Tony D

For years people bought super duper clutches and pressure plates, only to find later the premium price they paid was nary justified for a sintered disc and the good old Nissan 780Kg heavy duty pressure plate assembly. Keep cutting the margins by whatever justification you can to sleep well at night. When the dedicated vendors are the only ones left selling the stuff and its 8X the price, you can smile knowing your invested savings will cover it nicely. If anybody is selling the stuff at all...

Get umbrella insurance and a tripod before next startup! Was that you I heard before the video abruptly ended? "Het is BRAND je idioot! Help ons!U Fraans lafaard! Kom hier terug!"

Im thinking a new avatar can come from that video!

I see Kay did what your best good friend should do: drop the camera and run for the door! Suggestion: this is what they make TRIPODS FOR! The pure entertainment value of this moment is lost because the cameraman has atrophied Dutch Testicles, and can't set the camera on an immovable object or tripod to capture the cars final moments of Viking Glory. Obviously he missed the significance of the cars spontaneous offering to Vulcan, thanking him for forging his crank. Instead he ran like a Belgian in 40's (or ...) Are you sure Kay isn't French? I swear I heard him screaming like "WE GEVEN!" But I'm not that great with Dutch... Yesterday at breakfast I showed the photo you sent to the coffee dude at Farmer Boys and asked him "Does that look like a fireball to you?"

Muahahahaha! "It begins..."

Should be identical to stock pump unless the pumps capacity is overwhelming the line or regulator orifices... Hi flow pumps sometimes have trouble keepin idle pressure low, as low horsepower fueling demands were not in the engineers list! Good luck!

Most bolting methodology for vehicles and HP Racing comes almost directly from the Airframe/Aircraft Industry. There many bolts are phosphor coated, or Zinc coated, and are specified to be thrown away after one use. Nuts are cheap... They know the friction of a new fastener with X coating, and design the torque around that. As theorized above, the Torque Three Times is likely to get the nuts to a normalized state they could repeat. But unless you actually jig the fastener up, put a dial indicator on the stud head, and then tighten it, you won't know. And really that is all there is to it. If you jig the bolt and test it (more likely testing 10, or better yet, 100) then you can get a number like you are looking for... or at least a sampling of what happens and then draw some conclusions. The thing is NUTS are generally considered DISPOSABLE considering the consequences of a failure induced by their changes. I would have to ask, given the extreme low cost of nuts, why NOT simply replace them each teardown? What REAL economy do you gain by checking for a theoretical burnishing limit? Remember it is the nuts affect on the STUD that is important. By simply replacing the nuts, like Bryan said above "you can use it over and over and over again indefinitely"! We change the nut, to protect from going into the stud's plastic state. Why risk it? Something falls out of the sky, or the rod detaches and wastes the engine. Because someone didn't want to spend $15 on a new set of nuts? Like the saying goes: Get some NUTS MAN!

" and my catalytic converter is fresh and new" Joe Isuzu went and changed companies didn't he? Now he's building Nissan L-Engines. Whoodathunkit?

Yeah....

Personally I had a HELL of a time keeping traction in my turbo car unless I had really good tires with a 3.7 on stock height. One thing you can do to 'try it out' is go look for someone with a set of 13X7's and low profile tires. If you have a 20" tall tire, you can pretty much simulate the gears with a little calculation. We put 13X7's with sticky slicks on them, with the stock gearing. Made it act like a 4.11. You can do the same it's easy to do on the back, you don't have to clear any calipers!

There is the possibility the pilot on the stud changes... But that exists with Nissan Rod Bolts as well. It's not an ARP specific issue, you should do it whenever you change the rod fasteners. That was the point I was making, that it wasn't just with the ARP's, it's with all of them! The additional step of reaming the rod bolt holes was once necessary before ARP made dedicated fasteners for the L-Gata!

The stock 432Z tucks twin 60mm pipes through those crossmember humps on a 240Z... The exhaust is NOT the lowpoint using the factory hangers back by the differential. The grinding of the differential is a good trick for larger singles, as is the idea to take two 280Z front diff crossmembers in order to run twin 2.5" pipes without hitting anything (or for that matter twin 3".... The key to not hitting is hanging it properly so it stays where it's supposed to stay, and having the pipes bent correctly so they don't stick down below frame. On my old 1970's era Greddy/Trust Goju System (twin 50mm pipes, mirroring the stock 432 setup) the stack of differential weights hung off the front diffy mount crossmember to null vibrations is all scarred up, but the pipes are up higher than that, unscathed. The stock hangers are used in the back. No knocking, bumping, or scraping. Pay attention when hanging it, hang it properly so it isn't moving, and you will be golden! Good Luck.

Are they referring to Big End or Bolt Hole resizing? On the old ones, you had to ream new Bolt bores. On the 'wave lock' style they are a direct replacement. Though checking rods for twist, big and small end diameter, C to C, and having them sized is a good idea, and relatively cheap.

sounds like you were thinking perfectly fine to me!

Mine, as well as John C is it's probably going to take 1000+ miles to get a 'good reading'.... If all the readings were taken from the same gauge is another consideration, and if that gauge reads and accurate number. As mentioned above, that they all are very consistent tells me it just needs to wear in a bit more. The wet test kind of confirms that. This may increase in pressure over time. It may not. There may be a ring seating/bore finish issue.... what it comes down to then is leakdown test results to confirm it's passing rings...and an oil consumption test. But oil consumption is done over 1000-3000 miles. 500 mile test would only be to see that they are all relatively equal IMO (which they are) and that no ring gap stacking has happened. I would run this engine to 1000 and recheck, or even 3000.... and watch oil consumption. This may take 10,000 miles to get to working pressure. Or you can put it at peak torque on an engine dyno and run it there WOT for Two hours.... that should break it in sufficiently. (200 hours is equivalent in OEM testing standards to 100,000 street miles, so that dyno test is considered 1,000 miles equivalent... and is what some engine builders do now to allow customers to just 'get in and drive'! )

Let me add to this as a reward for searching. Why does ARP say to torque THREE TIMES? When you torque a nut onto a bolt, by design the threads of the NUT are deformed. The amount of friction that this takes changes due to an effect known as 'burnishing of the threads'---by torquing these fasteners three times, ARP is taking away the excess friction used by thread deformation and normalizing the friction. If you were to torque that bolt to 10 inch-pounds (no plastigauge installed) and mark a reference point on the nut and rod, you would see that at your 28 ft-lbs torque point, on the first torque up the angle-turn (which is mechanically related to thread pitch, and therefore rod bolt elongation) would be in one position. On your second, it would be further, and on the third it would be further still. Subsequent torques MAY reveal that the threads are normalized and would stay relatively stable in terms of angle-turn/elongation of the rod bolt. Then again, it may not, and ARP may specify replacement of nuts after each usage cycle. If they do, then the three turns is to a normalized point they know will relate to X amount of elongation/stretch. Recapping forces in a nut-bolt, for a given lubricant used, 75% of your torque is friction under the head, 15% is friction on the threads, and 10% of your indicated torque actually goes towards fastener tensile elongation. If on the first torque your thread friction is 25% (to pick a number) then that pie sum remains the same---it has to equal 100%, so you would actually have NO TENSILE ELONGATION of the fastener (no clamping) even though your TORQUE was "Correct" If on the second torque now your thread friction is 20%, now you have gotten HALF your tensile elongation, even though your TORQUE indicated is STILL only 28 ft-lbs. On the third torque, now your thread friction is 15% (as designed), you now get 10% tensile elongation, and at 28 ft-lbs of torque you have full tensile loading of the stud into the elastic range of tension (75-90% total tensile load of the fastener.) Now, JUST SUPPOSE you re-use that nut, and the friction changes the same as it has on the prior three tightenings, that it thread burnishes and you drop your friction another 5%, so thread friction now is only 10%---everything still has to add up to 100% right? That means that your force for elongation went from 10% now to 15%.... Think about that---you have just increased tensile loading "only 5%" but in reality this is 50% more tensile loading! (15/10=1.5!) You now likely have moved the fastener from the elastic, recoverable, use it forever 75-90% range into PLASTIC deformation...meaning some time down the road through load cycling on the joint , the bolt will likely fail. BUT YOU ARE STILL AT 28 Ft-LBS of Torque!!! This is why Bryan's "Always use Moly-Graphite Lube" is not really correct, you have to use the Lubricant SPECIFIED. His suggestion applied to a fastener to use normal engine oil would lead to the very overstress he warns against avoiding! You can see that TORQUE from the above examples really is IRRELEVANT when the designed parameters of the fastening system is not followed. Four different tensile loadings all with EXACTLY the same torque, the last being to a failure point "without ever going ABOVE the max torque spec"! Lubricant changes friction on EVERTHING (As JeffP said), and underhead friction is the biggest contributor. Our machines have two types of thread lubricant (ARP consulted with us on fastener design)---these Aermet Studs specify a graphite lubricant, though a moly variant exists. The coeficient of friction difference between moly and graphite is on the order of 100%, your friction drops in half... So that formula for stud elongation, using EXACTLY The same 'Torque' applied to the bolt head would change from 75-15-10, to 50-2-48! This is a demonstration I do for our class, and I actually make a big dramatic announcement (imagine that, me being dramatic...) to 'stand clear'! The tensile elongation of that fastener changes 480% JUST BY USING MOLY LUBE INSTEAD OF THE SPECIFIED GRAPHITE. I get to about 50% torque and the fastening apparatus goes BANG! The whole nut head assembly literally blows off the end of the stud! We then examine the break and point out characteristic 'tensile failure' signs. As Grumpy mentions, Torque is VERY inaccurate, with many critical fasteners now tightened to stretch dimension, or generically using "Angle Turn" where you take the angle and can calculate based on the number of degrees turned how 'far up the ramp' you go according to thread pitch. We also demonstrate this in the lab, using a stretching apparatus, as well as an angle-turn fastener and a dial indicator on the stud head. The students see exactly the correlation between Angle Turn, Hydraulic-Stretch, and the variation introduced with changing variables when using 'Torque'... When they say follow EXACTLY, they mean it. The above is why! I suggest anybody else that wants to know more about fasteners and why you do some things, or why they fail to go to the UK based "Bolt Science" website. Google them, they come right up. There is GREAT reading there, and I always tell the students to spend time watching the "Junkers Machine" video before they spout off on how great split lockwashers are for "keeping bolts tight"---there is TWO THINGS that keep bolts tight: PROPER TENSILE LOADING ON MAKEUP and PROPER JOINT DESIGN. Period. Loctite is another matter best left for another time, other than to say if it says INSTALL DRY, Loctite IS a friction-changing substance and it CAN induce bolt failure (I can cite an expensive example!) Friction changes are all accountable through calculation, the thing to take away from this is not to think "Torque" gives a consistent result. If you change a variable, then you MUST recalculate the "Required Torque" based on the new frictional data for the joint. I went on entirely too long on this, but I just repeated this daily for the past 6 weeks in Thailand, so it's all fresh in the mouldy brain! It's a little more in-depth on the mechanics of how it works. It's basically the same as what JeffP said, but more 'whys' are answered.

Yes, I will agree there is more to it that my broad generalizations, but for the typical public consumption it gives them a 'general' idea. As Xnke notes, what got me to change my gearing were the funky curves for fuel consumption. They are VERY peaky for the L20A and they ARE biased quite a bit higher than you would think. I am adverse to 'lugging' because of my initial vehicles: Corvairs and VW's.... A VW has a very low mean piston speed, and will run around at 4,000 rpms all day long not overheating. Cut that in half with gearing and you melt the damn heads! The world view of rpms is radically different from the US View of highway travel. Best I can explain it is why rednecks race pickups: a 70s Chevy Shortbed has 4.11's and it will SPANK most anything out there stock-for-stock if you can get traction. Try running it against an Impala with the same spec engine and that 3.27 gearset, or even better those 2.72's! The Chevy is designed to run well below torque peak, and in fact likesto be geared high. But you look at those fuel consumption curves for the Chevy and they are DRASTICALLY different in shape than the Datsun stuff! I had my 73 geared with an 82 transmission and 3.36's. It worked, and got passable mileage. But it always seemed to be 'working'.... Changing to 3.70 gears, the car just seemed 'happier' all the way around and was a lot more sporting to drive. I didn't see any appreciable change in Fuel Economy. I experimented with 4.11's in there, a lot of noise, quick acceleration but....meh, I went back to the 3.7's There is a broad range of gears that "will work"---depending on what your definition of 'work' is.... Again, my preference due to the Air-Cooled Background is to keep R's higher, rather than lower, simply due to the fact that more oil flows across the bearings and the chance of catching a bearing when detonating is theoretically (and likely practically) less. The smaller the engine, the more I tend to let them rev. My old A-Series 1,200 would just amaze me.... 4,200 rpms on the freeway.... sounded like it was SCREAMING with that open-element air cleaner... But 39-40mpg. It just seemed to love running along at those speeds. I find that the stock L26 in my Blue Turd LOVES 3500, and upping it to 4,000 makes me forget the speed I'm going is right near jail time... I'm often leaving the car in 4th trundling along with no throttle input at 4,000 before I go "oh" and upshift to 5th for 3,500. I was in a Clio 1.3, carrying on a conversation outside Liverpool once.... Driver had left it in 2nd and we were going along at a steady speed for some distance at 5,000 rpms before I interrupted the animatedly-talking driver with "Andy?" Yes? "Change-Up?" Oh, right, sorry! And he shifted to 3rd, the rpms dropped to something like 4,200, and he continued back into conversation without another thought! "Proper Gear For Speed" is something not really taught in the USA because big engines have so much torque you really don't need to 'drive' the engine. The L-Gata IS like them in this respect. But damn, they are so much more fun when using the "proper gear for speed" method of driving!

Sounds to me like you need to let your rings seat. BMW's were tested in a long - term program (leave it to Ze Germans...) and were found to still be increasing in compression and horsepower production at the 30,000 mile point. Meaning, technically, at 30,000 miles, they still were not completely "Broken In" yet!

Jeff P is making over 650 on an extrude-honed stock intake with a runner diameter not opened big, but providing an anti-reversion lip of 1mm compared to his head ports. It costs him 30 cfm on the runner over a match-ported 45mm Canon Triples Manifold.

Thing is it's NOT 'winding it up'---the engine is HALF the displacement of a SB Chevy. To get similar HP, physics dictates 2X the engine speed. They put a lot of nickel in the blocks to combat any sort of wear from the repetitions.... Simple Physics and metalurgy. That is where they are designed and geared to run. If you look at the gearing overseas, the L24 with four speed got 3.7, five speed 3.9. Put it in a 2+2 and you were 3.9/4.11 depending on trim level, and 4.11/4.38 with the five speed. At this gearing, you find the top speed of the car comes almost exactly at power peak of the given engine. My L20A S30S ran 6350rpms in fourth, "plenty of pedal" but it made no difference, it was all-in! I drove from LA to Phoenix in 120F heat of summer running 4000rpms which had a 4.11 gearset in it.... it didn't overheat. I just sung the whole way there!

Porches don't have big grills, looks more like a Jagwire. For years when people said "Yeah, so what do YOU drive?" My answer was simple: I don't like to brag, but it's a rear-engined, flat-six, air cooled, factory turbocharged car... (Corvair Corsa 180 Turbo-not my fault they have a one track mind!)

People intent on lugging an engine ... What can you do?The design operational range is 2500 up on the L243500 up on the L20A... You get the dual carb L20A cam... And that's what you get! My L26 is at 3500 at highway commute to work, 3700-4000 when traveling long distances, like across the desert.The industrial applications for he LD used 2400 as operational rpm, the petrol versions 3500-4000 rpms.

South America is "difficult".... His best bet is to convert to and L24. Or as he notes, put some L24 Slugs on his L20A Rods with six new bores. The CC on the L20A head will be high compression, best to port the head and lower it slightly, and take advantage of the larger bores by putting in at least L24 intake and exhaust port seats and valves for best breathing. If he gets the 45mm SU's they will work fine on the 2300.

Not a chance in hell it will pass smog.

If you do a 3.0, the way to go is find the EFI out of a BMW 3-liter Six of comparable vintage, and hook the ecu/pin the harness & BMW AFM correctly and run that. FAR better results than trying to make the Datsun ECU work with the bigger engine, and a hotter cam...