, since I find on long drives at constant speed, the symphony of Intake and Exhaust, with special guest Turbocharger, just gets a little mundane. LOL I just have to find a place or better way to have those gauges elsewhere, that doesn't put gauges all over the place and look bad. Right now I'm rocking an iPod, with some cheap amplified computer speakers running off my inverter. LOL To install the temp probes for the tanny and diff, you will need to drill holes in the case/cover at low points to be submersed in the fluids. You might be able to get away with using the diff drain plug location. The trans drain is on the very bottom of the tranny though, and on mine is a rather large plug that would be difficult to adapt, or take some work anyway, and then I would be worried about damaging the sender and possibly puking all the fluid out of the trans while driving, since it would be literally one of the lowest parts of the car. You may find that the trans will require a bung welded to a low spot on the side of the case to keep the sender high or level but submerged in the trans fluid. Drax240z; I see a LOT of new Chevrolet trucks with trans temp gauges in the OEM cluster, including Avalanches and Even the Escalade that you know will never be used for towing.

I routed my fuel feed into the end of the fuel rail nearest the firewall, and then from the other end to the FPR which I mouted in the location of the stock mechanical fuel pump, which I then used the original feed line as a return. Been working great this way for over a year. You will need to verify that your FPR will indeed provide proper fuel flow to the rail connected in the way you have pictured above, some rFPRs will and others won't. I would advise against mounting the FPR on the firewall, some sanctioning racing organizations will fail tech with the FPR mounted on the firewall.

I literally LOL'd when I saw the following picture. Just something about it exagerates the extremity even more!

Wow, only 92db? Not very loud, IIRC that quiter than an average vacuum cleaner at about 10 feet. If you do an internet search you can find charts that show relative sounds to decibel readings. You can also test how loud your car is with a hand held decibel meter, Radio Shack used to sell these, not extremly accurate, but close enough to let you know. Have someone stand at the side of the road, or in a parking lot, and drive past them about 50 feet away and see what the reading is. Obviously obey all safety and traffic laws when doing this. You could also call good local independant car audio shops, that should have an RTA/SPL meter and ask them to test your car, explain what you're doing and what you need, and they should be able to help you out, there will usually be a small charge for this as well.

I'm using a GM ECM to control my L28, so I replaced the TB with an GM 3400 TB (going to change to a 3100 TB, since it's smaller soon), and was able to remove a lot of comonents and bolt bosses that would have been on it. I mention the previous because it changed the throttle activation from linkage to cable, and set-up the fuel system a little differently than stock, going with a single (custom) fuel rail, instead of the stock looped fuel rail. What I started with: What I ended up with: And what the final assembled product looked like last year (since going to DIS I was able to flip the TB over and help "clean up" the engine bay a bit more):

Most cars I've tuned/datalogged idle around 20 in/hg. In my Datsun, if I keep it in gear from a high(er) speed run and engine brake I see around 25 in/hg. But you have to realize these vacuum measurmenst I posted above are in the intake manifold, and where you would be using this tubing essentially between the turbo/supercharger and the throttle body (left out inter/aftercoolers for simplicity), and would never see this high of vacuum there.

The last tank of gas, with mixed driving (city and highway), with some spirited driving, I was able to get about 20 MPG according to the odometer in the dash, which I haven't checked the accuracy of. I know the speedometer is out, but that could be just simply because I might have replaced the needle the wrong position. Engine: L28, turbocharged (6.5L diesel turbo), GM EFI (Delco), 3" exhaust. Tranny: 5-speed

If you're into going to the wrecking yard, look at Chevy Astro vans. They have an LED bar that attaches to the roof. You could likely mount this to the underside of your spoiler or even on the roof. I have a couple that I plan to take a part and mount the LEDs in a custom bar to blend more with the exterior of the car, I don't have a spoiler.

Unless I missed it in the thread where it was changed, he is running the OEM turbocharger, which is more than capable of keeping boost pressures down in the single digits. If there is a problem with the wastegate and/or actuator not allowing the flapper to open enough than boost can spike, or go higher than it should, also excessive carbon build up around the wastegate opening can do the same, but that usually only comes after severe neglect, and rarely in a situation where the car is actually being "driven" to the point where the wategate will be opened. In some cases, the owners of the cars drive so gingerly, that carbin is allowed to build up on the wastegate flapper, due to essentially "non-use". This is rare though, and just mention it as more of a point of interest. In this thread it was also mentioned that there is a gauge with a built in boost controller and the boost spikes seemed to appear after the install of the controller, as I'm reading it. I would recommend removing the additional solenoid and connecting the wastegate actuator back to the intake and verify that the wastegate is indeed working correctly, then and only then, you can trouble shoot the boost spiking issue.

I can't say for sure on Nissan vehicles, but GMs, specifically the Turbo Sunbird, Syclone and Typhoon, for sure use the ECM to control boost. I am running one of these ECMs (with custom code) on my L28, and the ECM controlled boost control solenoid works mint, when the wastegate isn't pushed open by the exhaust pressure. LOL (simple spring fixed that problem). I also know Subuarus use the ECM to control boost pressures. I'm sure I could find many more too. I have seen a few cars that are set up without any electronic ECM controlled boost control Solenoid, such as the '89(ish) Toyota Supra, and a few others that are not coming to mind currently. Just pointing out that there are some vehicles out there with ECM controlled boost. It's nice, with a bin switcher, you can have two "tunes" set up on a single chip and switch between a "low boost" bin and a "high boost" bin, on the fly.

Something like that would be better suited for a hybrid (like a Prius hybrid), where there is recumbant braking used, to charge a capacitor, and is then used on the accleration to save batteries/fuel, through an electric motor, connected directly to the drivetrain. I want to play with this idea once I build an electric vehicle, I have a 1972 Honda CB500, that needs too much to get back to original running form, that I want to convert to straight electric, recumbant braking is definatly on the board of plans for that project.

The gear you pull in most certainly does effect the torque and HP numbers that the Dyno will calculate. The time it takes to go through the RPM range is usually quicker in a lower gear, and time is part of the equasion, not just your overly simplified equasion. I have seen this first hand. The dyno will calculate the HP and torque that is produced at the wheels, or drum, or more specifically the contact patch of the tire to the drum. So as gear ratios change or tire diameter changes, so do the numbers that the dyno will show. The engine torque produced and HP will remain the same at the crank, but what is shown at the wheel contact patch will change. If it didn't there wouldn't be a large selection of rear end gears or even transmission gear ratios, nor different tire diameters. If the gear that was used didn't change the numbers produced at the contact patch, then changing to a shorter tire would not produce quicker acceleration, all else being equal. HP = torque/time. So the quicker the engine revs through a range, as it will in a lower gear and the larger the torque, again as will be shown in a lower gear, the "less" HP will be calculated. With more torque not as much HP is needed to do the same work, which is why time is a very important part of the equasion. You might just be surprised how much torque is being applied at the rear wheels in first gear. In a lot of cases there is over 1000 Ft/lbs from your average everyday engine at that contact patch when in first gear. I've calculated over 3000 ft/lbs from some of my cars, with a known crank torque and then working through gear ratios.

Your problem is bolded: Use 4th gear. 4th gear is either 1:1 or the closest to 1:1 on any tranny I have seen (with the exception of a couple home brewed gear swaps). Using a lower gear will skew the numbers usually huge torque, but low HP as you have found. You'll find that your torque will "go down", but your horse power will come up and both will coincide much better.