Tony D

Sometimes, the offal I vomit forth is actually tasty enough for consumption, and healthy for you too! As an ultimate thankyou, you can go down past the Galleria, turn right onto Walden Street and then do a burning clutch-dumping smoky donut in front of Cameron's Main Offices while shouting 'TONY D SENDS HIS REGARDS!' Do it on the Easternmost side of the complex, in view of the training room, Baldo should love it. Don't worry, they will blame me. Remember, this theory was shot full of holes, so 'priming pulse' to return liquid fuel into the rail didn't really work, it was something else! I don't know what, but it was something else...something. Just not what I suggested!

sigh, people think turbo and PSI.... Horsepower people, horsepower. Please get off the psi-fixation. As for ANY MS system, they come resident with 22psig MAP sensor, so that should be good for around 650-700HP if the engine is done correctly. 10psi is only around 350-400hp, I guess your goals are pretty high, huh?

Wrong "S" terminal. The "S" terminal on the STARTER. I am interrupting nothing on the ECU power circuit, I am just stopping the solenoid from being engaged on the starter. This will start the fuel pump as long as the car is in the "Crank" position. Jumping the AFM is not recommended---you can manually do that by holding the flapper, and it will continually run the pump as suggested, but my contrivance alters nothing in the fuel control system at all, including the 'stall feature' built into the AFM. If you were to use a non-spring loaded switch and didn't turn it back off the most my modification would do is not allow the car to crank (and you could still start it by jumping the solenoid manually)---if you forget the switch on the AFM, and you get in a wreck...the fuel pump keeps on a-pumping covering the road with fuel and roasting you solwly in your conveyance. No, I think interrupting the starter is easier, shorter runs of wire, and doesn't affect any safety features in the car. It also disables the starter for theives.... But that's beside the point. Look at the "S" terminal on the starter and that circuit. The wires are easily accessed under the hook and routed back inside through any number of grommited holes. No permanent splicing of hte wires is necessary, just a pigtail from the "S" terminal to the switch, and from the switch back to the connector that pushed on the "S" terminal before. Easy, quick, simple. No cutting required. ALL the cars run the fuel pump in the "START" position. This is why I sourced it thus...

Yeah, we couldn't GIVE yen away when I got there, then when it changed in 88 things changed. Guys came to me with 68,000 yen in a jar one time asking if I wanted it. "Uh, dude, that's like almost $700!" He sat there looking shocked. Asked him what was the matter and all shook up he said: "This is my drinking change. If this is what I had left over, how much did I [/i][/u]spend[/u][/i]???" I was stationed at Kadena 84-89, watched yen go from 268 to 117. As for insisting that dirt getting into a dogleg is somehow a design 'flaw' the question is, since there ARE drainage holes, and the owner's manual says to thoroughly flush the areas...is it a design flaw, or one of shoddy upkeep and maintenance? I know plenty of Z's with no rusty doglegs which were run around off-road and were flushed religiously.... The leaves are the killer, they don't flush well, and is the biggest argument for using a car cover outside.

Stock turbo intake manifold incorporates pressure relief on drop throttle (blow-off) by venting into #4 intake runnner. It's not required until you start doing things which increase system volume. And even then...well, I'm not going there... The drivability difference between stock and MS is worth more than anything else you are going to consider. In fact, doing the conversion with MS is FAR easier than cobbling the stock wiring harness into another car. If you could do that, MS conversion is a breeze. And it's upgradeable. I wouldn't do anything else to a STOCK TURBO ENGINE other than change to MS. For me, that is #1 on the mod list to a good running turbo, it makes it even better.

Clutch Idiot Interlock is not there, and not required. I wouldn't add it, just another thing to go wrong. I have disconnected that 'feature' on my Y2K Frontier because personally I have a HUGE problem putting a 1700# poreload on an unlubricated center thrust bearing of the engine. I can start it in "N" and not have any thrust bearing wear at all... Decisions, decisions, longer bearing wear, or consequences for starting the car without putting it in "N" first (and concurrently forgetting to set parking brake when shutting down car per instruction manual) I'm not a fan of worst-case 'cascade failure' scenarios. I can remember to set the Parking Brake and put it in "N" before I start. As for the inhibitor switch, yes, you have to jump it. My suggestion is to not JUMP the switch, but run the wires to the console and install a factory switch in one of the existing holes so when you park the car you can enable a 'cranking disconnect'---nice anti-theft feature. I did this on my buddy's 69 Corvair when we did the conversion. Worked so well he forgot about it and after a long parking stint in his barn confounded him! I showed up, flipped the inhibitor switch right there on the dashboard and he started swearing as he remembered it was old-had to flip that switch as he exited the car. It had been close to 7 years since parking it, and he forgot it needed to be flipped up and who turns on the fog lamps when the start the car, eh?

It's simple design. the 'flaw' is inadequate drainage. You will see that the inner fenders on a US Specification 260 and 280Z have plastic flaps inside them to preven road debris from being flung into places it shouldn't be. The original cars had drain flaps which couldbeplugged closed by mud, or in some cases parking under the wrong kind of tree. Look at the door windows: they have 'fuzzies' on US cars, the datsuns had rubber wipers. What for? To keep leaves anddebris from getting INSIDE the doors and soaking up moisture---and holding it against an untreated metal surface. The issue is that drainage of water is usually adequately addressed in these cars, but the issue of debris ingress was not, and in many cases the debirs accumulation in these areas will hold moisture and rot from the inside out. it was not uncommon to see people with high pressure washers blowing up into 'drain holes' in the chassis to dislodge mud, leaves, etc... If you park in a garage, people think that is what saves you from rust. Only by the factthat leaves and dust can not get deposited into these areas! I've found parking under the wrong kind of tree will do in a car FAR faster than anything else. Small leaves, in particular, like to get into these crevices, plug the drain holes, and then you're screwed. As for the comments on 10 year japanese car ownership, this is also true (Konish) so many myths surround this it's not funny. But it IS true that Japanese manufacturers AT THAT TIME looked upon a car as a 10 year appliance, and didn't STRESS rust prevention. Drainage, but not prevention. Driving around on Okinawa revealed mid-panel rust as bad as anywhere in the Rust Belt back home... They got better because they HAD to get better. But in the 70's across the board, they didn't put a lot of stress on corrosion prevention. And the Z's being lightweight had thinner metal than most. Go check and compare a 76 celica fender against a 76 Fairlady and you will be amazed that you can physically measure a significant difference in metal thickness! Additionally, much of the inner-fender plastic cladding used on the US cars was NOT installed on the Fairlady. My 77 S31 does not have inner fender liners like my 77 280Z. Why? Weight, and perceived domestic market expendability of a motor vehicle. Seriously, in 1987, when these cars came due for Road Tax in April, they FLOODED into the scrap yards. I watched and almost cried when I saw an ORIGINAL Fairlady 240Z (HS30) get scrapped for a slight wipe down one side. The yard paid the owner 5000 Yen. Which was all ANY car with expired road tax, and expired shaken-Sho is worth at that point. It was COMMON to simply take a perfectly running car down to the scrap yard and turn it in for scrap value, and go get a new one. it's a clutural accomodation. I ended up with a brisk business transferring cars from Japanese Friends to Servicemen because I would give 2X the price the scrap yard would (10,000 yen, like 33$ at the time) and then would have a car dealer process the transfer through LTO and sell the cars all day long for $500 and $600 with a one-year Shaken-Sho on them. For a short-timer, it was a perfect deal, and he could resell the car (at 11 or 12 years old) to another servicemeber for what he bought it for, and THEY would run it thorugh another inspection for $300. You got a car for a year for under a grand, insurance included. What a deal. I digress...

No, you have just taken what he said and turned it around 180 degrees! ADVANCED means ADVANCED. You are currently RETARDED, and you need to ADVANCE your distributor just like he said. You don't change ANYTHING in the timing map. The OPPOSITE of what you just said. One or the other, NOT BOTH! Make the timing MATCH, then LOCK DOWN THE DISTRIBUTOR. From that point on, ONLY use the computer for timing changes. I thought it was pretty clear from the posts.

clarifing is not as effective as editing out...

that flywheel is more balanced than the engine you will be installing it on in that case!

OMFG, I agree with KTM, this is getting deep... BMEP is BMEP

have to agree, someone moved the distributor, once it's set ALL timing changes are done via input into the computer, NOT changing the position of the distributor!

Methinks you are putting way too much thought into this. Was your engine balanced previously? The Kameaeri flywheel is a balanced unit of itself, and if your prior assembly was individually balanced it can be bolted on, just like stock flywheels don't need balancing on exchange from stock to stock engines. The flywheel itself can be balanced, and exchanged from engine to engine. If you want to spend some money, go ahead and take everything apart, and maybe get a couple of grams of imbalance taken out---likely on your crank, not the flywheel... Really, look at the design of the unit: There is miniscule weight at the farthest inertial point on the flywheel. The less weight there is, the less there is to balance (or that needs balancing, or that can throw out balance...) I've bolted mine on and I think your concern about crank bearing longevity is...uh...well, waaaaay over the top on what it is. What does that thing weigh anyway, like 8#? With most of the inertial weight in the first 7" from crank centerline? Did you balance your harmonic dampner? If not, I'd not worry about a flywheel with less inertial loading that your balancer...

I do have this alternate fantasy that involves trained monkeys and some corkscrews...

It isn't, it's a grossly incorrect statement. You are correct Nigel. You are not insane.

I have to be impressed, I have driven one of nine, and probably have seen at least three other distinct and different cars on the mainland with that head on them. Almost half the known worldwide production? Somehow I feel that hard to believe. I have seen, personally, half the world's supply of TC24B-1's? There has to be more. I simply can't believe that low of a number.

Follow John C's suggestion. Second, are you running or planning on running a full on WBO2 controlled Standalone EFI system with proper compressor bypass valve and full fuel system? You only mention hardware, nothing about the most important item on the engine: The fuel and spark control system. The HARDWARE is not the issue. Fuel and spark control is. You can have a $15,000 bottom end, it's still going to blow when you try to run 8 psi on a stock N/A fuel pump and stock N/A injectors without an intercooler on a 110F day up a long hill... You're spending money to spend money because you haven't a clue where to spend the money. It sounds good because this is what all the books tell you to do. But in the real world anybody who has been aroudn turbo-L's for any time will tell you it's everything OUTSIDE THE LONGBLOCK that makes the horsepower reliable. Bolting on a head for 'flow' is laughable---unless you are spending $2400 for a fully worked head with ports polished and matched. The different head won't make enough of a difference to be worth the effort (flow-wise). Take this bit of advice: Save the money you intend to spend on 'bottom end improvements' and just leave it alone. What you put in there likely will be worse than what Nissan Assembled the engine with in the first place, and won't last as long. Instead, take that money and put it all toward fueling and spark control, and learning how to tune it, on a bone-stock bottom end. You, like so many are obsessed with a PSI rating of the engine---which is totally irrelevant. HORSEPOWER GOAL will dictate what you need eventually. And from experience 400HP will be doable on a bone stock bottom end with nothing special done. The longevity of that build will be ENTIRELY dependent on what sophistication you placed into the anti-detonation spark/fueling delivery control system. I have seen big dollar engines wasted from a clogged fuel filter. It gets expensive when you skimp on fuel control, and put money into the strongest link in the equation. L-Engines don't need internal reinforcement, they need SUPPORT SYSTEMS appropriate for the horsepower level desired. As this is rarely understood, people will spend money 'fixing what isn't broke' and then with no money left in the coffers, buy some cheap system, or band-aid their stock system trying to make horsepower. And things go boom. Like I said, you have obsessed on hardware, the most durable part of the equation, and mention nothing about the MOST CRITICAL OF THE SYSTEMS. You need to read. You're approaching this bass-ackwards. You want 20psi on a stock bottom end. To me, 20psi is something in the area of 600HP. To use a stock bottom end at this power level is astoundingly cheap, bordering on insanity of the delusional. And that's exactly what I mean by "trying to get a lot for nothing, and cheaping out."

Two 10" Hayden fans on a three core radiator without shroud was more than enough to maintain my 350HP Turbo 240Z. The largest issue I saw was running a 160 F thermostat, and having the cut-in temperature set properly. If you wait for the switches to turn on at the preset 180 or 185 F, you are too late, and the spot boiling will happen after long highway runs when you pull off into traffic on surface streets. My car runs at X degrees at 30 mph in 5th gear, my fan is set to turn on at X+10F. Using this setting scenario, and a 160F thermostat, I have never had an issue with the engine overheating with a three core radiator. The fans will not run if I'm going 30mph or faster. It's as predictable as the sun rising and setting. I described this to KTM, and he reset his switches accordingly, and his 'overheating in traffic' stopped. Remember whatever temperature you show at the outlet neck of the thermostat---it will be 20F higher at the back of the head. Once a small steam pocket forms from no / stagnant flow at the back of the head due to low NPSH on the pump, youre through! If you want, put a 24# cap on the radiator to see if it helps, but generally a set 180F switch is FAR too high a temperature to work reliably in SoCal desert temperatures when coming off the freeway into stop and go surface streets. This is well documented in the archives.

280Z hood would do similar. And some 3" round holes under the brake/clutch cylinders and battery will work wonders without altering the exterior. They do punch louvres in them as well...

When you have no shame, the IRS shutting down your business is not considered a 'disgrace'... No quick heart attack. I want him eaten by large cats unable to defend himself... Now, imprisionment and impalement on Bubba would be a suitable purgatory. Once released, the first thing he does is goes skiing, and then gets impaled and eaten by wild animals. That's even better. IRS Audit drawn out, and then placed in prison where the guy gets Bubba-Loved to the extent of colostomization. Which gets pierced when he goes skiing and hung up on the pine tree, so the infection can get him as well... Thanks for that ZXToy! That adds constructively to the fantasy. How can I get his whole immediate family involved in it as well. I'm Italian, I wish them all Ill Will... Old Country Style!

do it, dyno it, and post the results, then there will be no conjecture or supposition... I could group my Mikuini Manifold through the ports and using tubing. I doubt any measurable difference will result.

How did you get it to 10 from 18 without changing the bins in the MS? Read the bins in megatune, read your timing light, compare the two, they should be the same. If you're dorking with the distrubutor to change timing, you will trash your engine as you are moving the ENTIRE MAP when you do that. THE MS references the trigger, and once set, all adjustements are made from the MS Control Panel (Megatune)... I agree with the last: READ ON MS! This sites MS Forum should give you more than what you need. You're shooting blind right now, and run a good chance of screwing something up but good!

Define that limit. 20 years durability? I've been at that threshold since 1985 and still have no issues with my NA Turbo Conversion. Probably 50K plus miles on it in that time. 26K of it driving daily as a commuter from Corona to OC. The limit is based on detonation, NOT HORSEPOWER! 200HP will kill the engine if it detonates. STOCK 180HP will kill the engine if it detonates. The horsepower is basically irrelevant. You don't detonate, things won't break. Show me someone making 400 HP that doesn't detonate, and you will be amazed how long a stock engine will last. But like all things, people using a stock bottom end tend to be trying to get a lot for nothing. And cheaping out tends to make things break. Usually (I'd almost say always) from detonation. I would say 350HP will deliver stock engine longevity. I have no oil consumption, full compression after all this time. I don't detonate, either. I don't think 350HP is by ANY means any sort of a 'limit' on the engine. It is if you want 100% engine reliability for 100K+ miles. Hell, who knows, maybe 200K miles.

Sigh...

pistons will let go in every case due to detonation before the rods will... sigh...