Tony D

All over my FB Page...

Makes you cringe when you realize there are dyno-hours only IRL V-8 3.5L Infinity Engines out there in crates with Marelli ECU Complete selling for under $20K huh? What do you call a top-dollar spec racing engine with no hours and $50K worth of parts after the formula changes? "End Table"!!!

interesting... wonder if it's MBA or some rockwell hardness difference due to the different contact rates between HYD/SOLID rockers? Then if it is different for an 81 and 82...I'm thinking MBA "Don't leave money on the table stick it to the Turbo Guys" kind of thing. I'd be interested to see what unfolds.

Agreed Mate! I don't know what all this after-the-fact winge-festing is all about. Anyway, I think we both were straight with the issues on the last page. Yeah, that was at Eastern Creek wasn't it. Along with Godzilla. Several R32 GTRs were there that year. Great fun to watch them lap the V8's!

Just whatever you do, don't use Speed/Drag horsepower equivalent equations to dispute someone's claims or refutation of claims as to stated horsepower. Apparently that causes a 'battle royale' and some can't draw a straight line of 'proof of horsepower claimed' to Speed/Drag Calculations and then the direct refutation that it's 'impossible' to make that much given the valve diameter and inlet port flow. But reaming a guy on grammar, hey, that's acceptable. My rant is now over.

If someone wants to refute a thread, do so on something OTHER than a Dyno which is USELESS from one rig to the next. As set forth in the argument: HP/Drag is a scary close taskmaster. ANYBODY coming on a offhand making disparaging remarks with little proof based on ONE engine put on ONE dyno deserves a little reality check for making the comments. ALL I originally said was "FYI Rebello was making 400HP Engines" and basically "I HOPE someone could make 400 with 3.5 liters and that kind of valve flow area." Persistence on calculated flow numbers as a reason something "couldn't possibly be done" is also another fallacy when indeed, the car made the speed---how is that explained? I don't think the OP or I share ANY animosity whatsoever, I think we came to a mutual agreement on terms. What kills me is people who come whining and take offense where none was given, nor taken. I guess you all can be offended for the OP who doesn't seem offended at all, and reasonably discussed the disparity being brought up. You want to make claims about someone else's build you do so at your own peril. Supra510, you show me an exact ENGINEERING FORMULA recognized by SAE, JIS, TUV, or any other sanctioned engineering body to calculate WHEEL HORSEPOWER from CRANKSHAFT HORSEPOWER. I can show you where CRANKSHAFT HORSEPOWER STANDARDS exist from SAE. IF the dyno was calibrated and test conducted to SAE standards (as stated earlier) then conversion to ANY OTHER ENGINEERING EQUIVALENT is simple math. Which was another point made (you obviously missed it.) Which brings us full circle to "Dyno Numbers are useless" so making offhand comments based on them on someone else's build is equally as useless and shouldn't be done. Sean came in Dont drown in HP wiggly waggling posting nothing technical, just mommy's admonition. And well after the point was discussed and a resolution was come to. If you guys just want someone to come on and say "I'm going to make this, and it's going to have XXXXHP and blah blah blah" then fine, you get what you get. For my money, I'd like to see results, and without disparagement of another builder. Maybe you guys like negative marketing, or badmouthing someone who isn't around to defend the claims... But I don't. I'll leave it up to the moderators to cull anything they want out of this thread and 'clean it up'...including fawning praise with nothing technical to ask or add... If anybody causes anybody to leave, it's going to be the ersatz grammar police who went damn well personal with their attacks on the guy. But I'm the bad guy for standing up for no badmouthing other builders based on one build, and 'if it's impossible explain how the example exists'? Either we got more non-engineers here who don't understand 'proof and logic' or I don't know what... just because someone asks questions to clarify a statement based on an empirical standard that is traceable and verifiable mathematically does not mean it's a 'battle royale'!

It's a JDM clock that came on second-generation S30's. It's a Fairlady Z Clock. Knob for setting date and hand calibration to proper hour. Time is the same as in the USA 12 at top, 6 at bottom, 3 on right side, 9 on left side.

Well Howler Monkey, I think you're being a bit obtuse: Speed takes Horsepower.... Please go back and read what I posted regarding poo-poohing of Rebello's claim of 400HP and the Drag/HP requirement to go 170mph+ at Bonneville. It directly contradicted the claim that the "Rebello 400" engine build "only in a pinch" made 290-330 HP. At the minimum the Drag/Speed/HP requirement was closer to 375, and was very near the 365 claimed the engine was to have produced. If you have a problem with me, take it to PM from this point forward--I believe my points were well laid out and anybody who actually READ them and didn't come in with a predisposed bias towards me. The Bonneville speeds were proffered as direct measurement methodology for ACTUAL horsepower produced, and not DYNO horsepower.

Fine and good, unless it was a five speed, I've never heard of G-Force doing a conversion to a four speed!

Yep, I think the Mini would be in there along with the Beetle. Tapioka discounts the largest mass produced vehicle of all time. Virtually continuous production on the same chassis from 1934 to 2003 or thereabouts. The ONLY reason it went out of production in Mexico (where it was the most popular Taxicab) was the Federal Government changed the law to mandate that Taxicabs have four door, and the Nissan Altima was the replacement. Even though briefly VW de Mexico considered a stretch Beetle... I mean you had almost 70 years on the SAME platform (unlike Toyota and it's claim of 'best selling all time 22 million units-Corolla'---anybody who thinks a 2012 Corolla even faintly resembles a 1969... You look at a 34 Beetle, and a 2003 Beetle and it's almost like you could swap body parts -- hell, you may have been able to!) I think Adolph and VW AG got their tooling cost recovered.

This is the unit I got, it was something like 129$ on sale when I got it, which was CHEAPER than their 15# unit which was NOT on sale at the time!!!! The Pressure Pot units work FAR better than the siphon type. And they sit with the blazting medium all secure without anything getting into it for a loooong time. Mice got into the Trinco, and now I'm blasting with a mix of expensive Ballotini Glass Beads and goddamned rat turds... The stripping power of the pressure pots is higher BY A FACTOR than siphon styles. I've had an ALC Sandy-Jet since 1985 (which is what the HF units are a direct copy of) and I've run all sorts of crap through it, from Unstrained Beach Sand to Black Magic and walnut shell. They work, but for limited work smaller pressure pots do more work with less media than the suction style. One of the advantages of the pressure pot is less dust. You get so much better efficiency from the pressure pot, you throw so much more media at such a lower pressure the media doesn't break up and dust like with a siphon gun. Generally they say if you are dusting excessively you are using too much pressure. For efficient Suction Gun operation I'm running massive CFM at 90psig. For the same kind of work with a pressure pot I'm running between 40 and 60psig!!! The pressure pot acts like more receiver space, so your compressor (at least mine) seems to run less for the same amount of work being done. For an electric bill, that is nice! Understand this... For BIG jobs, I have TWO 450 gallon receivers behind my shed... I hook them together and then I hook up an old diesel compressor like this to the receivers: That doesn't have enough power to make 100psi, but it will return 90 psi all day long... And I go to the rental yard and rent a BIG pressure pot. I can strip frames, clean concrete, just about anything. No electric bill at all! I've got serious compressor available (as long as I keep it under 90 psig) Hell, if you Google Map or Google Earth my address, you can see that Blue IR sitting out at the back of the property next to JeffP's 280ZX Drag Car!

Hey, was that Red Car at Muscle Car Masters at Eastern Creek two years ago? I think I have photos of that thing!

They are available with a Nissan Part Number. In the fuel subforum custom solutions were discussed extensively.

I will NEVER strip my engine bay with a suction gun EVER again! Pressure Pot, maybe. Chemical Stripper with shrouded spot blaster, definitely!

I actually have a stand alOne pressure pot that I woo snake into the blast booth for difficult jobs. The pressure pots are FAR mor efficient units, taking more off at lower pressure than you ever will with a suction gun. The media is usually reusable several times out of a pressure pot, and dusting is considerably less.

When you pump 6X Stock Horsepower through most any production car engine, you 'have issues'... SBC's have crossover ports that have to be plumbed at a given HP range as well. Push anything enough, and the original design intent will be exceeded and require modification. I don't know I'd classify that as 'having issues'... nor would I classify it as a defect of any sort. The Nissan Heads specifically designed for high specific output application for the L-Series don't need anything done to them at serious HP multipliers. We mostly choose to work on heads that are readily available and misapplied to our application. Not everyone can dig up an LY or FIA Cylinder head, or buck up the 35,000 Euros to have one replicated!

And load your software on someone else's laptop and test anything you suspect may be a problem with the MS on it... You never suspect the comm chip going bad in your laptop. Mine did and it was the root of all evil in my startup. Fixed my laptop, and all was right with the world!

You mean besides the VW Beetle? 7

E-Motive principals are quick to point out they never had a DNF due to cooling issues!

Sheep aren't involved in the Shed Seclusion are they? There are sheep near my shed. Keeps me out there for extended periods as well, no reason to go up to the house...

I would say I'd like to see it run and it's results, yes! NASCAR is a limited engine class true, unlike Bonneville where as long as the head studs aren't moved you can pretty much do what you want based on the stock head. I'm sure V8 Supercars is similarly restricted in many aspects. None of the L-Heads I've seen by anyone are close to the FIA L-Heads cast by Nissan in limited numbers. And let's recall the old 1983 Road & Track article quoting E-motive at 750HP @ 7500 and 21.6 psi boost... Which was accurate, but did not reveal the true capability of the engine of 1100HP @ 9000 and 30+ psi boost. The L-Engine is not to be underestimated. Especially as somehow limited as a two valve non-crossflow head. Ultimately, the PMCS/Nissan teams ceased development on the S20 around 345HP from 1998cc's back in 1971~2 At the time it was pursued because it was thought the L24 was not capable of reliable operation at 9KRPMs... They only had slightly lower output, but were more drivable.

Building motors and sharing your knowledge is appreciated. But I don't like negative marketing, or sweeping broad based characterisations based on one, or even a series of engines. I've worked with most major compressor OEM's, and can say the basic physical laws governing them are all the same. I will be very careful answering customers questions regarding marketing claims. I know knocking another's product will likely as not get you booted from a project. I'll Market on my strengths, and rely on others to do the same. I'll educate based on the facts as I know them, but unless I've been there and seen how they do it, I'm very reticent to place my methodologies or results to someone else's build. We had some vitriol here over someone with a street L24 making 300+ with many calling BS as "Race Engine Builders" weren't getting that kind of power...disregarding the obvious fact that you don't have to conform to formula or class rules when making a street engine! It was foolish and unproductive to argue the obvious success of the particular build. As was it unproductive to knock the original FYI in light if it's obvious success. Bring what you have to the table, it's more than welcome and interesting. But if there's knocking of another's product, in light of unanswerable queries, consider that indeed the best course is to stick with ones own wares and reserve comment on others. The reason I asked originally about your reasoning behind the choice of RB26 over RB25 heads is that your favourite US Engine Builder is in work on an RB25 Head setup...

Wallace Racing Top Speed Calculator for Bonneville: 2400# (likely light, I'm sure Burton, like us added somewhere on the line of 300#+ for traction) Cd .465 F/A 22 Result: 370HP under the best conditions of traction.. Right in line with your claim of the claim elsewhere of 365hp for the 3.0 How do you reconcile these numbers, sir? I don't dispute your testing of the engine in your possession. What I do dispute is the backhanded manner in which you dismiss with caviler attitude even the possibility that is is a valid HP claim in light of the facts behind running at Bonneville and being powered by a "Rebello400"? This same calculator pegged our 2900# 76 280Z with Undertray and G-Nose ( .38 Cd, same frontal) at 311HP with our dyno then showing 317! Like I said: "Scary Close"...

Nothing more disappointing than someone with a closed mind. It us capable to back calculate horsepower from drag coefficient, frontal area. Thanks for seeing the point of my posts 260DET. I've always found it a bit common to peddle ones wares by disparaging another's. All I ever asked for was he do the calculations before being so emphatic in his "impossibility" claims. I guess an 11,600 RPM L-2X Engine is impossible as well...

I'm kind of disappointed that this newcomer refuses to answer technical questions and seems content to Pass judgement on other people's work. And indeed the 400hp claim was N/A from Rebello, check their website. the Red #7770 car... Well that's covered in the other thread and no reply to the top speed/drag coefficient/frontal area calculation requested to resolve the issue once and for all... I asked which engine he claimed to make 600hp on, the plenum engine, or the ITB one... I understand he has a business and he's beating the bushes to scare up business and raise some potential customers. But I'm really saddened he poo-poohs technical questions which would cast his aspersions in an unfavourable light. Physical laws exist in this world, and while he obsessed on micro examples, he refuses to see the overall macro example which directly and irrefutably overturns his contentions. As to the turbo power claims, that was on a Mustang calibrated to, and traceable to Appropriate SAE Specs as the facility is used for emissions certification tests by OEMs. It was arrived at comfortably and without custom plenum with the full knowledge the stock OEM manifold is killing 30cfm per port. But that's at 25"... Another technical specific left out... I shan't digress further. The posts thusfar have proven interesting. I'm just seriously disappointed that all we ate going to get to counter questions is a lockstep salesmanship line. Very disappointing indeed!