Tony D
-
Posts
9963 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
74
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Tony D
-
-
My parents don't have that excuse...
I got it, but my little brother escaped. Lucky bastige!
-
That is the 'Black Book' I was referring to in an earlier post bout fuel system layout.
In conjunction with the Skyline Edition (Volume #2), it has a LOT of good relevant information about the cars, as well as the engines (L-Gata)...
Mine arrived via DHL two days ago---beat me home by a day!
-
Wow, you know Angus Young?
LOL
I think I'm burning all my old photos from mom and dad when I get them... I don't want any photos of me out there pre 1984... LOL
-
Hoke probably put it better than I did, if you grasp at the wrong masters direction, you can either waste a lot of time, or get it right. Likely, you will miss the boat. Getting out there, and working gives you a LOT better idea on which way things are flowing. You may come across something you recognize people missing, or overlooking, and say "hey, I can be the expert here" and then specialize further. But until you get out there you won't know where that is...
It's not like the movies where some guy comes up and says "Plastics" and then walks off and you spend the next 20 years going 'Oh man, he hit it right, I should've listened then!'
But back to what Hoke said... he mentioned something I was being diplomatic about as well. I was once told by someone 'how can anybody be a 'master' without ever working? Others have said they won't hire a masters of anything unless they got the diploma after they were 32-35. In some administrative occupations I've been told they will basically ignore a masters acquired before the age of 40!
I know a LOT of guys where I work that the company paid for an Executive MBA so they could go into upper management. But till then they paid and paid for classes and confrences, seminars, all sorts of knowledge. In an engineering profession, the company (if you have a decent one) will realize that any additional schooling you get, you will benefit from, as will the company. If you 'need' an administrative specialization like an MBA, you can get it at any time later. Till then, your hands-on skills will benefit the company more directly. Getting that first job and finding your niche is more important IMO than getting an upper level degree.
Mostly because right now you're unfocused. You still have no clue what the working world needs, or wants. It may change in 2-3 years and you may find going in a different direction is more to your liking. If you are in school when this happens, you're SOL, you won't know it happened, or won't see the signs that it's happening and be able to shift your coursework accordingly.
The one thing I've seen consistently over the past 20 years is that people doing the teaching rarely have a hand on the pulse of what the working world really wants. They know their cirricula, and they can teach that very well. But for trends in the working world they are sadly behind the times. Really the kids on internship programs are their most valuable feedback source for the information they DO have. I saw it in the military as well, and to this day I see guys with resumes written by base career counselors and usually take the time to talk with them after the interview: "Do you want to be the CEO of this company, or do you just want to do a job where you fix the exuipment, and go home at the end of the day and don't want to worry about getting phone calls in the middle of the night?"---in almost every case, these guys (upper level enlisted guys) will say they are SICK of upper level managerial responsibilities, and they just want to do a job and go home. I advise them to trash the resume the government people wrote them, and totally rework it. The government career counselors know what they THINK the working world wants to see, but they have no clue. Because they aren't out there.
And that is the key, IMO: Get out there. Do something. Once you're out there, you will be amazed what you will find that will interest you. And if you're decent, good work will FIND you. Additional education can always be had, and if you are someone desired, they will PAY YOU AND PAY FOR THE EDUCATION. And to me, that is probably the best way to go about it. Having student loans sucks, you got to pay them off. Do so, with a job. And from this point forward, you shouldn't have to pay for classes again.
Come to think of it, I just realized I have to call HR to get our company's scholarship for my son. He starts school next year, and I totally forgot our company has a 'gimmie' program for kids of employees who go into any engineering program. Hey, free is free, and anything I can get for him means less out of my pocket, right! LOL
-
I don't know about 'easily'... At 16psi, you are effectively putting 200% more pressure on the stock thrust bearing, and it will not last long.
Frankly, I wouldn't waste my time with anything more than 10 psi on the stock turbo. You can use it for more, but the efficency is degraded quite a bit. Anything over 13psi and you start getting into longevity issues because of the stock thrust bearing limitations.
-
Most companies will pay for a job-related Masters even today.
Why pi$$ away your money for another 3-4 years and go further in debt when you can go out, focus your life towards a specialty, then get someone ELSE to pay for it (and pay you decently at the same time!)
Usually they want a business masters anyway, and not a technically-oriented masters unless you are in a really specialised field or doing research & development.
-
Any rotating equipment experience? What are your feelings about overseas travel...
-
Why did the Auto Union dominate at that time?
Though using the term 'leaders'... According to the official Merc posters they didn't produce anything from 35 till the gullwing...
BMW wasn't squat then, they made bikes and airplane parts...
I hear they had a shortage of competent bicycle manufacturers in-country then, though. They relied heavily on compulsory voulntary donation importation from neighboring countries to fill that need. All das kliene kinder frolicing in the alps in lederhosen singing "valderi valdera, valderi, valdera-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha, et cetera..."
-
You're thinking of the earlier cars where the Auto Mount bolts into the unitbody of the car differently than the Std's.
By the 280Z model, this difference was gone (actually by 72 or 73...)
-
Don't knock VW...
You could buy one with stamps gathered at work, giving you the freedom to roam the autobahn...
Truly, "arbiet macht frei" at that time. At least that's what all the signs said...
-
Yeah, but only one subset of the two populations perpetually drives in the left lane with their left blinker on, and a finger continually on the fullbeam switch...
"EPBMWD"
LOL
-
Ok again boy genius,
Who said dumped it in "City of Houston" sewer system?
I might suggest you get off your high horse, you do not have enough facts, your assuming things were done that were not and seriously you are making yourself look goofy.
John
AND I QUOTE FROM YOUR OWN POST:
"On another note I used about 8 pounds of soda and 40 gallons of water for the solution. "
Hence my commentary of using 5# of HTH to knock it back to 7.
As I said, this is basic chemistry, not rocket science. You don't need to be a boy genius to figure this out.
Your sig says Houston, and you said "SEWER" ... 2+2 logically equals 4. If you are on your own septic like I am...then I don't have a public forum comment for what you did, it surpasses dumping it to a million gallon a day system by a factor that is mind boggling.
You're upset because I don't find what you did funny, or cute in the least.
I'm not on a high horse, I'm being intellectually honest about the situation. If you choose to delude yourself, that's fine.
It's something I would never have done, because it's wrong. If not by Houston Guidelines, if not by Federal Guidelines, by moral guidelines.
I don't see poisioning the planet as humorous. Not in the least. And it's something I can not support or condone.
5# of HTH and a broomstick and none of this conversation would have been needed. And regardless of your take on it, IMO, that course of action was the mature and responsible action to do before sewering it.
And you're arguing that point. This is a point I shall argue no further, to me it's simple black and white.
-
I don't own a Z Car with a stock weight flywheel, an can't imagine a situation short of the wife's Navara going rock climbing in compound low where I'd want a stock weight flywheel!
That goes for VW's and Corvairs I own. I've had lightened flywheels in everything since 79!
The following generalities are true:
having a stock 3.36 gear will make it harder to launch.
having a stock L24 with no torque will make it harder to launch than a larger engine.
having any turbo or L28 is childs play, even at 3.36...
If you can't hold a car on a hill with a clutch, likely you will have an issue launching the car with a lighter flywheel. I have no problem holding my car on a hill with a light flywheel...My son doesn't stall the car either, and that was his first learning experience. Matter of fact, he thinks the wife's Navara 'is really mushy' on the engagement compared to the light flywheel and clutch setup he learned on in the Z.
-
Let me make this perfectly clear: California is a big PITA to deal with bureaucratically. We had processes where we ran glycol.
If the glycol was in solution BELOW 50/50, we could directly sewer the wastes.
If the glycol to water concentration was ABOVE 50/50 (like 60 glycol, 40 water) we COULD NOT sewer it, it had to be disposed of in drums as toxic waste.
We COULD NOT dilute it to 50/50 and then sewer it. It was illegal. And they fined you. And they DID do checks.
Curiously after finding this out, all our glycol systems were administratively corrected after engineering review to allow the usage of 45/55 glycol water mixes.
And STUPIDLY enough, we were allowed to dilute the mix in the system (basically pumping in water by calculation) to reach this new leagally sewerable goal.
If we removed the mix, to dilute it and then reintroduce it to the system it would have been covered under it's original operating conditions, and would STILL have to be carted off to hazmat because it was originally more than 50/50 concentration.
Glycol is water miscible, you can dilute it at any time. We literally had thousands of gallons outflow a day (an hour...) and dropping in 55 gallon drums of glycol straight into our clarifier wouldn't have made a DENT in our allowable permit conditions. No way they could have ever told either.
But having some ethical and moral compass when it comes to dropping untreated chemicals in large doses down drains (or even better: storm drains) seems to be the better route and higher ground than cutsey rationalizations or excuses.
I have seen people in other states (small towns especially) who have dumped things down the drain, and later in the day or the next day had people knocking on the door with fines. When their little 'deposit' hit the sewerage facility, it set off all sorts of alarms. And then they went to sampling the relatively small sewer system to determine which points the substance was found, and from there, tracked it right back to the originating household.
Never dump a gallon of gas down the drain in East Tawas Michigan, "the sewer police" WILL find you! (And that was 1979---imagine technological advances in real time tracking nowadays and what they can do!)
Seriously, 5# of HTH and none of this discussion was necessary, and you would have sewered harmless saltwater. You're arguing in defense of what you did that it was the right thing to do? In light of how easy it would have been to simply dope the drum and then sewer it correctly, I don't see it that way. Doubtful the local sewer people would look kindly on it had they known, either!
Might check with city of Houston eGubbmint site regarding the people at Pretreatment: "It administers and enforces federal EPA regulations, as well as City of Houston Ordinance, Chapter 47, Article V., (Disposal of Industrial Wastes through City Sewer System)." I'm sure if there was no issue doing it, the guys at Pretreatment will tell you so: 'Go ahead, just dump it, we got enough volume, it won't make a difference!" Could be the case. Doubt if it is, though.
-
No, he does not have a point. There is a REASON he puts drain cleaner in quotations. It's an OBVIOUS ploy at trying to be smart, which isnt' the case here at all.
You want it plain and simple: you violated any one of a number of federal guidelines relating to unpermitted disposal of industrial wastes.
BTW, where did you find the 55 Gallon size liquid plumbr drum at Costco? There is a reason they limit it to maybe a gallon.
You are NOT on an industrial sewer, you are on a residential service. Look again at what is permissible in your sewer and likely you will find that you are in SERIOUS violation of not only FEDERAL but LOCAL guidelines as well.
It's not the matter of what you interpret the substance to be, the VOLUME of what you used was a violation, and that it was NOT used as a drain cleaner, but was by your own admission a byproduct of an industrial process (not wise on a public forum, BTW) means you knowingly violated statutes by disposing of industrial waste byproducts improperly in a residential sewer system.
You're talking to the guy who was responsible for continuous monitoring of a 20,000+ GPD Clarifier. A clarifier which got to the point of continuous monitoring becuase we exceeded our permitted copper content by such a ridiculous ammount it's laughable. The fee was literally .28 cents. The continuous monitoring to prove we exceeded our permitted conditions only that one time, on only that one substance, was closer to $150,000.
We could sewer caustic, and did drumloads at a time. Our permit conditions dictated the Ph of the sewered water---and like said previously between 6 and 9 there was no problem. A simple shot of HTH or other acid would have turned your caustic drum into legally sewerable saltwater.
Dumping 50 gallons of industrial waste byproduct (untreated) down a residential sewer doesn't remotely tirgger the common sense clause of 'somthing I probably shouldn't be doing?'
If not, then likely you think the Toxic Avenger is a wonderful movie with seanic tourisim spots like Camden and Newark...
You didn't dump 'drain cleaner'---bottom line is you dumped untreated industrial waste down your home sewer.
For the effort required to properly treat it being so simple and so little (sorry mods) it strikes my as incredibly stupid.
-
There is something eeriely sexual about that 'buck pole'... I have never seen them trussed up in that manner before. It leads me to wonder what kind of marinade you guys plan on using...
-
I have always ran the 160 F thermostats in my L-series engines and even my performance Small Blocks. I have no proof or theory to support that as the way to more power other than I remember reading Smokey Yunicks work from years gone by and recall he said that cold water and hot oil always made the most power, so I followed that advice and applied to my engines.
Same as what I read. Talking with the Electromotive guys, they said they overbuilt the cooling system, and paid a penalty for it (more weight for exchangers, etc) but they NEVER had a DNF that was cooling related. Their statement was 'you can always cover a cooler, but if you get hot during a race, you're screwed!'
Note the S20 head, LY head, and even the FIA L-Series heads had a totally different cooling passageway setup with a street driven setup. These were engines designed for high specific output and racing from the factory. The LY24 was over 300HP, the S20 in racing form was 340+, and the FIA heads... well the LY was quoted as around 5% more power, so I can only figure the FIA head was a response to that same level of power (300HP).
Cooling is a bear, and always overlooked. Nissan recognized the requirement for a different setup to keep these aluminum heads cool under continuous racing environments. There are improvements to the head that will allow considerable flow increases for cooling, they just need to be implemented, and in most cases people aren't willing to put that much into a head for a street car. For a LeMons car, all that cam is likely overkill. A stock low compression L28 was eating the field for 8 hours in Reno, and was competitive at Thunderhill the year before.
As for rate of heating, look around many pit areas and see if you find oil heating blankets on the oil sumps (or on wet sump pans)---hot oil is what you want, the rest of it will handle itself pretty quickly on the warmup lap. But that oil needs to be hot NOW when you start the engine! But we digress...
-
I love the 'wife rationalization' ofthe costs involved.
When you buy $50 at a junkyard, you got $50 worth of parts. That's what makes junkyards great, there is no marketing involved. a Momo Steering wheel that sells for $500 in the Sports Accessories Shop sells for $2 there in the JY.
And likely, that's about a 400% profit on what it cost to produce anyway.
Junkyards are the Ayn Rand Equivalent of Automotive Stores, everything trading for it's worth, and not what someone says it's worth!
The only way you got $3000 worth of parts for $50 is if you resold them for that much.
I don't know about anybody else, but I'm a hoarder. I don't sell what booty I privateer out of JY's.
-
My bet is any 'lag' you are experiencing from that turbo setup is a result of asking too much from the combination.
Lag is defined as the time from WOT to Full Boost Pessure.
In EVERY case I have investigated in the last 10 years, EVERY one of them had no discernable lag. Less than a fraction of a second. Many cases the time from WOT to Full Boost was less time than 0.2 of a second (datalogging).
EVERY case of people complaining it took 2-3 seconds for 'full boost to come on' were from driving the car in the wrong gear for the speed. If you are not driving the car correctly (that meaning you are keeping the rpms below boost threshold) the car WILL NOT make full boost until that rpm point where boost threshold is met.
Above that point, boost is instantaneous.
This is no different than driving a cammed car: you have to drive it right for it to perform right. Nobody floors a 3.2 at 700 rpms and expects it to rocket away from the stop sign. For some reason when they add a turbo, they expect it to!
I'm prone to agree the placement of the throttle plate will have far more effect on how a change in throttle position will 'feel' than ANY affect it will have on 'lag'.
If you take the compressor output under wastegate closed positions, and calculate that output in liters per second, then compare it with the actual volume of ALL your piping, including the intercooler you will see that it will not take seconds to fill up the piping. It won't even take fractions of seconds. Realistically, with higher flowing turbos, the LAST thing they need to worry about it 'lag' but insufficient piping volume as the pressure rises so fast from the high efficiency cut wheels today, that you can actually surge because the pressure rises so fast!
If you are talking about 'low end' differences, my bet is that you aren't driving the car properly for the turbo applied to it. Many people with larger turbos have found that improperly driving the car (WOT before boost threshold) gives them more modulation capability as they can feather the throttle as boost comes on...they refer to it as 'using the lag to their advantage' but that's not what they are doing. There is no lag. They are simply using the most inefficient part of the flow map to give them subpar power they can control. Most turbo cars are a case study in misapplications of wheels, gears, and in most cases turbos. I'm thinking where you have the T/B won't make any difference in practical terms of 'lag reduction'. It will, however have an impact on how the throttle movement is perceived by the occupants of the vehicle. The turbo will do what it will do, regardless of the placement of the component. And the difference in 'lag' you can find simply by comparing the plenum volume before and after the proposed modifications. If you aren't shortening the intercooler piping since you've already changed that configuration (and from the looks of it, you are just moving where the valve is in a relatively straight run of piping) he volume will remain the same regardless of where the valve is placed.
In any case, the volume difference, compared to L/S of turbo output will give you exactly the time change you can expect to experience with the change. Be ready to work to the right of the decimal point to some extent, most turbos make several (10's) of liters a second, and most piping is less than 10 liters meaning 1/3rd of a second under proper conditions is the 'worst case'.
Having a properly sized compressor bypass/blowoff valve will keep pressure in the actual piping somewhat higher than atmostpheric on drop throttle, so in effect you will only be partially pressurizing the piping, with the downstream side of the manifold being the only portion requiring true 'repressurization'. And this is what was being referred to as the perception of response. All you really will be doing is repressurizing the manifold.This will be mere fractions of a 1/10th of a second. Even at 4 Liters!
-
Standard was Phenolic for heat transfer stoppage, second most popular was the anti-vibration isolators which utilized plastic of some type, and O-Rings.
I wouldn't mount them to the manifold directly with just a gasket. But that's just me.
-
TonyD,
This my not be politically correct but you are cracking me up and I'm laughing out loud in the early AM. But how bout the turbo kit? It looks like it's not a bad price for a cheepy get going in the right direction deal?
To paraphrase Mr. Shep Proudfoot:
"Don't know Kit, Can't Vouch for it."
And I don't need Shep comin' lookin' fer me sayin'
I vouched fer somethin' he never vouched fer!
-
Can anyone tell me what the max amount of boost a stock turbo will run? I am planning on around 12-15psi
Anyone will tell you that natural surge point is determined by ambient conditions. Without those being specified, no accurate prediction can be made. Control point is normally 5% below natural surge point.
My experiments have shown me around 21-22 psi on a 60% RH day with 25C Ambient Temperature seems to be about the limit.
Anything else regarding running close to 16psi will be covered in the archives... such as eating up your thrust bearing, etc...
Anything about 10psi is really starting to get out of the design parameters of the stock turbo. You can go further, but it's efficiency drops dramatically. And it's not that great to begin with!
-
Define RRFPR, many people mistakenly refer to manifold referenced FPR's as 'rising rate' and say 1:1 RRFPR which is like "Freeze Plug" and "irregardless"---incorrect and outright misuse of the English Language.
A manifold referenced FPR is normally used in all EFI applications because it keeps the pressure drop across the injector pintile the same regardless of load.
Additionally, when under high manifold vacuum, it effectively 'decreases' the size of the injector by running less pressure through it, making for a longer pulsewidth at idle---easier to control larger injectors cleanly.
Rising Rate FPR's have ratios of manifold pressure to fuel pressure, like 1:2 or 1:3, whatever. This means that under boost, as you increase boost pressure 1psi, fuel pressure will increase 2 or 3 psi depending on the ratio chosen. At 20psi of boost, with a regular FPR, you will have static pressure of say 45psi and then the boost referenced correction, meaning you have 65psi in the rail.
With a 2:1 RRFPR, under the same situation, 45psi static, and 20psi of boost, you will have 45+ (20X2), or 45+40=85psi.
With a 3:1 RRFPR, under the same situation, 45psi static, and 20psi of boost, you will have 45+ (20X3), or 45+60=105psi.
As you can see, under boost, you will get considerably more fueling for the same pulsewidth at 105, or even 85psi, than you will from a standard FPR running 65psi. The percentages are easy enough to figure out. This allows you to run the N/A fueling map with it's set Millisecond pulsewidths, and get more fuel to the engine.
On an N/A engine, the RRFPR would be a total waste of money outside the ability to adjust the fuel pressure.
Now, that being said, there IS about a 7psi differential between idle and WOT. Meaning fuel pressure could be technically arranged to be slightly higher than idle pressure, or normal static/WOT pressure using a RRFPR, but it would take specific calibration steps to have it come into play. In this case you would use the RRFPR with the manifold vacuum attached and the engine running at idle to set what normally would be 'static' fuel pressure around 45psi (instead of the normal 26)
This would result in you gaining 14psi over base (-7 to -11 psia manifold pressure at idle, closer to 15psia at WOT so 4 to 8psia differential, using the same multiplication ratios giving you an 8/12 to 16/24psi rise in fuel pressure at WOT)
It's not normally used on N/A's it's easier to play with the thermal sensors on the car and get more fuel.
-
Lets just say too,too fast, past a car from 3rd to 4th at full boost.
In my car with a 3.70 gearset, that's closer to 85-90mph than 60 anything
Efficeincy of stock turbo
in Turbo / Supercharger
Posted
It's dependent on area. The original design was suitable for OEM levels of durability (say 70-100K miles) at stock boost levels. But they aren't 'overdesigned' like most other parts of the engine.
When you run 10psi, as opposed to the stock 5psi you double the load on the bearing. At 15psi, you've doubled that again. Exponential?
One of the biggest things people do to increase longevity at higher boost levels is go to a "360 Bearing" meaning the whole face has a thrust face on it, 360 degrees. Like VW Cam Gears (only one half of the split bearing had a thrust collar on it), for performance loading, putting more bearing there lets it live longer. Halving the loads.
Basically, the loading at 10psi on a full thrust bearing would be the same loading of a stock turbo at stock 5psi of boost because the increased bearing surface.