Tony D

Waitaminit here now..."stupid"? That IS offensive.Wikipedia is a valid source? I'm familiar with the motion-picture DevilZ from the 1989 feature. Touched it in the day matter of fact.I'm not that up on the anime version (which I make the assumption POSTDATES the 89 feature AND the Manga which it all started from.)And apparently then the anime version grew a turbo as the SSS car didn't have two (used for the motion picture it had a big single KKK) Reading the links provided provided a lot of talk, guesses, foolish conjecture, but little in the way of manga, anime, or video backup. The Manga I had seen followed the motion picture VERY closely, as did the single anime... So lose n fact you could or relate scenes between the two like they used a virtual tracing program to get he details exact. So before you go be an asshat and tell me "don't be stupid" for asking for ONE piece of visual backup consider he REASON I'm asking. Seriously, I wasn't offended before, but right now I'm feeling the need to kick someone's impolite ass! WTF?

"The anime version was a twin." -- Got a link to a page?

Use Hump Hose connectors, they will allow for movement. Same as the hump hose on the stock NA TB hose. Search on "Hump Hose" and you will know how it works.

Looks like Trust in one photo, HKS in the other. Where is the spec that says the Devil Z wat TT? 24OZ here has a PDF copy of the original HKS brochure he obtained through direct inquiry to the Aviation Division of HKS.

FYI The stock T3 was 0.48 A/R Turbine Side on the L20ET (JDM) - 145HP The stock T3 was 0.63 A/R Turbine Side on the L28ET (North American Market) - 180 HP The stock T3 was 0.82 A/R Turbine Side on the L28ET (Eurospec) - 200 HP FROM FORENSIC DISASSEMBLY, ALL THESE TURBOCHARGERS USED THE SAME CENTER CARTRIDGE, HOT SIDE WHEEL, COMPRESSOR WHEEL, AND COMPRESSOR HOUSING (AND HOUSING A/R)

More items for "the shelf" no doubt!

45'HC's will fit three 280Z 2+2's inside with some maneuvering room at back, or front. It's a good place to store tyres and such...Two in there gives you quite a bit of storage...The ramps I use are the standard plastic crappy ones they sell at Autozone.

I worried about the "garaged" clause till I got a 45'HC Shipping Container.They accept that as a "Garage" Also be careful, many times it allows for "garaged/carport"-they want it covered somehow.

The reserve is 30K... What's the hang up on 100K?

Don't make me disassemble stuff!

Arriving SYD early October... Plan on being in attendance at Bathurst. I HAVE FROM NOW UNTIL THEN TO ACCUMULATE PARTS AND PACK THEM IN MY BAG HERE IN THE STATES Mark, get the word out and have the guys PM me here. I should have a great excuse to loiter n SYD for at least a week before returning to New Caledonia.Let's make the best ofit, shall we!

If I stay steady it won't go past it and will buck and surge perpetually.Give it gas, get past it, and drive on. The PO had HUGE tires on it, so his highway speed cruise was considerably lower than when I put OEM Size tyres on it. I bumped my highway cruise speed up to 75+ and haven't looked back.The EFI system I have in the car is a 1976 setup with 176,000 miles on it.

The calculation of needle position and it's "correctness" is a function of actual temperature, & thermostat. Top reading - bottom reading=spanSpan/100= percentage of relative movement (*PRM) PRM+Bottom Reading= indicated temperature Do the math and you will know what your gauge is reading. Nothing near E unless you're in Minot in February warming up...

Sloth and Ignorance are their own reward I suppose. Fine for some, not me. The TRULY curious will find answers. The idle curious waste everybody's time.

12 hours a day 6 days a week and people wonder why they don't get an answer spoon feeding them... This is why.

There was dyno testing done using the pump as well for evaluating the difference in quantifiable ways under controlled load conditions. That was also posted but it was general information not excel tables and charts... Mainly because I don't know if posting those is different from photos, and second because it was $1,600 of personal money spent quantifying it and I just don't feel like giving specifics away for free when the majority of punters who would access it wouldn't appreciate it anyway. It's always anybody's perogative to conduct testing on their own and share the results. There are limits to my generosity and the site is set up for self-directed learning. Things that seem unrelated aren't, and those that seemingly are related directly--aren't! Searching is hit and miss inside the box. We aren't Dewey-Systemized here!

No photos visible. As I recall Jeff gave pretty detailed photos of the port work done at the head juncture which increased port flow considerably The BIGGEST reason given by most for going to a tubular exhaust manifold on a turbo is the perception that it "flows better than the restrictive cast manifold"-- but when you cut apart a stocker, like Jeff Shows, the internal diameter of the Euro Manifild is actually larger than the SFP 1 5/8" tubular one he bought for excessive $$$. When you then realise this, and see the bumps and restrictions at the head juncture, it becomes easy to remove flow obstructions that are obvious -- giving you the cast Manifild with a "tubular equivalent" on the exhaust port to Manifiold. Depending on the engine it was installed upon his spool was a couple hundred RPM's earlier, and obviously no impediment to power production to over 7200 RPM's. As far as I know Jeff's setup is the only one I know of making 650+ HP on stock based intake AND exhaust Manifolds. He did it for a reason, and do far the only quantifiable reason for removing a stock manifold was found on the intake side, where the stock runners are costing us 30CFM per hole compared to the Cannon Triple manifold and either a plenum or ITB Setup. The exhaust side, ported to be tubular equivalent on the flange to head area does not appear to require replacement to 650+HP at 7200 rpms (and he's just afraid to run it higher, I'm working on him about that...!!!)

Posted Jesco Brochure clearly shows flow @ RPM and is easily compared to published data for L28 Petrol version as specified in FSM.

As to VW's and oil weight, like most GERMAN engineered things, if you deviate from the engineered specifications, you run the risk of catastrophic damage. When VW or BMW says an oil weight, they MEAN it. What VW or BMW say doesn't apply to a Nissan, or a Ford. Each application has it's own engineering rationale. Air Cooled VW's were notorious for scuffing cylinders and bearing breakdown when you ran other than the originally designated 30Wt (Straight!) Atlas Copco air compressors did things which confounded simple observations when synthetic or off-weight oils were used. For instance, run an ISOVG32 Mineral Oil (20Wt) and all was good. Cold to hot the oil pressure would go high to low as one would logically expect. Put almost any synthetic and it had trouble not tripping on low oil pressure when cold, and setting off 'high oil pressure' when warm. Cutting and shimming the oil pump was an exercise in futility as the flow on the bypass leg was calibrated for maximum flow with mineral oil, not the dynamics of synthetics. Oil is VERY misunderstood, how it works, how it acts and behaves, what you really want or need. This was so important for VW in the Air Cooled Days, field trainers would spend almost 40 hours training distribution mechanics on proper lubricants and why you needed the ones VW Specified. Apparently little has changed in their design philosophy, they engineer for X, and expect you to use X. If you use Y, and it doesn't work like X, they will give a typical German response: "It isn't X, what did you expect?!" They do have a point!

Heh heh heh Bessemer Engine c.1933!

Jeff P's Anglefire "Extreme 280ZXT" page covers this.

Pressure is resistance to flow. Thicker oil has more resistance and pressure builds, indicated by instruments. As mentioned this also takes more horsepower to drive the oil pump with this thicker oil. As engines wear, clearances increase allowing for more potential flow across that "orifice" this shows on institments as a "pressure loss" when in fact flow through the bearing juncture has actually increased. "But Tony, you just said a pump is a mechanical device limited to a set flow curve by its internal capacity!" And so it is. It is also routinely so oversized for the application it's not funny. As the engine wears, in reality what is dumped overboard through the pumps relief valve just gets less and less. This allows full pump flow to the bearings and indicated pressure remains constant. This is why bearings with wider clearances don't overheat, they have plenty of cooling oil flow across their working surfaces. As John C says "shim the pump relief spring if you want mor pressure" -- what You do is simply Put the full pumps capacity to the ENGINE BEARINGS and not dump it overboard back to the sump. Increasing the viscosity is generally not something recommended unless you have very specific application needs. Street cars are wasting money. Straight 30 or 40 is fully acceptable in less variable environments like where I live.

The viscosity has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the VOLUME DELIVERED. This is almost a purely mechanical derivitave of the oil pump's capacity. The oil pump moves X cc's of displacement per 360degrees of movement. The volume displaced is that volume multiplied by the pumps input shaft speed. Oil the thickness of tar may have a priming / pickup problem... But once flowing it will be delivered at the exact same volume by the pump as 0W-100 Super Synthetic.

Yes they have.

Dead Spot in the AFM Wiper Resistive Trace Performing standard FSM checks will reveal this. Mine does the same thing-I've been driving "around" that dead spot for years.