alexx933

So once again I have a very basic question: out of all the TPS sensors, which do I purchase? I have the option of a number of vehicles and various years i.e. 240sx, maxima, 300zx. Yet the TPS seems different slightly per application. I may be wrong in the idea that some TPS vary with year and transmission. But even so, the confusion has delayed purchase and continuation of my conversion. Which TPS should I be using? Oh! I did end up purchasing a new optical distributor and shaft. I figured there would be less backlash for this question by using this thread as opposed to starting a new one. Thanks once again!

Ya, it's a 280z. It's nice to know the earlier models have more space. I've been looking for another chassis as mine has a lot of rust which I don't have a way to repair. Thanks for the heads up!

I've had bad success with pedal pads not wanting to stay on while driving and typically being a pain just to get them on perfectly. Nor do they exactly accomplish what I want. Pads can give more or less area to perform footwork but don't do much in the way of changing the distance between the two pedals.

I didn't realize most cars are similar. I learned to heel toe in my CRX which has plenty of space. Use of the heel feels more precise to me. Possibly due to the amount of time I spent in the rex. Using a torch to heat the arm of the pedal would allow it to bend easier as well as put the pedal slightly closer to the driver. Cutting off the angled portion and welding it straight is beyond my know how but could work. If modifying the arm seems like the hard way, then the other option would be to put new pedals in. Finding a car with straight arms and then fabbing a system up to use the throttle and brake systems doesn't sound much more difficult than the above option.

For stock pedals, heel toe shifting results in rolling my foot over as opposed to using my heel. Has anybody modified their pedals so that there is more space between? The stock pedals are bent to place them closer to the transmission tunnel. Would reducing the angle of the clutch and brake pedals help alleviate the issue? Finding a fairlady won't work for me, sadly.

That would explain it! I have a hard copy of a 78 fsm, and didn't realize they had made so many changes between years when I got it. I was looking in my copy of the 78 and finding it to be different than what I was seeing. I had to download a copy of the 77 just to find what NewZed was talking about (not to mention I wasn't looking at the components diagram but at a specific picture that showed relays attached to the bracket). Thanks for clearing up my issue!

Newzed, you were right... I was getting stuck looking at the wrong picture. It still confuses me as to Why the relays are under the seat. Plus the fuel pump relay mounted next to the ECCS. It all looks stock and unmolested.

When I had bought it, it had the original fuel injected l28e.

It is a 77

The fsm states that the relays should be there and not the silver box, hence my confusion.

When I was installing my Turbo motor, I was looking for the relay brackets. I found the bracket in the passenger foot area, but the bracket under the fusible links eluded me because there were no relays there. Only this silver box. I found more relays under the passenger seat and the fuel pump relay under the dash. Is there any reason for this? Why the deviation from the standard practice? and what is this silver box?

Oh god, that sounds nice! haha I have been waiting to sell my CRX until the conversion to MSnS so I'm not always paying for my crappy mileage. $35 just to go 80 miles is ridiculous as opposed to $20 to go 160 miles. If I got about 25 mpg, I'd be perfectly content minus the fact that this will be scary to drive in the winter haha

The original one wire O2 sensor will be kept until after the MSnS conversion just because I'd rather put the money into a wideband. As far as closed loop goes, I don't know as much as you guys, but the best mileage I've ever gotten was during a 100 mile trip at a staggering 12.5 mpg. After passing about 5 cars in that one hour and forty minutes.

Yup! It's a brand new O2 sensor at that! haha Accidentally shorted the blue/red wire from the ECCS that powers the fuel pump relay and so I had to wire it in separately. I'm pretty sure that with a combination of somebody having messed with my AFM is causing the ECCS to give it more fuel. I just thought this was weird how the idle seemed healthier with that vacuum leak.

My car already runs pig rich. I get about 10 MPG. Currently in the process of switching over to MSnS. I didn't offer any information as to the year because I thought it was irrelevant. I have an 81 turbo in my 77. There is no idle adjustment screw on my TB as idle is controlled by the ECCS. I looked through the FSM quickly and may have missed that unplugging this would increase my fuel pressure. I was thinking that by drawing air in through the vacuum leak, it was actually running more lean as opposed to more rich.

Today, I decided to play around with my engine a little bit. Check the oil, coolant, vacuum lines and such. While the motor was on, I was checking the vacuum line to the stock FPR. I unplugged the hose from the intake side. All of the sudden, my idle surges slightly higher. It actually sounded better. I plugged the vacuum leak and the idle went down to where it was to start with. I tried this a couple times with different vacuum sources and the FPR to the same result. What does this mean? I have no working tach at the moment so I'm not sure if either way results in a more stable/healthy idle. Thanks in advance, Alex

RB just to keep the straight 6 design! Not to mention the sound!

Seems like I will also be looking for that shaft then! Changing and aligning that shaft can be a pain in the ass too! On the plus side, it appears the star is symmetrical so there wont be a need for aligning the shaft. Just the rotor! Thanks! I really appreciate your help.

I'd have to change the shaft for the optical distributor? I might still have the 77, but I may have sold it along with the original motor and distributor shaft.

I don't currently have an 83 optical distributor, but that will be changed here shortly. I don't feel like filing off most of the teeth on my pulley and fabricating a bracket to hold a hall effect sensor. Not when there is a bolt in solution that will look much cleaner. I really appreciate the input guys!

Thanks for the swift feedback! Metro, If the 81 CAS is the same as the 83 CAS, then i need to build the board for the hall/optical? I just don't want to build for the wrong setup and have it be wrong. I plan on using the 83 dizzy.

These may sound like noob questions but I've looked and can't seem to find correct answers. Currently, I'm running an 81 l28et engine in my 77 280. I have not yet installed MS!! I'm using the stock dizzy without the CAS. I have an HEI module to fire the coil from the ECCS due to the lack of an ignitor. Is there a way for me to fire the coil independent of any EMS? I need to convert to MS ASAP so this would smooth the transition. In purchasing my MS kit, I ordered a direct coil ignition module. Should I just install that and only adjust advancement by turning the dizzy? The simplest route would be the most effective for me. Sorry these are such noob questions! And thanks in advance for any assitance!

Thanks for the input cg. I bought a megasquirt and spark set up that I haven't begun building yet. But i need a compatible CAS. I was just thinking that this could be somewhat simple while I build and plan the MS&S. The amount of time You've helped me is greatly appreciated. Your advice to run a different EMS instead of messing with the stock system is a good idea. I guess my time can be better focused on something more long term.

So after a long break, I've decided to figure this out once again. I began with the 81 FSM in the supplement section EF. From there I was going to test everything with the assumption that my perpetrator would be either the TPS or the AFM. The FSM started with the TPS which checked out. I moved onto the AFM with the manual on page EF 61. At the ECCS plug, the resistance was about 215. So fail. I started the component check. The four pins on my AFM are labeled 34, 33, 32, and 25 with 34 off on its own. The FSM shows to use 33 and 26. The picture shows 26 in the same position as 32. This is a bit confusing as to if I am using the correct pins. Can somebody clear this up? I checked the resistance using the labeled pins on the AFM pretending that 32=26. The resistance was 217. It seems to me that the AFM is faulty. Would I be wrong to assume so? When I got this motor with all the parts, the cover on the AFM was so loose it would fall off which leads me to believe somebody was trying to modify it. That's why I assumed it was the AFM. As always, thanks for any and all assistance!

Alright, sorry for some half assed info guys. I was really hoping i wouldn't need to take my intake off because it's a pain in my ass. But I looked through the 81 FSM which has the poor mileage section, it shows the ECCS as being a single plug. However, my harness uses three plugs. By finding the correct pins, will my continuity testing reveal the same results?