Tony D
-
Posts
9963 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
74
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Tony D
-
-
" 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?
-
OP is a re-seller of H4 lights.....ginning up business on any and all auto forums with a sensational "news" story.
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.
-
Haha, it's kinda funny. I thought this was a new thread at first because the high-displacement extra stroke L motors came up recently in a thread here. I thought this was Tony's response, but instead it looks like tony's response to the same issue.... THREE YEARS ago... And some noobs wonder why people get mad...
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....
-
It's right up there on my priority list with 'turn in the $25,000 of outstanding expense reports' and 'turn in premium time from March to November 2011' I think...
Now that you have necro-bumped it (think about the implications of that word...) and I'm refreshed on what issue it's in I can at least know where to find it again whenever I am home.
OR....
Someone may want to configure a Yahoo Japan or E-Bay search to auto notify if that issue comes poking up... I have a fear I was reading this at someone else's house because I didn't get there until 84... and I've had a falling out with the guy who would likely have had that issue.
Come to think of it, I'm going to send an e-mail to Mr. Okamura now on this issue and see if he can find it for me in Japan.
-
Read what you wrote under "#1" in Post 6, then reinforced in Post 8.
I don't consider that even an option. You leave the option open. Maybe I think too much about this kind of stuff, but leaving the option open gives the impression, despite what caveats you may place, that it is an acceptable practice.
It's like arguing about the rod. You surmised it was weight. It more correctly is to keep the case from having more meat taken out in the area of the bearings on the earlier case which isn't as thick in that area as the later models. Probably a better thought out engineered approach but with the downside that you would have to totally overhaul the transmission when you did any swap... Though changing the rods from what I'm told is not that big a deal apparently. Looks like it to me, but I'm told they come off externally (still means to me at least you have to pull the back off as well, instead of just doing a front-end swapover...)
I just mentioned I saw the rods done that way in Japan, and would never of considered doing it that way. Curiously, this is also how the modification was done in Europe on several cars I saw as well. Those updated the rod and used OS Giken Straight-Cut Gears in the box, which are apparently available for the 180SX Tranny...
But to answer the question, #1 in Post 6, and again reinforced in Post 8---the option is left open. I prefer not to leave that option open (as stated from the beginning) as it defeats the whole purpose of the stronger transmission in the first place.
-
That, sir, is again the function more of the flywheel than the emissions devices.
The NEW cars are FAR worse than the old mechanical only BCDD and Throttle Dashpot. They will physically hold/bypass air open to keep rpms up---that is on stuff like the Z32, not S30's.
If this is happening on your car, you got something adjusted wrong! It's not the emissions devices, they're transparent when driven hard. If maintained with a modicum of care (if that!)
-
I made 350+ RWHP on the stock EFI pump running no more than 23psi. They are extremely quiet when at idle and only pumping 3.5psi through a return-style regulator. At 23-25psi (21-22psi of boost) nobody really was interested in what noise the fuel pump was making!
Why reinvent the wheel? If it fits in the chassis, use it. I've used on on the carbed blow-through setup for years. Fuel Flow for 350HP is fuel flow for 350HP. Showed no signs of being undersized in that application whatsoever.
-
"Does anyone recommend teflon thread tape as an extra measure (on the threads of course)? "
ABSOLUTELY CATEGORICALLY NO, NEVER, NOT EVER!
I am in a damned war now with our assembly site in China over this very issue. They seem to think Teflon Tape is something good in a fuel system. Again, this is 50's technology...
There are PLENTY of anerobic sealants (PST 567 for example) which do the EXACT SAME thing ONLY BETTER than Teflon Tape EVER tried to accomplish. Thing is, it will NEVER get in the fuel system to snag and clog filters, hang a float needle up, plug a jet, etc... The list goes on and on.
For NPT fittings in fuel systems, use Loctite PST of whatever strength you desire (there are several numbers out there, low, medium, high strength, removable, non removable, etc.)
For Banjo fittings, the CRUSH WASHERS are what affect the seal, the THREADS do NOTHING in terms of sealing, they merely provide the clamping force to seat the banjo against the seating surfaces on the CRUSH washer.
It is the CRUSH that is the operative word here, and that is PRECISELY why you must ANNEAL them before assembly if you are re-using.
I came from Aircraft Hydraulics, systems that operate at 6000psi. If I can get aluminum and copper crush washers to NOT LEAK at 6KPSI, everybody should be able to keep them from leaking at the pressures they are using (many times 6000 times LESS than what I was working at!)
The KEYS to leak proof threaded and pipe/tubing joints are as follows:
CLEAN surfaces. Not just on the fittings themselves, but the ENTIRE AREA. If you have grease, oil, grime, etc all over the engine, you will NEVER be able to diagnose properly WHERE any specific leak is coming from. I've seen fittings wrenched on till they fail because of a fitting several inches above it continually leaked and followed piping down to the backside and simply dripped off the lowpoint. If the entire assembly is bathed with a quick-drying solvent like brake cleaner immediately before startup ANY moisture is QUICKLY discernible and traced to point of origin easily.
No nicks, divots, or scratches that can cause a leak path on sealing surfaces (and on NPT fittings, THREADS.)
Sealing Washers NEW or annealed properly.
Male NPT Threaded Joints properly cleaned, with sealants applied properly to the root of the threads to prevent leak-paths.
Female NPT Threaded Joints properly cleaned, with DRY threads.
NPT Threaded Joints made up with the proper number of 'turns past finger tight'---on smaller fittings this may be as little as 1/4 turn! Generally no more than 2 turns past finger-tight from DRY MAKEUP.
On O-Ring Fittings, proper lubricant on the O-Rings (Parker Super-O Lube, or regular O-Lube)
On O-Rings with Static Seals, make sure the static seal is on the PROPER SIDE relative to pressure application.
When using Anaerobic Sealants, remember THEY will seal the thread root-overtightening will DRIVE OUT the sealant, deform the threads, and PROVIDE a leak path. "Looser is better than 'one more turn' when dealing with these sealants!"
When putting Aluminum Fittings into Aluminum or Magnesium, try using Loctite Green, (cylindrical parts locker) on the threads and DO NOT OVERTIGHTEN. (For a one-time installation meant to be permanent, use Loctite RED.) Use the locking compound to secure the threads and fix the position. If you tighten too much chances are you will gall the threads and render both the fitting and the casting you are putting it into useless. Both of these can be removed by applying a heat gun to the area to release the compound. The threads will come out looking like new, and they WILL NOT LEAK!
NEVER use tape or other sealants on JIC/A-N/SAE style cone fittings. The key to their assembly is CLEAN NICK FREE FACES AND FLARES. I have seen locking compounds for it, as well as washers for the face. They can assist in troublesome cases. but many times when a flared tube has a nick, simply supergluing some 400 grit crocus cloth onto the face of a mating fitting and using it to clean the flared face will allow it to be made up dry without a leak. Anybody using teflon tape on flared fittings should be hauled before the local car club, flogged, and then shot.
If it leaks, take it apart, CLEAN IT, and put it back together PROPERLY. In 999 cases out of 1000 in the field where I have had calls for 'oil leaks' I have found sloppy makeup practices were employed when the machine was going together. I take all the leakers apart (as well as most that aren't yet leaking) remove all the sealants, tapes, silicone, monkey poop, whatever was applied to 'stop the leak' in the past, and reassemble a clean, dry, properly torqued fitting and the LEAK CEASES.
If I can get repeated three day passes to town for Zero-Defect QA inspections from Military Inspectors on 6000 psi Hydraulic Systems after major maintenance (that means not one of over 1250 fittings in a three system hydraulic test stand had even a SINGLE DROP show after a grueling test-run) you can get a 3.5psi fuel system (or even 100psi) to run without a leak.
This also goes for my time with 6000 PSI+ Helium Compressors. You want to talk about a BEAR requiring ABSOLUTELY SCRUPULOUSLY CLEAN FITTINGS---a Helium Compressor for bottling cylinders is probably the worst you will get. Most critical-path systems use Helium as their leak checking gas as it's inert, and has the smallest (most apt to find a leak path and leak out) mol size to 'find' leaks where other gasses will not show a leak. Helium will seive out a fitting where Nitrogen will sit virtually forever without leaking down!
Jdm exhaust/muffler
in Exhaust
Posted
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...