Tony D

There was a brief, shining moment recently when the Arizona Legislature considered that since ONLY 10% of the state's revenue was coming through property taxes that they should really consider simply cutting expenditures by that much and doing away with the administrative headache of collection and relieving taxpayers of the nuisance! Somehow that didn't fly, but man it was a nice thought!!!

Sounds like the lifters are freely moving at least! They should pump-up with oil pressure as long as sufficient flow and pressure exist. And that should be the condition at 4500+ rpms. The hydraulic pressure provided by the oil pump, plus the cross sectional area of the pivot's plunger would exert considerable upwards force. But those things should be SILENT at idle. If they are clattering, you are loosing oil pressure to an extent that it won't support the lifters. On an 83ZXT with the lifters the injectors clicking is all you hear at idle...with the occasional burp from the bullfrog pump. I think you have an oil pressure problem which may or may not be cured by the mechanical changeover. The N/A cam (depending on which one you get) will either be similar, or noticeably different up top from the turbo cam. The comparison of power before-and-after will be somewhat skewed replacing them both at the same time but what else can you do? Good Luck!

We had conventional distributor in our racer (magnetic trigger) with 45 DCOE's and ran it to over 7500rpms. When we went to ITB's we went to a magnetic trigger which was installed in the stock distributor---the smaller wheel in there was good to 8500 rpms (so they said) and as long as we ran the engine below that point, we never had any issues with spark scatter. When we went above 9500 on the L20A, then we started having reliability issues with the spark. Went to true crank-trigger (basically a bigger wheel) and the issues resolved themselves---same system, different trigger point. The MAGNETIC triggers need spacing between the 'peaks' to get a readable signal in the ECU. The opticals work faster and the circuitry is faster so a larger diameter wheel doesn't do much for you other than allow you to use cheaper components and processors in the ECU (think OEM...) With what JeffP found on the conversion of the optical trigger from the Z32 put into a conventional distributor...I think we could have kept it there and not messed with the hassle of making a crank-trigger bracket.

ANY spark scatter you are experiencing is NOT a function of the Optical Trigger. It's an e-gate which is on or off and nothing in between. ANY spark scatter you are experiencing is DIRECTLY a function of several factors which come into play when using ANY system NOT directly fired off the crankshaft. 1) Crankshaft to Drive Gear Backlash. 2) Any Key Shearing that may have happened. 3) Possible loose pulley bolt letting drive gear on crankshaft 'work'. 4) Friction fit of drive gear on distributor shaft which lets is rotate freely when hot. 5) Slop in the Drive Tang of the Distributor. ALL the above factors (these are the quick ones I can think of) contribute to timing that 'changes' while the engine is running. The optical triggers are good to over 12,000rpms DISTRIBUTOR speed without fail. JeffP has made a test bench to check this on an O-Scope, similarly the input speed for the Nissan Distributor (Z32) components is similar. The trigger only fires when gated. WHERE the gate is relative to the crankshaft is dependent on the above 5. There is no rotational inertia of the plastic disc relative to the metal components. I will posit the 'scatter' you see is from the metal parts which have a lot more inertia 'rattling around' and as the disc is relative inertia-free it sticks to the shaft it's pressed onto and triggers reliably relative to it's original position. Take that same optical trigger wheel, chuck it in a direct driven dremel tool powered test stand and you see there is no variation in trigger events. It's rock solid. In the digital world, it truly is GIGO---the mechanical slop leading up to the triggering point is where its changing. It moves relative to the crankshaft for any number of reasons. The stock mechanical distributors do the same thing. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but you can make a damn good looking pig. Short of going to crank-fire, the only thing you can do is what guys have always done to get better, more accurate distributor spark timing. Ultimately that meant removing the distributor and it's complex drivetrain components and triggering off the crank directly. That is the ultimate solution. The question is "do you need it?" From what your described use of the car is currently....I would say "No".

I would think soooo. I can't view what's on the video here, so it's nothing I can comment on.

Should dyno it now, and "should" have done a stock baseline. It quantifies and lets you know where you are when you start. Below 2500 stock the bog and have a laggy feel. The STOCK cam doesn't start making power until 3 or 3500. I know where mine was at previous to a forced installation of header/exhaust. I should quantify it as well. I didn't notice any 'loss' in bottom end other than being slightly more cold-blooded. Seems the extractors helped scavenge the exhaust better and required more fuel from the SU's than the previous stock system. It 'seemed' to pull better on the top end, but then again it's just louder so it may be all smoke and mirrors. When I checked my L28 with a real dyno, I was shocked how much power I lost with the previous owners 'bolt on' power adders...

" I did lose a little on the bottom end but gained huge on top end. " Ditto Leon's comments. I would like quantification of 'a little' and 'gained huge' in regards to a 'stock L24'...

IF you're off the chart of efficiency of the turbocharger it quite possibly could mean you are not pushing the same Pounds Per Hour through the machine... The added heat out of the turbo at 12 vs 8 could start to negate the perceived gains. When I used a stock turbo, I originally tried 17psi, and that didn't work at all. Eventually it was settled on around 11-12psi was my "high boost" setting. But generally at 10psi is lasted forever and pulled almost as strong. 36+12=48psi at the rail insofar as fuel pressure goes, that leaves you with no more than 12psi line drop before the stock fuel pump goes into bypass---which would explain the different passes you get. This is also why I said to check the fuel pressure upstream of the fuel filter. If you have 8psi line drop (typical) you're already at 56psi at the pump on 12psi. If your filter has any appreciable drop in it, this could make pulling upper end harder. Then again you would expect it so show lean---which brings back the question of if you're trimming fuel above torque peak? You can pull fuel pretty hard after torque peak and you keep picking up power. The stock system went lean at the very top end, a little too lean, but most guys think running 11.8 AFR across the board will net them power, and that's not the case past torque peak. Pull it back to high 12's or even mid 13's and you will continue to see a power increase. Really at this point instrumentation has to be watched, and keep all your graph scaling the same so you can do actual comparisons of apples-to-apples when it comes to rates and pressures. When they are normalized to the same scale, SOMETHING will jump out at you. At least it should.

You mean this is a RATE? RPM/SEC or something like that? At 8psi you accelerate at 500 rpm/sec to 5969 rpms past the red arrow... Opposed to: At 12 psi you accelerate at 200 rpm/sec to 5969 past the red arrow... ?? I mean, if I'm understanding you correctly you are saying that the engine doesn't accelerate well past torque peak, and accelerates harder in lower gears than higher gears (according to the chart...) This is to be somewhat expected. Do you have something like a G-Tech that graphs instantaneous G's? I found that to be a CRITICAL piece of equipment when learning how to change the way I drove my stock-cammed blowthrough turbo. By shifting to optimize G loading for acceleration I found the wive's tale of shifting at stratospheric levels was COMPLETELY a waste of time, and that if I shifted by 5500, or in some cases 5000rpms (which felt like a VERY 'short shift' in gears 2, 3, 4 that the instantaneous G's of acceleration were MUCH higher than if I held shift point past 5000 in ANY gear. What you may be experiencing is simply the function of the stock cam telling you "SHIFT EARLIER" and you will accelerate harder. Wanting to shift at N/A shiftpoints only is applicable when you have a cam matched and suited for revving like that. My best acceleration times at the track with the stock cam came with a first gear shift at 6500, and upshifts at 5200-5500, 5000, 5000. It's a really counterintuitive way to drive the car given how it accelerated in 1st gear, and even second. But after 2nd gear it really seemed to like short shifting to pull with higher G's. May want to look into this in that respect. It sounds a lot like it's doing what 'they all do' to some extent and you may be trying to 'fix' something that is driving technique based. I never had great "pull power" above 5000 in any gear above 2nd. You're just too far past the torque peak, and the VE of the engine on-boost is commanding you to shift like a Big Block 454. Boring as hell, but effective. The G-Tech was what changed the way I drove it. I could not argue with the instant readout. YOu can probably get the original 'black box' like I had now on E-Bay used for $10. It's a neat gadget if for nothing else to tell you how hard you are ACTUALLY accelerating. And I think that would be equivalent to your RPM/Sec rate-of-change example. That should be mathematically derivable from weight of your vehicle and acceleration of RPM/Sec Change. This may be a 'problem' that is unsolvable. It may be inherent in the cam profile, and may be exactly what I experienced if I'm understanding what your graph is showing.

I guess SoCal has one advantage: one day we could theoretically break off into the sea and force secession!

Posts 9 & 10 repeat the exact warning H4 Lights was giving about non-DOT approved kits (even when they were marked "DOT" they were coming without shade caps or proper dual-element capsules.) Yes, the guy buying them and installing them for other people...he's a possible target if someone gets a subpoena and starts combing through records to look at some arbitrary number like "anybody who bought 5, 10, 100 of these kits will be pursued"... The Feds like to make lists like that, and make a determination easy to follow. One guy sells X and is pursued. Another sells X-1 and they don't do a thing. Very arbitrary and capricious. The original conversions WERE very good in terms of glare to oncoming compared to cheap replicas, but because of the SAE standards which dictates a LOT of light be dedicated to go UP so people can read non-illuminated highway road signs even they got nicked with 'glaring light to oncoming' labels. It is inherent in the FEDERAL REGULATIONS that there is a big "glare component" which is subjective and open to speculative interpretation. The E-Code conversions have a defined cutoff on low-beam as their governmental regulations call for such a thing, and how much light has to be on the roadway and how much 'stray' light is allowable (E-Code is very restrictive about light 'going up' even on High Beam. H4 Lights explained any and all of this to anybody who cared to listen when the conversions were LEGAL. He was a prophesier about this eventuality because he'd seen it happen in the industry before. He can link you to a website of another guy back east who has been before congress to testify arguing for the adoption of a SINGLE STANDARD in motor vehicle lighting more similar to the E-Coding for just this very reason. If anything the OP is a 'nyah nyah toldya so!' in regards to his prior warnings which generally went unheeded by everyone in pursuit of 'cheap bright lights'...

Sam280Z kinda nailed it, they all already have a one-way check valve... People don't usually brake with their foot floored at WOT and on-boost anyway, except in Audi Quattros...at startup....in their home garage...

Noddle, anything I posted was in support of your comments, especially in regards to the use of Teflon Tape not being necessary.

I'm not sure what you are trying to show with 'delta rpm'... Or what you mean by 'where it fell off' after the red arrow, I don't see any 'falling off'...what fell off---everything looks like it remains basically like it was before. RPM falls 500-200rpm in relation to what?

I think that's a mischaracterization of what he's doing. There is no 'for sale' content in his post, nor even a link to his website to buy anything. What he HAS been consistent in doing is warning people about improper lighting systems in their vehicle. He sold DOT Legal HID's until they were outlawed. At that point he advised his customers, and anybody else who would listen that they were now 'illegal' and that they ran the risk of getting their car impounded on a federal level if they were caught with them. He has seen this before in SoCal (San Diego) where feds nailed people coming out of a 'greymarket conversion' operation---what did they impound the cars for? Noncompliant Lighting! (Headlights in particular...) There is always a contingent of people who poo-pooh the feds coming to your door and taking your stuff away with the 'when is the last time you saw them do that?' rhetoric. Well, here is an example of importers getting nailed. I think we know what happened after the Feds nailed some well known SKYLINE importers: they then went after buyers of their product... I see the OP as someone putting forth fair warning that if you buy this crap, and think it will never affect you, think twice and consider your options carefully! Nothing more.

I've seen an L24 with a 4.11 and Automatic get 28mpg with Triple Mikuni 40 PHH's... If you are in-town that mileage will drop to 15-17. On the highway it should be higher than that if the carbs are adjusted correctly. I cruise between 3200 and 3500 on the freeway to get that kind of mileage.

Screw it, PM Sent...

This is not rocket science, PLEASE P.M. me!!! As for the comment on 'illegal exhaust' there is a very defined testing procedure to determine if the exhaust meets the legal sound limits in CA, and the CHP can test for it. If you are tested and found compliant, there are NO fees generated for the states. Don't make this a political commentary---there IS a valid point here on Smog Compliance which he's apparently laughing off and it really is a serious situation. My understanding is John C recently did an SR20 Conversion in a 510 which is Smog-Legal. With a US Spec engine, it's not a real big deal to comply... But non US stuff it gets sticky. This ticket can be the end of legal registration in the state. It's not to be taken lightly. But paying a fine is not the end of it...especially if the Referee has now logged you into the SMOG system from his visit. As Randy says, if the Ref 'couldn't do anything for you' that was the death-knell of your registration of the vehicle. It's not a laughing matter. But compliance is not that hard, and there ARE legal avenues to TRY...don't know if they will work. The exhaust ticket was something black and white easily gotten out of with a simple dB testing. But altered Smog Device? Oh that makes it a bit more complicated! I'm curious if the Referee did his due diligence and completed a WHOLE Smog Testing Routine on the vehicle, or if he simply looked at it visually and blew him off. It DOES make a difference. There ARE some situations where if he did that, your best bet is to go to court and plead in a specific way. But he NEEDS TO PM ME to discuss it off-forum, and then can post the results later for the benefit of everyone else. So PLEASE, P.M. me!

"Went to the ref and the guy said the cop was bored for messing with us and hes only had a few classic cars in his 10 years working there but it happens. Regardless there's pretty much nothing he could do for us, sent us on our way. Pretty much gonna get a lawyer to drop it or pay the fine... " What does this mean? The Referee should have been able to 'clear' your ticket. If he didn't, then it means that your registration can be revoked and your car becomes an expensive paperweight. A lawyer won't get it dropped, it's black letter law when it comes to conversions. The older cars are not exempt from compliance only bi-annual testing. You have a non-USA engine in there, and that is a sticking point. I had the same issue years ago when I had a low-S/N engine in my 73, because it was a "non USA Market L24" I had to install all applicable Smog Devices for 1973 before it would pass through the referee. While that testing provision has changed over the years, the compliance process has not. It's not a laughing matter, a lawyer probably isn't going to be able to do anything for you, you DO have 'an altered smog device', and you are still required to be compliant with applicable smog rules for the year of your chassis and/or engine. Understand me, I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to just sniffer test and go (PM Me...PLEASE!), but that is the way the law is written for a daily driver. If you choose to fight the way the Smog Compliance system is set up, good luck. Some sanity needs to come to it. But if the referee didn't clear you, a lawyer can't! The only way for clearance is compliance with the SMOG Laws (and PM me...PLEASE!)

What mileage... A 3.7 with a Four Speed O.D. transmission is probably pushing the limits on lugging the engine, should be closer to 4.11 or 4.38. I have to work (meaning average over 100mph) to break below 20mpg in steady-state driving. I recently changed from the late gearbox to the early gearbox (.74 to .85 OD) and the mileage didn't change, and frankly looks more consistent. My highway cruise into work is around 80mph, with a 3.70 gearbox, and I average 24mpg consistently. I have gotten as high as 27mpg when I had the late gearbox, and kept the speed absolutely capped at no more than 65mph. That should be some guideline, giving I'm like 360#, so in an early 260Z that should be weight-equivalent to you!

The ZX does have a pressure restricting mesh screen susceptible to restriction of fuel flow on the front end of the pump as well, down in the tank!

As you wish. You win, no caveats. I'll informed is as good as misinformed. Back to the laptop debug...

Depends what injector you have. If you have the o-ringed style, they may spin round in the rail/intake and you van try a run that way... Don't know about wiring connecto clearance in that configuration. If they are barbed it's almost as easy to send them in for a flow check and cleaning as it is to make the apparatus.

LOL...maybe at another forum where the answers go bac another 6 years, perhaps?

OhOh.... If you have large seives in the line for catching (as the tech instructor in Block 10 said:) 'sharkshit and little children' be advised the VERY FINE screens at the inlet of the fuel injectors MAY be clogging with fine debris which is bypassing your fuel filters. This is EXACTLY what happened on JeffP's engine. They will flow fine...to a point. Then the engine is like it hits a rev limiter. And that would be at or around peak torque like you're seeing. Take the time to pull off your injectors and reverse-flow them. Put them in the fuel rail backwards and simulate some load to cycle the injectors with cleaner flowing backwards through the bodies and see if afterwards you get better results. It may be you indeed DO need finer filtration on the downstream side of the pump (you can always run several filters in parallel to get the flow you need) to prevent the filter inlet screens on the injectors from fouling and restricting flow when you really start using the injector capacity. We may be on to something here....