Tony D
-
Posts
9963 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
74
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Tony D
-
-
The thing is these are used cars and people who drive used cars unless they are Jay Leno do not have alot of money to spend on parts and whatnot.
My first car was used. My last car was used. I don't own a new car.
My first car had a license plate frame that said the following, and it still applies today:
"I drive this because I want to, not because I have to!"
And I ain't Jay Leno. The less I spend on a canvas, the more I can spend on paint, brushes, and content. Many of the masters painted over their own paintings to save on the canvas costs. Their work endures. There were plenty of aristocrats of the same era that fancied themselves artists that painted profusely, each on a new canvas. Their work usually ended up keeping some of the servants warm in a fireplace somewhere in the castle eventually.
You're just looking at it the wrong way!
-
Man, I have to WORK today and I can't devote time to this thread. Damn damn damn damn! I'll link JeffP to it so he can theorize, he has less work to do than me today (I assume...)
Good questions. Especially about his 0.63A/R housing (or 0.82, I forget which).
-
The common person cannot even fathom how much work it takes to build these custom L series setups.
I have been called an arrogant bastard for making that very same comment! How true it is, though. I guess people don't like being referred to a 'common' or 'average'!
BTW, that OS Gikken Head is actually a $100K engine buildup as they will only use the heads they have remaining if they assemble it in it's entirety.
$10K seems like a big discount!
As for falling over themselves to buy a set... is this an official order thread now? I wasn't aware. I may have to send a P.M.!!! That will upset the wife to no end...but I think The Blue Turd deserves a distinctive induction setup from "That Horny Z Guy"! Will you have that cast into the flange, Derek? "THZG Casting Works"
-
5.25 Qts after starting the engine to circulate and to fill the filter...
-
Looks like a Grant knockoff of a Nardi
-
As it is, most manufacturers are unwilling to undergo any major product improvements during the projected lifecycle of a vehicle now as it is, because changing anything leaves the uninformed jury members open to the lawyer's question of 'why did you redesign this part? Obviously you thought something was deficient in your original design, therefore you were negligent in the original design.
Vannilla Cars just like everybody else's through the liability avoidance 'guidance' of the legal department. The pervasive nature of this within the USA can not be discounted. It colors your life and vehicle/parts choices almost every day. You really don't notice it till you go away and come back to it. It's stark. The inability to get OEM replacement parts for light aircraft is an excellent example of it which can be deduced directly from the court actions. There is little other reason for the decline, when parts sales were steady due to the inspection/retirement cycles required for airworthiness. It's just a segment of commerce that goes away.
-
I don't see why you couldn't...
Especially for the price!
I should buy one of those MSA pipes for my wife's car come to think of it...
-
Thanks Tony, I'll keep at it and try to employ your suggestions. It may be a few days till I get back out to the garage,it's only 10 degrees out right now.
Do this where it's warm, it increases effectiveness of the solution. Though likely it wouldn't freeze at that temperature, merely turn to slush (unless it's C, in which case get out there and work!)
-
All I remember was it was specified as being for a Mitsubishi---I can't remember which one, maybe a Non-Turbo 4G63 from the mid-late 80's? This was 91 when I did this, so it wasn't anything newer than that! The rubber grommet on the PCV fit RIGHT into that hole with the pipe removed. I think it was a valve that stuck into the valve cover of the Mitsu as I recall. Might have been a Dodge D50 or Colt that I snared it out of in the JY. I am such a parts whore it's not funny.
I have another drawthrough system (er... perhaps I should not admit this here, some people will gnash their teeth knowing I preserve old school technology...) And at various times have run the Crown, Modified Crown, Turbo Toms, SK, and HKS setups on my car. Add to that several years before getting into Datsuns, various VW and Corvair Turbo Ventures and you can see why I got hung with the name 'turbotony' which is my e-mail at some webservers...
-
My numbers were examples of pulling fuel after peak torque compared to what everybody seems to say which is 'Shoot for this AFR across the board'...
Jeff and I dyno testing (and Bryan as well) have seemed to mirror the fact that the engines make far more power by PULLING fuel after peak torque than by keeping it as rich as it was coming UP to peak torque.
That was the intent of the post, not to specify a magic AFR that should be used.
I mean, you got to admit---there is NO WAY I would have EVER thought we would have cool EGT and keep making power to 13.8AFR! But it did, and it was consistent.
-
I used a Mitsubishi PCV Valve that plugged RIGHT into the side of the block, and removed the pipe entirely. The Mitsu valve was plumbed to vacuum in the manifold between carb and turbo and as I recall was restricted with a 0.063" orifice internally. The top of my valve cover had the deriguer K&N filter installed.
But this was in my old Drawthrough days. Dark days indeed.
Yes, it will pull out: channel locks may break it free, or you may have to clamp a vice grips onto it and knock the grips with a hammer to get it free. Tightening it back up can be accomplished by soldering on that end, or laying some thin braze to increase the diameter slightly and then sanding it down till you can pound it back in (if it's too loose for your tastes, use some pliable sealant if you didn't solder/braze all-round).
-
Put an additional linkage on the cross/transfer bar, and use holes in it to set your spring tension on the transfer bar for 'feel trim'.
What you ARE missing is the stock return spring on the cross/transfer bar---it's a large coil spring that usually wraps around a specific spring arm, and is backed against one of the heim joints. It is a STOUT spring which makes the linkages pop up on release of throttle.
One other thing you could investigate is removing your two springs and put a compression spring on your throttle cable (like an old VW) which would pull your quadrant back to a starting point set by a cable stop on the cable itself. Also, your throttle quadrant is set so that you will take a HUGE effort to move it off-idle the way you have it set. If you will rotate it anticlockwise as viewed from the firewall maybe 15 degrees it will take FAR less effort to move it off idle even with huge spring pressure.
I set up my quadrant to have my pedal floorboarded and the ITB's at WOT. To do this, I had to alter the pedal stop on the throttle pedal inside the passenger's compartment, and lower the throttle pedal down to almost the level of the brake pedal (darn the coincidence there!) At idle, for smoothest pull the quadrant should have the cable tangential to it, you are bisecting the arc the quadrant will travel through. You may want to try rotating it 15-30 degrees anticlockwise before changing anything and see if you are still O.K... Like I said, you may have to lower the pedal stop, but likely it will make your setup operate FAR smoother than it currently does.
Good Luck, Cheers!
-
Rolling Parts hit it dead on, Lawyers were actually applying modern day liability mentality to products Piper made and designed in the 40's.
Their argument was they were liable for these 'negligent designs' some 50 years AFTER THE FACT.
There was legislation passed capping liability...not sure on the details exactly, but it was explained to me as a 'statute of limitations' in regards to general aviation aircraft after a set number of years. Basically after a given time unit, the liability transfers from the original manufacturer to the maintenance companies keeping the bird aloft (or not...as the case may be!) It makes common sense, but it almost killed general aviation manufacture in the USA.
Firestone 'low temperature rated' tires may be a slight misnomer. The inflation issues for a 'soft carlike ride' did not correspond to Firestone's load rating. Exploders did have issues in Saudi well before they had them in the USA, and running at 100+ mph across a desert at 130+ F can be considered "Extreme" but in the USA, the heat was not really the issue so much as it was improper inflation pressures. Same as the Corvair in the 60 when the lawyer nader argued that reading your owners manual is too much to expect from the average car owner. I mean, you spend $30K for something and you don't even read the manual? The issue of selling tires that are more than 3 years old as 'new' is both an ethical and moral issue, but we can't have that in business any longer, it's all predicated by lawyers and legislation. Prevailing wisdom is now (as taught in business schools) 'if there isn't legislation against it, push the envelope' ... they do, and actuarials do the CBA on potential liability and they go from there. Not a moral leadership whatsoever.
"Who is John Galt?"
-
Ahhh, for the days when you would go to Nissan and put the Nissan Part Number in for the FRP doors (Hatch, Hood...) that accepted all the stock linkages (and the perspex windows were in stock ready for shipment as well...)
-
I would say the fueling is actually over-rich past your torque peak. We lost major power running anything richer than 12.5 almost every point past torque peak. From talking to people in general who have dynoed their cars and noted the changes, it seems that you need to actually pull fuel past torque peak.
For instance, on JeffP's car we started at something around 11:1 across the board, we started experimenting pulling fuel at various points watching EGT's as well. Some people said they tuned to 1650F, we didn't get anywhere near that point, but were amazed at higher rpms (with porting and a cam) that in some load bins we were actually running as lean at 13.8!!! Most of the stuff was in the high 12's, which was FAR LEANER than anything before torque peak.
I encapsulate this in a short synopsis, it took FAR longer on the dyno than we thought before we realized that running the same AFR past torque peak was actually too rich, and we were loosing considerable power.
Just make sure their datalogging equipment is calibrated properly, and stick with the same place to (as noted above) monitor relative changes from your adjustments.
-
1) But the point I'm trying to make is that regardless if I continue to use the stock 13 psi cap, or if I put a higher pressure cap on, since the cap is never opening up (meaning the radiator (not block) pressure isn't exceeding 13 psi) then what advantage would there be to putting a higher pressure cap on it?
2) I'm not challenging that the pressures in the head are higher and this helps prevent nucleate boiling - I understand all that.
3) I'm just challenging the advice I've seen a few times here that putting a higher pressure cap on the radiator would help reduce detonation. I just don't see how that can be if the system has enough capacity (as mine does) to operate without venting with the stock 13 psi cap?
To address in turn:
1) You are confusing puking coolant with nucleate boiling. If you aren't puking coolant with a 16 psi cap, it does not mean that you aren't nucleate boiling. You may not be, but because it doesn't get to that point doesn't mean it isn't happening. the higher pressure cap gives nucleate boiling margin just as an oversized radiator core does for normal operating temperature. THEY ARE SEPARATE ISSUES. That you have cooling margin is one thing. The largest radiator and pump in the world will give you tons of margin for cooling. Simple cooling. But PRESSURE is what actually CHANGES THE POINT AT WHERE IT BOILS. Because it's operating at a higher pressure, the chance that nucleate boiling will occur, and go runaway is FARTHER away than with the 16 psi cap.
2) My contention (politely) will be that you dont, follow to point 3 and you should see why.
3) Detonation (or tendency to detonate) due to inadequate cooling of the cylinder head caused by nucleate boiling will be reduced by running the higher pressure cap, because of the margin of increase you get by that increased pressure. Instead of nucleate boiling at 230, now it's 265 (JeffP has recorded this temperature in his engine, BTW!) If you are running a 160 thermostat, it does not mean that everywhere in the engine is 160F! The higher pressure cap will save you from the runaway should conditions get to that point. If your system has capacity in excess, the higher pressure cap on the surface will not benefit you, but the MARGIN it will add if anything ABNORMAL occurs between turns 3 and 4, (two miles from the pits) that you will experience LESS of a problem than you would with a stnadard 16psi cap. Again, you mention 'without venting' and that is an IRRELEVANT item when dealing with nucleate boiling. It does not necessarily happen that it gets hot enough to make ENOUGH steam to cause a venting incident. You CAN be nucleate boiling, and not have a venting issue. My example of pukeover after shutdown was intended to show an EXTREME case of boiling (due to no coolant flow from the PUMP...) The PUMP ADDS PRESSURE in the engine ABOVE the CAP. CAP pressure only matters after shutdown for venting issues. If you are venting during running, you are nucleate boiling (outside of normal thermal expansion of volume of the coolant). If you are not venting, it is not proof that you are not nucleate boiling at portions of your head.
For Electramotive, we were told the pressures run in their coolant system were in excess of 2 bar static blanket, and they had modified certian aspects of the cooling system to allow a 300% increase in flow through the engine in order to insure no coolant related issues on their turbo car.
Frankly, for an N/A car, this may be hard to understand or justify at a specific output of only 100HP per liter or less. When you are talking about 250 or 330HP per liter, on this engine, with this head and combustion chamber design.... it becomes more clear you aren't in Kansas any more Toto!
-
Carburetor Shop in Ontario California once told me to try Vanish Toilet Bowl Cleaner. It's caustic and won't eat the Mazak or other metals but if you leave it in there too long it WILL turn it jet black.
I would make up a pot (stainless steel food service trays I had laying around) and it seemed pretty good with some goggles, tooth brushes, and latex gloves at getting most of the stuff knocked out to where things like frozen throttle plates and shafts would free up.
I limited my soaking/working time in the relatively strong solution to around 10 minutes, then completely flushed them with water.
Then back to PB Blaster, heat, etc.... If no luck, back in for another 10 minutes of work and then reflush with water and try the oils again.
Heating the stuff to around 140 F seemed to make the action much more agressive.
I wouldn't use acid as it WILL deteriorate the metal. Likely all you have is corrosion or debris sticking them---and chokes can be oil fouled, meaning an alkaline solution will remove the oils leaving only dirt remaining...and the brushes will get that!
Good Luck.
-
Protection from lawsuits is required these days. Piper Aviation is a good example...
Lawyers have no bounds unless reeled in, and even then for over 2000 years the answer has been known... I don't know the phrase in Latin, but it was translated as:
"First, Kill all the Lawyers"
-
It is a common wire, and the added resistance in the line acts as a 'check valve' during some periods of operation.
I removed mine, reinstalled, and eventually removed it to no difference in operation of my Autometer Tach. Mine now resides in the glove box...
-
One thing to note was that the ABC Expose was talking about expired/aged tires being sold 'as new' which IS a problem.
There are now 'recall' requirements for tires.
The Braap post on his motorhome has a post in it from John Coffee about changing his tires on his trailer. That was a direct result of me revealing that at least one of the tires on MY newly-bought trailer could have possibly been as old as 1978! Some of the tires were old enough to NOT have the UTQG Dating information on them putting them into the mid 80's (and they were replacements!)
Old tires are out there, they can kill you. Don't be stupid.
As far as making comments about people driving 35 year old tires as being insane... There are some who would say that a tire kept in indoor storage, with no checking, 100% tread, and some of the original molding nipples on it would pose no hazard whatsoever being driven below 50mph. I'm not saying it was right, but the tire looked as good as any tire on the shelf at the dealership. The assumption was with less than 15K on it, 'how bad could it be'?
Not such an insane bit of logic. Stupid, but I can see the person's thinking. Were someone to have bought the car, devoid of date coding on the tire, there was no way to tell HOW old the cars tires were! They may have only been 15 years old. (actually at that point, less than 10 years as I believe the datecoding was implemented in the mid 80's and this was in the mid 90's).
The bottom line is 'no matter how good it LOOKS, it can fail catastrophically-and that means new tires as well: DRIVE ACCORDINGLY!'
For those of us old enough to remember when NEW TIRE BLOWOUTS were a common occurance...
-
Like I said, you presented an EXTREME.
Driving an all original 35 year old 260Z on original 35 year old tires is done on and off trailers (and that works very well every time). Anyone DRIVING on 35 year old tires at 50mph+ down a roadway is basically (insert unrepeatable word here) insane.
(Sigh) Ok, then the one that came apart in chunks after 4 years is in no way applicable. What's extreme about 4 years?
Ozone attack in the southwest will kill a tire FAR quicker than most other places.
To put out a statement that 'extreme' conditions are required to make a tire fail is foolish. I have seen NEW tires fail. (Let's not get into Explorer discussions, I'm not even going there...)
The Federal Government has required the 6-7 year limit due to the failures of the Explorer, and the precipitant litigation. They had to pick an 'idiot limit' where they could be sure most people would have already changed them. Note they specifically state in the guidelines now that it includes spare tires which have never been used. IMO if you are running 6 year old tires on anything you're an idiot. But then again, that's just me.
I would not say 'hey, if you aren't driving them the the extreme they're fine for X years"
I do have older tires on my vehicles, I call them 'pushing around the yard rollers'. They are usually what goes on a car when it goes to the paint shop.
Nothing I'm regularly driving usually has a tire on it more than a year old, much less two or three. Anything over three is trash for me, regardless of 'tread left'... I usually rotate the spare, but if it just sits it's relegated to 'pushing status' after a few cycles of new tires on the car.
-
ozconnection asks a question I was wondering about as well, but let me ask it a little differently: I follow how a higher pressure cap will allow the system to reach a higher temperature at thermal equilibrium without venting. However, I think it's also being suggested that a higher pressure cap will help reduce localized boiling that creates steam pockets in the head. If that occurs with a 13 psi cap that is not venting/overflowing, I don't understand how switching to a higher pressure cap would change it. Am I missing something?
You need to go to the grapeaperacing site and read the information on cooling there, this will make it crystal clear why spot boiling will cause a runaway thermal situation in an engine. Steam is an insulator, and once the steam blankets the head from spot boiling, it can't transfer heat, and then it all goes to hell.
By raising the boiling point through pressure, you decrease the tendency to spot boil. Look who is having problems: people with 160 degree thermostats running 20psi caps! If it's happening there, what do you think is happening with 190 thermostats?
Because you have 'steam' it doesn't mean 'boilover'---it can go back into solution as it hits cooler water. You will never know it!
I got into a debate with someone here about radiator cap pressures because they contended c ap pressure was the same as block pressure. The only people who say that are people who have never run a water pressure gauge on their engine...it's a foolish contention to make. You have close to 40psi in your block with a 16psi cap and the engine at speed. With a higher pressure cap, the NPSH on the pump is higher, and your output pressure is higher. When you realize this is the conditions below the restrictor plate/thermostat, you can start to see exactly how hot some of the head pockets are getting!
Anybody but me ever jig up a thermostat housing with a thermostat in it and start applying pressure to see at what point the thermostat acts as a 'relief valve' and lifts off it's seat? Once you do that, after you have witnessed for youreslf what pressures exist in the block at speed with a conventional 1 bar rad cap, you will realize why restrictor plates are run, and why they run a 30 psi cap+ on racing L's making 1000 hp.
Some of the information in the "How To Modify" book was altered to the expected audience, or because of someone's understanding of why things are done the way they are... but may not necessarily be true.
I mean, if a thermostat lifts at 50 or 60 psi anyway, why bother with it at all and simply put in a flow restricting orifice which will do the same thing and doesn't have the possibility of failing or having a variable flow rate dependent on engine speed (and consequently block pressure)?
As for comments about ambient temperature, you are off the mark somewhat. I have personally recorded a 25C day where the engine was operating in a more severe environment than a 40C day elsewhere on the same continent. What is important is macadam thermal layering. This is the temperature your RADIATOR encounters on any given day. It may be 40 and overcast, no problems. 40 and clear and you overheat. Because the thermal radiation warming the macadam surface of the roadway up to 1M from the surface can be considerably hotter than ambient. I have seen (I regress to Farenheit for my own specific clarity) 85 Ambient but 130 through the radiator in Southern CA climbing hte Baker Grade and had to slow to 65mph to keep the car from surging (and engine temperatures at 195+), and three days later in Iowa was going 110mph at 103F ambient, with a 105 thermal layer on a clear day (engine temperature no more than 170), but with the midwestern aerosols blocking UV radiation on the roadway.
Yes, on some of my trips, I has 100ohm Platinum RTD's and J/K thermocouples taped and wired all over my car, and my kid was writing down numbers as I drove (kept the kid busy... on the return trip from Canada, this 8 year old decided to read Beowulf...)
On this particular trip, based on previous long trip experience I brought along 8liters of premix to add to the radiator for the 'shutdown puke' that occurs on the cars after you shut them down hot after a long highway run. The previous summer I puked 4L over a 1500 mile round trip. I assumed it would be similar with similar conditions.
One variable had changed: Water Wetter.
On this longer trip, I had the coolant in the same ratios, the same thermostat (160F) in the same car, with the same radiator, blah blah blah. KTM has seen 'The Blue Turd' and can attest firsthand that not much changes on that car year to year (or decade to decade!) On my trip to Canada I did not loose ONE liter over the course of three weeks driving and close to 18,000 miles. The decreased surface tension caused by the water wetter completely STOPPED the 'pops and crackles' I could hear within the head after shutdown. It stopped pressure rise to the cap venting point. If you run in hot weather, run a 160 thermostat, and water wetter. I've done so in my Fairlady Z with a recovery tank, and though thermal expansion may occur, in many years of driving I've not lost nor had to add anything to that car either. The Turd does not puke after shutdown like it did before WW.
Run a 190 thermostat, and sure as hell you will puke! Even with water wetter. If someone wants to do the theermodynamic calculations to justify the adibiatic advantages of running the hotter water temperature and put them out there for everyone to see, be my guest. But this requirement that we run these 190 thermostats (which in Nissan Manuals is called for ONLY in "FRIGID" climates) is purely based on theoretical bunk... there is a marginal aadvantage but in practical terms the headaches you encounter make it not worth the effort. Your oil gets to the required 180F with a 160 thermostat (the coldest recommended by Nissan---for 'tropical' climates, curious how it works like that, huh?) and will run hotter depending on load.
"So my question is if the conditions never cause the 13 psi cap to vent, how would putting a higher pressure cap on reduce spot boiling in the head? "
Hopefully above has told you why. To put it more succintly and without the long read: Higher Pressures in the block will RAISE THE BOILING POINT (and this decreases the tendency to boil...right?) The higher pressure cap IS NOT TO PREVENT VENTING it is there to raise the boiling point so it doesn't spot boil, and then insulate everything---read the grapeaperacing page!
I digress...time to go to lunch anyway.
-
Holy Necroposting Spooner Batman!
Depending on your routing of the hoses on the heater circuit, you could effectively block a very nicely designed thermal siphon effect not running them the way I suggest.
After shutdown, the routing I suggested has the hot turbo with cool water available at the pump inlet. The turbo heats that water hotter than engine heat, and it rises to the thermostat housing where it can discharge through the open thermostat into the radiator hose.
Going heater hose to heater hose will give you no place for the heated water to RISE to without restriction, and it will also have to fight hydrostatic head of the water in the block to return. Thermal siphons are very delicate balances, and don't tolerate much before they stop.
AFTER the shutdown is the most critical cooldown time, I'd err on the side of the system that gave me automatic circulation when the engine is OFF.
That Nissan used this same routing is no coincidence. Their engineers do sometimes know what they are doing!
-
1
-
-
I might be interested in it for my 1200cc VW engine...
Engine temperature tests and results
in Nissan L6 Forum
Posted
JeffP has Photos, but I'm thinking at this point 'not for public consumption' just yet...