Tony D

Warning: Do not please install when under water as shocking result get by your death. Warning: Using the tool which is improper to the suitability of task may result of your death most dishonorably. Warning: Eating this package not most deliciously, and may cause internal explosion of dire consequence. Warning: Shooting of the flames into the reservoir which has not been evacuated can make big explosion, wear proper goggles and suit. Not that I've spent too much time in Japan or Asia, but I'm sure the warnings would be translated somewhere along those lines, as I have seen them before. Too recently to admit, as well! If you have a SCAN, e-mail it to me, or PM me and I will take it into the engineers where I'm working this week... there is a younger one who has an MX5, and a Scion which are all accessorized and who may be able to give me something you can use! He is already happy I linked him to the SoCal JCCS website, and is amazed I drive an "Old Famous Japanese Car, Fairlady Zetto!" He about freaked when he saw my MSA 2009 T-Shirt at the Airport. WE have been getting along well, he and I. The older engineer... well... Until he gets half a dozen beers in him it is...um...'difficult' to get him friendly towards the Gaijin...

Yes, it was a competitor in the heyday of Muscular Cars that a Cramiro and Moustung would do battle on the field of honor for their respective villages. Many times they went to the dyno simply to get 'motor insanity sheets' to show how worthy a competitor they could be should they ever sully their honor by actually competing in public. (Motor Insanity Sheets is rearing it's head because I have spent the last two weeks working with the guy that sent me that request...and his Engrish in person is no better than the translation program he used to come up with that one!)

Actually, that's not true at all, several members have access to CFD modeling, and have posted results of it. Which is why I mentioned it, this should be a good way of solving the problem... I know people want to argue about what is 'best', but from the beginning I have simply asked 'why'? You have given a theory, it's possible that's it. I have also given several rationalizations as to why a larger body would be used. But the predominant 'bigger is better' paradigm just seems like so much B.S. for most of the vehicles out there. Like I said before, this seems like the EFI equivalent of putting an 1100 Holley Dominator from your 426 Hemi Dragster on your 318 Dodge Dart and smiling broadly. Some of Phils comments seem to support that, as well. Now, let me restate it again in case anybody has missed it: I am building a Bonneville Engine which will be at WOT for extended periods and not have to worry about Modulation Issues. If someone can give me a good reason to use a big single as opposed to triple ITB's on the manifold, it would make plumbing the setup much easier. Everybody is getting caught up in wanting to argue this side of the point or the other, when all I'm doing is asking for concrete data which may support which way I should go on a highly stressed engine in those operations. You know, engineering a solution, instead of guessing, or accessorizing. My Bonneville Car is not a place for advertisements or accessorizing, it's for functional things to do one thing: break a record. Looks are nice, but from my personal experience a lot of things that are touted as 'bigger and better' rarely are, and you functionally get far more payback performancewise from things you never thought would work as well as they did. I can bet there are people on the street running a cam with more lift and more duration than our current record-setting Bonneville N/A engine. Think about that for a second... Likely what we will end up having to do is (like everything else) build BOTH setups at great cost, and then do the dyno testing ourselves. (The comment Spork Made has me interested...that 'larger than normal runners...may end up buying a similar manifold, and then testing various bodies on it.) Now, that being said, if I put up a couple grand in Dyno Time and parts procurement costs (well, the triples setup was $2K+ and we haven't made the MonZter Plenum Knock-Off yet...) believe me I will likely not be tooo forthcoming with the information. I might get a bit more arrogant, and THEN start to argue based on my personal testing... but to that point I'm just asking for an engineering analysis. I think the CFD owners got more things to do than run simulations on various throttle body sizes... but it sure would be nice if one of them runs across this thread and offers to 'put the argument to rest' like what happened on the plenum thread MonZter did! Yes, and apologies to Phil for jackiong his thread...

I don't know that the 4" exhaust is 'overkill' on a car running a GT35R at it's horsepower limits. It was not uncommon in Japan to see 125mm piping on turbo cars as a matter of course. Today they still sell 104mm piping for S30 Turbo setups. Testing on JeffP's car says that his 3" exhaust may well start to be a sticking point on horsepower development from this point forward. The guys at E-Motive said 4" minimum...

Flowing down a runner with 1590 sq mm of cross sectional area. Following my line of though now, are we? My point exactly... Though rate-of-change in the runner since the TB is closer to the intake valve is more abrupt. In this case a 'larger' plate with the plenum to act as a buffer and soften throttle response may make a high horsepower car easier to modulate. You are talking about flow of one cylinder through the big plate, but the runner is only so big. And if you have a plenum that is pressurized opening the six 1590 sq cm TB's will have pressurized air coming in quickly. A larger body may be required to repressurize a plenum which has been evacuated to 'negative' pressure on a drop-throttle event. Which points me towards drag racing application. Again, this is not a 'we use a small body' argument---some people may be justifying if for whatever reason, but I'd like a reason why it's necessary. I don't know that it is, and rational reviewing of 1000 hp cars makes me question why? I'm not on a large-body 'crusade' or anything of the sort, I want to know what it does, why the choice was made. As a 'crusade' about form of 'mis-engineering'...well...I mean, I wasn't aware this had turned into a ricer bling site where you put a fart can on the back of the car purely for appearances, along with a lot of stickers and learning some jargon to throw around there. I thought this site was more, about quantifying the performance, about learning the whys and not just another Honda trick-out parts site. If there is a functionally rationalized reason for a given part being on the car, then it's not 'mis-engineered'---if there is no functional purpose for a given part being on a given car, it simply isn't engineered at all! Mis-Engineered implys that someone did something because of a mistake. That is a far cry from someone saying 'it looks badarsed and so I put it on there'---that's not engineering, that's accessorizing. Please read where I posted 'because I can' is all the justification I fell anybody needs to give for anything on their car. There is nothing wrong with 'accessorizing' a vehicle as you see fit. Just don't call it "Engineered to be Feared"! It's a whole different dogma when you get into the 'Accessorized to be Feared' mindset.

Same as the Inpula, they were made by Chebroet in the domarstic merkat. You know? "Caproce/Inpula" --- The State Police back home ran them in the 70's... They have been supplanted mostly by Ferd Clown Victorius as the preferred domestic RWD platform for keeping the masses in line.

Schneider has HEX???? I was told by the Schneider guys they use CWC blanks...

YOU CUT WIRES? DEFILER!!!

As MonZster's little experimentation in CFD showed us, big for transmission seems to be good, but remembering the HKS Plenum, it didn't seemed too hindered by the 'small' holes to transfer the air to the plenum. The nexking points seemed to be more in the delivery piping being too small, rather than the entrances to the plenum being too small. Really, the last thing you want in a plenum is velocity, you want diffused pressure equally applied down all runners. Which is why I'm thinking about that smaller T/B, through the body it is fast (possible pressure drop) but afterwards it can diffuse out and slow down. That action builds even pressure in a plenum. Hey, who had that CFD? That should give us a good idea! (Back to Expense Reports)

Man, a guy can't get aways wit nuttin' dese days wit all da coppers 'round watchin' all the time... I poop freely, like I write...like a sheep that got into the peach orchard.

I bought a 1969 Beetle one time which had nothing but roof flashing, fiberglass, bondo, and roofing tar for heater channels. How the thing did not collapse under it's own weight is beyond me. The 'repair' extended to the running board, which was slathered in the stuff as well from the underside. From all appearances, it looked like that 80 year old guy just didn't want rust to be a problem (He told us as much, too!) Hey, he was 80, he must know his stuff, right? No, it just means he's had the entire developmental time of the automobile to perfect his sales lies and learn underhanded tricks most others have forgotten! Be advised in 40 years or so, if you see some guy with a bunch of Datsuns 'selling out of the hobby' BEWARE, I got som PAYBACK on a whippersnapper or two who knows it all... Just to keep the cycle perpetuated!

I have always been partial to the GM 3.8 engine. I, for the life of me, couldn't figure out how GM could get that engine so right, yet Ford put such a literal slug of a 3.8 engine in the Mustang. I would often say: "That Mustang would be a great little car if they would put GM's 3.8 Supercharged GEN3 engine in it!" It wasn't a Ford/Chevy Jibe---it's just that at the time the engine in the Mustang blew so badly it wasn't funny. I mean, the 350Z had more power. Guys would say 'apples and oranges'---but it's a Mustang for gawd's sake! Just because you didn't want a V8 in there doesn't mean you don't care about performance! My bud was upset he couldn't trade his Hemi Dodge Truck in for the Hemi Challenger during the recent gubbmint madness. The V6 Challenger apparently would have qualified, but he said 'why?' That GM 3.8 would pull low 30's for mpg in the Bonneville SSE I had for a while. Amazing. Such a sweet engine. And if you kept out of the Supercharger you weren't paying the gas penalty (12mpg...) So versatile, too! Ford should have bought those for their Mustang till they pulled their head out and started making decent power with their V6. What they had in the past was sickening. Did I mention I hated prior Mustangs with V6's because they had a soggy mill with no power?

WOAH THERE! This is not a 'best' discussion. Nobody has told me an answer to the question I posed, other than cosmetics or theoretical nebulosity. I stated outright I did not know just that it seems to me if E-Motive got 1000hp out of that engine, then I really wonder WHY that huge TB is there. Do you really need it. I have already stated that if there is someone who wants it there, that's fine by me. But if someone is stating factually, or implying that it in somehow is better suited than a smaller TB---I would like to know why. Best is determined by the use of the machine, and it's application. As I stated, maybe this is a Drag Race Part, and in that realm it is properly aplplied. Similarly, when its applied (say like an 1100 Holley Dominator) onto a roadrace or street application of half the horsepower....is it helping or harming that application? Maybe Phil is DOING something. If he's up on the dyno, it would seem it would be easy enough with that intake to prefab several adapter plates and put a Q45, 75mm, 70mm, 65mm, 60mm, 55mm, and 50mm TB on there with a dedicated intercooler return pipe to do back-to-back comparos for which setup INDEED would be "Best for Phil"---and damned interesting to boot. If I had the time, I'd swing by the dyno and assist, hell, even chip in some money for the Dyno Time such is my interest in this particular subject. Understand, I have to build an engine to run at Bonneville... Anything that will get me significant WOT HP will be of interest to me. It will be a highly purpose-built motor, so I'm not worried about Tip-In or that kind of modulation crap. What I need I can make out of a nautilis linkage, no problem. But if I find I make significantly more torque which will allow me to accelerate through the gears quicker, and assist me when pulling wider spreads...all by using something smaller than a Q45 body, or something Humongo, then I have to defer to the functional demands of the setup. I'm asking why, and thusfar there really hasn't been 'I tried this on the dyno and found' kind of an answer, nor has any real convincing evidence been proffered as to why 'bigger is better' after a given diameter or horsepower level. As it is, I will likely have to build the intake...oh waitaminit, we're not using a single air door... or will we? That all remains to be determined! Remember, the GT-R comes with triple style butterflies, and these guys change to a big single... There's no way the 6 opened 45mm butterflies are anywhere near the cross sectional area of the single. At least not by looking at it. Most of these 'big body' RB plenums are actually a step down in size from the flow potential of the existing butterflies. Which reinforces my question 'why are these guys downsizing the throttle area'?

If you could see the valvetrain on the subject of that You Tube Post... Well, let's just say, it's not what most people expect. The prep work in this sticky is far more than what we did on that one... And we have had it 'higher' than the shift point during dyno testing to see the extent of the curve and try to find a 'float point' on the valves. We were...uh....'unsuccessful' in that float-point attempt. That's all I'm gonna say about it. It tempers my comments about nits and nats on this subject!

You read all the stickies, but you didn't say what remedies you have tried, or if you have a shielded wire for the TPS, or wether it's running near the coil, etc etc etc... If you see it with the ignition on, and not off, something is too close to where it shouldn't be, or you don't have a good shield on the tps signal line, or.... The question really is what have you done already to fix it? I changed plug wires, and it went away, and my TB is REALLY close to the coil! One I put shielded wire in there, and got good wires, I ceased seeing the spikes.

Restrictors go before the turbo. The VG30DETT made 1100HP without the IMSA required 26mm restrictors on the turbo inlets. They had a bigger T/B, but as far as I know E-Motive was not running in a restrictor plate series at the time... I never said the E-Motive car had a 60mm TB, I simply stated it was sure smaller that the 90 mm unit being used. I could scale a photo or someting to figure it out. I would suspect something along the size of their turbo piping was used, if not slightly larger for a "WOT No Restriction" flow scenario. If there is a restrictor before the turbo, maybe there is some logic for it (going appreciably larger than normally seen)? I recall the #75 IMSA car had a decent sized body (single). But the driver of the car said the car was more driveable with the restrictors as it gave them more useable torque down low than the unrestricted engine(Steve Millen). For the time they were doing the development on the E-Motive car, they went though a lot of development---they may have taken an idea, or two... but I believe they were independent enough to let dyno results rule the decisions they made and not 'go with the flow'... They DID run twin turbos in 81, and ditched that idea pretty quickly (especially after the fire...) Come to think of it, outside Drag Racing... which nobody specifically stated was the purpose of the build, I don't know that a lot of 'roadrace' cars have humongo TB's... Decent sized, maybe...but not absolutely huge. I will have to do some investigation there, that sounds like an interesting study to do. I know Drag Cars have big stuff, and it may indeed be someone simply misapplying the technology because it 'looks cool' and like Millen Mentioned makes a peak power number, but at the expense of power under the curve. I can see in practical terms up to probably 75mm. That would be the largest practicable pipe you would use for about any horsepower level in these engines. But 90? That's what 3.5" or something like that? Bulges "up" in size will also affect flow without the proper taper lead and exit...

Wow.... it only took them... what? 40 years?

"It is not appropriate to store trout in your dungarees."

I think that was filmed at the Rock Palast in Germany... I have that VCD/DVD... Couldn't get to the concerts then...Missed the Pontiac Silverdome incident... Gotta Support your Michigan Adopted Homeboys!

I took my kid to see Ian Anderson. I think it damaged him... When he went to see Kansas and BOC it didn't do any better! When he showed up one day with a 'GWAR' T-Shirt on I busted out laughing and said THOSE guys are STILL around? After that comment, he started raiding my CD Stack, and found out there was music in there. Then again, he took Frank Zappa's "Yellow Shark" into Music Appreciation Day in his 7th Grade Music Class. THe instructor confiscated it, ripped it, then waited for me to pick him up at school to thank me for letting him bring it in! When you see your son standing by the curb with the Music Teacher and a CD in his hand...its "Oh MAN! He took George Clinton in, and not that orchestral Zappa!" LOL Contractors at the house were shocked when he was 6 and knew 'Atomic Dog'... Am I a bad parent? LOL

I don't know what JeffP put on his car, or what it cost, but the cost per amp is comparable...and it's BIG. There is no substitute for size in a generator.

Look for a Service Bodied Work Truck. My acquaintenace here bought a 2002 City of Los Angeles DWP 3500 Chevy for $1000 from an auction reseller. Guy bought it at auction for $300. Has put thousands of miles on it. Not the pretty truck, not a lot of comfort options, but it's got a SERVICE BED on it that you can literally load every tool you own into it and STILL tow your car on a trailer! He gets 15 unladen, but he also resembles Fred Sanford in both physical appearance and driving habits... I'd opt for a 99 or similar vintage F350 service body truck. I worked out of one for a while (3 years, 100K miles) and it towed fully laden fine. With the new programmers out there, you really want OBD2 on the car, and not the old TBI OBD 1 Systems like I have in my 90 Dually. Then again, I got my Dually for $1500. What astounds me is I put 5000 miles on it this past year, and officially I've only been in the office 21 days this year! When I'm home, the dually is working more than I ever thought! I thought I'd use MAYBE 2500 miles. I think if you get a DECENT truck, you will use it FAR morethan you expect. You don't think of it now, because you don't have one. When you have one, the ease of using it to make work easier, moving crap (YOUR OWN CRAP, not other peoples! Make that CLEAR to your 'friends'!) the list is really endless. For me, the Dually gets maybe 10 driving the way I do... And my old "1 ton" single wheel would get 15-17 (diesel)... But I can take in ONE load what would take me 2 trips in the stnadard bed single tire version. (4000# of Railroad Ties, for instance, or a 17X36 Cincinnatti Milacron Engine Lathe...) Don't need it often, but when you do, there is no substitute! Get over the mileage issues. I had that F350 at 100K in 2002 when I left it, that truck is STILL in service now, 10 years later, and racking up the same kind of mileage I did. I figure it's got 300K+ on it by now! For occasional work, your mileage fears are WAY unfounded!

I'm on the other end, I'm rather disapointed that the aftermarket has pretty much not moved at all from where it was 25 years ago when the L-Engine went out of production. The power hasn't changed... There really are very few ideas for maximizing horsepower. Many talk of this or that as a 'new' innovation, but really there are only so many ways to skin a cat... Really, nothing startling has happened to make power levels rise above where they were in 1984 for an aftermarket engine setup. I guess I'm just a pessimist. As for the OEM's... argh. IMO they are forced to go in the wrong direction, and being in Japan right now I see a whole plethora of Kei Cars I'd buy and drive back home....if I was allowed! I got to stop now...I'll get into trouble, as I'm in a foul mood to begin with anyway!

Normally the filters will bulge, or the base gaskets blow out if the oil pressure is that high. WELL before a GOOD oil pressure sending unit will pop. My bet is latent defect in the sending unit, given the oil filter doesn't looke bulged, and it's base gasket is in tact. I have had people blow that oil filter base gasket while driving down the freeway, you would be amazed how much oil can coat underneath the car while going 70mph before dripping or hazing the guy behind you! Luckily in that case, he saw oil pressure flickering and smelled something, so he declutched and shut down with about 20CC's short of catastrophic engine failure. We put a new filter on at the roadside, and put 5 quarts in his sump to get it to the 'operation' level (above 'add', not into 'full').... He made a gasket retaining ring out of aluminum to prevent that from happening in the future, so the base gasket now has something radially to seal against as well, like a real O-Ring housing. The only way that one blows is if the filter splits! (And I've seen that happen on VW's with Aluminum Spin-On Filters---always get a STEEL housing!)

"My L18 pulled over 8k regularly, using mostly factory parts in the valve train (springs excluded)." You would be shocked to know what the valvetrain looks like in this car (and yes, I DO have photos...somewhere!):