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 always thought GM thought the design inspirational, hence the Saturn Line was born...
-
Sure, $50!
Why overbuy?
Was it over in Forrest City? My bud got a green RHD that has sat there forever. I think trees are growing in around it, he will need a chainsaw to move it when he gets around to finally deciding to DO something to the damn thing!
-
Does it matter? There must be some issue since he hasn't gotten a refund for the product yet, eh?
Seems to me a refund of sorts would have already happened given the video and obvious piston problems.
-
Those relatively high US prices are strange but then again in AU there are a lot of grey imports which have kept used prices down. The Z32 body is a timeless design and up there with the S30 in that regard, sure to become a classic.
he's got it, while Z32's were still selling for $14K+ here in the states, the JDM pricing was below $3500! In 2001, you could have as many as you wanted for that price. Same for Skylines of the same vintage.
The JDM cycles drop prices precipitiously for domestic stuff up to the 10 year point when they either get really cheap or start going up in price again. There are very few exceptions to this rule.
I bought my 75 Fairlady Z for $2400 in 1984. Less than 60K miles on it, and like new all around. And I overpaid, at auction those cars were selling for half that...but I was new in-country, how was I to know?
And smart me, I bought the 75 for $2400 because I got a two-year inspection on it (the last one)---why on EARTH would I have wanted that silver 71 for sale for $3200 at the lot next to it??? I mean, sure that S20 engine and 432 badging was cool and all, and the triple carbs were nice...but man, I needed to get it inspected every year---why would I pay a premium for all that hassle...
True Story, the logic haunts me to this very day...
-
Nice try at a swipe, but when John C has already posted the relevant parts of the CVC already known to me to be truthful, and relevant, what am I to do but point out personal circumstances that show your folly?
I'm not calling the ref from Bangkok---thanks to JC for that!
But the point was the individuals in my example once thought like you did "hey, I'm exempt" and were dragged kicking and screaming to my side of the 'understanding equation'. Luckily they had the means to comply---it wasn't difficult, but it was tedious. They skated on the call-in not through some magical 'exemption' but through a proper conversion. Had ANY ONE of their other vehicles not passed... And had they owned bone stock vehicles in poor tune they would still be required to comply---pass of don't and loose the registration through the mechanisims extant in the CVC.
Unless you got the same e-plate that the cop pulling you over for the inspection has, you aren't exempt. Look to the section of the CVC which handles EXEMPTIONS and it's there in black and white. Cop cars, municipal vehicles...no private vehicles mentioned I saw----so until you figure out how to legally get an E-Plate to your car, you aren't exempt from COMPLIANCE (which is what EXEMPT MEANS---it's in the CVC, the following vehicles are EXEMPTED FROM COMPLIANCE)
And that's the legal nuance I was talking about. While it does (in the sections mentioned above) explicitly say you are exempt from biennial smog checks, in the section where it SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES EXEMPTION FROM COMPLIANCE these vehicles ARE NOT included. That is what I'm here to do, not put up copious clips of CVC Jargon, but to explain there IS a section that SPECIFICALLY SHOWS WHICH VEHICLES ARE EXEMPT. The pre-1975's are NOT included in this list.
You seem to read the CVC a lot, read it a bit more and you should pick this point up, perhaps go talk to a legislator or lawyer to have them explain about two lists each specific in what they provide for and exempt. Testing is NOT compliance. They are two different things, and while the law exempts you from one, they neglected to put that group in the other---meaning you are NOT exempted from compliance.
Simple as getting state legislators to add the pre-75's to that list... but it's not happening as they don't want non-compliant vehicles out there---they just don't want to TEST EVERYONE when it's diminishing returns. This is why the compliance exemption was NOT included. If you pipe dirty, you get called in and they can take the vehicle off the road.
It's what the SMOG check program was meant to do: remove polluters from everyday driving population.
-
Called my BAR rep and he said this is how it works:
1. Officer cites under 27156 (http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc27156.htm).
2. 27156 says its a violation of the law to operate the vehicle (except to get it home or to a repair facility) until proof of correction is provided to the court.
3. The courts currently only accept proof of correction from a referee.
None of this has anything to do with the biannual or sale smog inspection program that I mentioned above. Its completely outside the program and is a law enforcement action.
This is exactly as my "LIFE EXPERIENCE" has show it to be as well. You get the citation, you have to get something from the REFEREE to clear it. If the car won't pass the check, you're SOL. (This is what happened to the 240's and 510 I mentioned...then each of those individuals got a notice regarding every car they owned (most of which were company leased vehicles LESS THAN 6 YEARS OLD BY A LONGSHOT) for a 'random out-of-cycle check'... Harrassment? To be sure. Their offense? Having their car on the cover of a magazine with enough personal details inside for someone at BAR or DMV to get a real hard-on for them and make their life miserable. The costs and time involved were considerable, and ironically even their 'illegally modified' 240's and 510's were clean-clean-clean, far cleaner than if they had been in their stock carburetted and 40 year old state of disrepair...)
You are NOT exempt from COMPLIANCE only routine testing. And as all these are legislative fiats, they can be changed at any time. They have already attempted several times to remove the old cap and throw everybody back into the SMOG testing system purely to RAISE REVENUE nothing more.
Delude yourselves all you want---someone made the phone call and got the letter of the law. Standing on 'life experience' is a grand thing, but when more than one person says it's not how it's done you might consider the fact you may be wrong.
I liken it to having a really hot sister and getting some regularly. It's great with only you two knowing about it, but when your friends and family learn of the affair they kind of try to set you straight. You may still think it was and is the best piece on the face of the planet...but it just ain't right.
This is what we have here today...
-
????
One: The place you measured the pistons wasn't correct, and you should use calipers with longer arms so you can do a diametrical reading. My internet time is metered now, and I don't have the time to detail the issues I saw in the video.
Did those pistons come out of the block you have there? And was the piston you measured out of that bore? Are all the bores the same size?
What does common sense tell you about your readings?
-
See the link to the video and judge for yourself.
When CHP motions you into a ROADSIDE DYNO you MUST comply. Plates notwithstanding.
And I believe I think I can honestly comprehend what a "Sanford and Son Dodge Truck" is vintage-wise. As I said: The guy was the third vehicle off the stop light, and was pulled in, same as every other third vehicle going through that intersection for the 2.5 hours I sat and watched it operate.
What portion of John C's post here are you missing:
i) Evidence of tampering through remote sensing, visual inspection, other means,
&
iii) Vehicle selected for testing via 44014.7 or any other provision of this chapter authorizing inspection.
Maybe you haven't heard of the guys selected for 'random out-of-cycle compliance checks'?
I know three---two 240Z's and a 510. Exempt vehicles. Why were they required to report?
Please comprehend that above "i)" puts all bets off. Remote sensing is real, and you check dirty, you get the letter. Visual Inspection from the CHP---how about you send me the letter your three shop-owning friends send so I can just keep it in my glovebox which then gets me out of the hassle of going becuase they say so?
You THINK you're 'exempt'---you are not.
-
There is a point of diminishing returns.
And AGAIN, I state that their OPINION on what is causing these items they anecdotally notice is just that. There are alternate OPINIONS which seem to have been equally validated in my independent testing which hold water as to a 'better' source/resolution.
They are also making assumptions on E-Motive's engines and what they replaced on a regular basis. What if they never replaced a crank? What if they were running bearings through four races? How does that reflect then on the THEORY that 'block flex' is caused by a crank moving around.
Keep in mind that 200 hours on a dyno is equivalent for OEM testing purposes as 100,000 miles++
If the Electramotive Engines were 25+ hour 1100HP engines WITHOUT a girdle (and without bearing out-of-roundness issues) I'm thinking most STREET engines pushing half that are well in line...as long as they have the same attention to TRUE ROOT CAUSES as the Electromotive chaps took.
What causes crank flex? An inappropriate support structure, or induced harmonics beyond the internal dampening forces available by the crank itself? Perhaps Chris at BHJ can chime in with more details.
I posit a stud girdle, while a nice bit of engineering may be nothing more than a band-aid to the TRUE ROOT CAUSE of the 'problem' they think they are diagnosing.
And on this:
"Wouldn't a stronger bottom end give you better reliability/durability?"
No, not necessarily. If the stresses present are within the capability of parts to handle them for the duration required, adding more ONLY ADDS WEIGHT AND COMPLEXITY. Look at an F1 engine and tell me how much 'margin' they have... Adding 'durability' beyond the expected requirements is very poor engineering practice. You want what you NEED, and not a single thing more.
If this was the case, why not simply put a Stock Chevy V8 in there with 150HP instead of the L6?
Oh, waitaminit...people do that...wrong forum to use that analogy I guess...
-
They have it right, you have it wrong. Your days in fantasyland have sadly come crashing to an end.
ANY vehicle on the roadway can AT ANY TIME be pulled over by the CHP for the purposes of roadside compliance checking.
THAT provision of the CVC HAS NOT BEEN ALTERED BY THE LEGISLATION YOU MISQUOTE.
There are several different methods by which you are able to be inspected and put back into the system.
There are only TWO ways I know of that a PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL can get a car EXEMPTED from the Smog Program, and even then it is STILL not 'exempt' from the random roadside compliance check by CHP.
If you think I'm full of B.S. tell it to the guy in Torrance with the OREGON plates on his truck who was pulled into a roadside dyno and made to undergo a full test. I could hear him screaming at the top of his lungs from where I was, across the road and almost 100 yards away! HE still was required to comply.
"Exemption" is a sad way to state what you have on your car, which simply is no requirement for biannual testing.
NOWHERE in ANY part of the CVC does the 'exemption from TESTING' imply, or codify and exemption from COMPLIANCE.
It's a legal nuance you may not understand, but it will bite you in the arse HARD when your day comes!
Bad Information, misinformation...just like the Import Tuner Article said...
-
" I'm using a '71 driveshaft with my S14 transmission with no modifications, other than the removal of the dust shield. The very early S30 driveshafts are the perfect length to use with the S13/S14 transmission, because they're 50mm shorter than the '72(?) and later S30's and S130's, and the S13/S14 transmission is 50mm longer."
SSSSSSHHHHHH! And Nissan was blowing out brand new early driveshafts for $68!!!! I picked up a buttload of them when I came to this same discovery.
The only other item I considered was that funky rubber tripod thing the 240SX used to transmit the torque. I thought "hey, that would be nice for the wife's car...nice an quiet, and probably make the differential mount last longer" but alas too much for me when that 71 shaft fit right in there brandy-new with the Nissan Stickers still on it. Beat the hell out of paying IEDLS $150 for fabbing one!
Sometimes Nissan DOES come up with some deals!
-
Does it spit when it happens? What is your curb idle set at? What is your idle set to, and are you using vacuum advance on the 1st carb through the damper pot?
Mikuinis like 900 for curb idle, and usually idle jets in the 55-62 range with initial timing bumped up accordingly. A recurved distributor is not necessary, but it helps.
Having the idle too low, timing retarded, & heavy flywheel, will all exacerbate the 'bog' of insufficient accel pump.
And if it doesn't come off bog when you keep it floored likely there are venturi size and vacuum leak issues as well. They may stumble, but even 44phh's on an L20A will start revving and once they hit 1500-2000 will take off like ZOOM!
If they don't you have other basic mechanical issues that need to be addressed before monkeying any more with the carbs.
The cooling bodies and heat shield only help with a percolation issue which may or may not have these same symptoms.
-
So you heard a lean backfire...
That jibes with engaging a starter circuit/choke to keep it running.
One other thing, you said "L26 with Carbs" and that doesn't tell us which ones---the Flat Tops you should have on there DO have a 'choke' with a traditional plate and all. Earlier carbs (Round Tops) while it says 'choke' really it is a starter circuit which positions the jet down further in the well allowing more fuel to be added while incrementally bumping open the throttle plate to help perform this function.
-
Stick the float in a pot of boiling water, and watch the pinhole for bubbles coming out. When the bubbles stop coming out of the float, you have not only expanded the air, but boiled all the gasoline out of the float as well.
Heat the float and solder the offending spot. Stick back in boiling water after letting it cool to make sure it's O.K. and not still leaking.
Some people let the float cool before soldering it, on the thought it might collapse when cooled and sealed. To each his own, I don't want water in there, so if you have low humidity I suppose letting it cool down is O.K. too...
Don't go nuts with the solder, ideally heating what you have and using a flux laden brush (the flux with tinning solder in it) is usually enough to cover the pinholes and not affect the weight. If it weighs wrong, it will have similar problems.
Good Luck.
Order a set of plastic foam floats, and keep them on hand for the future!
-
I don't doubt that Bruce knows how to use calipers, but when you read the OP, you get some doubts about their proper use, and some questions about the context in which they were used. No? They were probably used wrong here, so we try to point him in the right direction. I guess he left. Maybe that was the right direction. I think I am going to UN-subscribe to this post myself. I speak from experience, my experience.
Here are others. Bear in mind the OP is using a pair of $10 calipers for his first time and wondering why the numbers are off.
I agree.
Likely he needs some instruction on what exactly to call things, as well as measure them.
Like I posited, perhaps he measured the fire-ring on the head gasket given the terminology and massive discrepancy.
I don't see even a $10 pair of digital calipers being off this much. I use them for work on machines twisting 54K and they are 'close enough' for non-critical measurements.
The OP was not checking his bore for suitability for re-ring or what oversize bore to tell the machinist. He was trying to measure it against the pistons (I think) that he had, which he said 'fit snug'... With a 4.5mm discrepancy as stated by others, I doubt seriously this is a correct reading.
Unfortunately as so often happens, someone comes in drops the hand grenade, and then runs off leaving us all with our members flacid and swinging in the wind...
This was an exercise in futility as the OP has abdicated his responsibilities after asking for assistance.
Can we ask moderators to give guys who do this 'onetime troll' signatures until they redeem themselves in later posts???
-
I have regularly provided information on roadside dyno checks in SoCal. Sometimes it looks as if they just take every third vehicle off the light, other times there is a guy telling the CHP who to wave into the testing station.
Yes, if you get tagged and pipe dirty, things can get complicated.
Complying out the tailpipe is not that hard, and if you have met certian requirements, that's all that matters even in the state of CA...
-
So Bruce, uh... you're saying that for 90.5-86=4.5mm this would not be noticable on even a pocket slide caliper with NO digital readout and just straight lines????
C'mon here---There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with a caliper. And if the inferrence is that 4.5mm difference between ID and OD measuring surfaces is something that is remotely possible....I say HOGWASH!
The reason DIGITAL calipers are prefereable over any other type is PRECISELY because you can ZERO the caliper from the ORIGIN position.
That makes any 'ID/OD' discrepancy IRRELEVANT. The standard is distance from origin point.
If this was a fixed caliper like I used for oh-so-many-years identifying junkyard parts improperly (it was a cheap Brown and Sharpe) without the ability to zero origin, I'd agree there could be a 'drift'...
But 4.5 mm ? C'MON!
How does someone say that? Take all the ad hominem shots you want at me, but some reasonable common sense needs to come into play here. And I reiterate that 'for all intents and purposes' the number you get at the top will be a REPRESENTATIVE NUMBER to compare against the piston for purposes of 'comparing compatibility'... Bruce, what were your cylinders out? 4, 5, 10 thou? Or less? On an F54 block no doubt.
10 thou is not 4.5 mm.
For that, a caliper...shite your EYES can discern that differential.
-
I would agree, that it left like that... well, giving them a chance to 'make it right' belies an overly generous outlook.
I once had to decertify a local distributor after a disatisfied customer called us (The OEM) directly for service. I went to the site and from what I saw, could draw a very clear picture of what happened on site. Not revealing this to the customer or the distributor, I let them both have their say.
Curiously, both stories followed each other very carefully. The difference being the distributor service manager told me they were a 'problem customer' and that they had 'six inspections before anything left the shop'...
As I decertified them for our product line I used the old Demming Quote: "You can't inspect in quality!" Meaning, if the guys doing the work don't care enough about their work to take the time to do it right, no amount of inspection will make them change. And that is what I see here...
Sometimes, you just don't give the guy that second chance. If they didn't get the BASICS right, that's pretty sad!
Curiously, in my instance of decertification, the customer wasn't necessarily complaining about the COST of what was done, just that the cost kept going up more times than he had authority to change his initial P.O. Both admitted 'it was a blank check P.O. just don't change it more than 2X after the initial quote'---in other words quote me a new machine price, and when you come in below that we all look good. Amazing guys get so stuck in their ways that they can't accomodate that kind of request. Then you get guys leaving monkey prints all over the machine, broken and stripped fittings, piles of rust and dross all in the tray on the machine... Not professional at all. And in all this, I was the 'bad guy' because I decertified all the technicians who worked on the machine, as well as the distributorship. An ounce of prevention was worth the thousands of dollars of 'cure' which was to send all the guys back to classes back east (which they 'already knew anyway') and make them jump through process hoops to regain their certifications within 90 days. Only to do so poorly in the intervening years that the OEM ends up buying them out, and firing most of the management in the Service and Aftermarket Parts Department. "Hey man, I warned you something like this could happen..."
Good to hear you got your head rectified by someone who cared enough to do his job right the FIRST time. -
Do people actually believe the B.S. readings they get from a NB interpolation?
My god man, if that is the kind of meter he had he DESERVES a ticket for stupidity!
-
I think this is definately going to be unique since I have never seen any Z with the competition hood vent and a G-nose front end.
Red and black car with German Plates showed up at the 94 ZCON with just such a setup.
Several others throughout the year. "Competition Hood Vent" is a nice marketing term---Nissan came up with it because they couldn't control vapor lock in street cars! LOL
-
Heat shield should be a low-transmission materal. Ideal metal would be Stainless. Really best is a ceramic/carbon aerospace composite sandwich. NO radiant heat is transmitted.
Putting asbestos blanket under the heat shield seems to help more than metal alone.
I have used Aluminum, with asbestos cloth underneath...I'd use stainless if I had some on hand.
-
Oh, i see where the term comes from now..
YEah, you will need a vented cap if you plan on doing a closed system.
-
In my 100L tank, the 15mm line (on recalling better) went to the filler neck, and one to the vapor tank. But nothing to the front of the car. Venting was as previously described. While CZC page is loading, I'll banter further...
You could run the 15mm line to the filler neck--that will allow fast-venting of the high point of the tank (what it is there for) so you get a full fuel fill. The vapor expansion/fuel depletion compensation is done through a 1/4" line which must vent to atmosphere. In the 240, that was where the diverter valve came from--positive pressure went to the crankcase, and makeup air for fuel usage came from the air filter.
The 'round stamp' you see is the production date code. If you can get it cleaner, you can tell when the tank was made and determine if it was current production for your vehicle, or if someone swapped it in later from another car.
-
That 15mm hose is a vapor vent. Why are you referring to this as a 'non emissions' tank? It has the provision for the EVAP lines and vapor phase separation tank in the 1/4 panel and must be run to that location, you CAN NOT 'run it to the filler neck'.
I have a non-emissions 100L tank, which ALSO have these vents, they ALL go to the vapor tank in the 1/4 panel.
The "Non Emissions" comes in the FILLER NECK. The breathing of the tank is still accomplished through the crankcase and air filter on your car.
On the car I removed the tank from, there was NO 1/4" vapor line running to the front of the car. The VENTING of the tank was accomplished in the filler neck with an overboard dump.
If you run the single 15mm hose to your fuel filler, and do not have the proper gas tank cap, you will suck the filler neck down FLAT and run out of fuel. These systems need an external vent. They either accomplish this from the vapor tank through that 1/4" line to the air cleaner/crankcase, or by a 1/4" line that dumps to the ground from the first plastic portion of the filler neck that bolts to the 1/4 panel.
I'll go check out the classic Z thread now...
MORE CALIFORNIA SMOG INFO
in Nissan L6 Forum
Posted · Edited by Tony D
John...muahaha... you learn well, 'I know of at least one'
With phraseology like that, the world is grand! I know of a few as well.