Tony D

So this is the prompting of the bright-green 'forum rules' in the banner up top... and the 'you need to click and accept' at the bottom of the page... Was it a test, all I could think of was 'Oh, looks like they changed classifieds to being here for a while...' did I pass? For a second, I thought I was being 'reminded' of the rules because of some malfesance! Perish the thought...

I can see these polished up really nicely and staying shiny under the car for years afterwards... Mmmmmmm, Shiny!

There is only one tank for a 75 EFI car. If you had a 75 260Z tank, it would have a 5/16" (8mm) feed line, and not the 12mm line of the EFI tank. Tanks didn't change for the US Market till around 6/76 when they started using the space saver spare and a much larger tank. It is quite different, I don't think it would fit the earlier chassis at all... Maybe you just didn't get everything situated on the mounts up top properly?

Age has very little to do with engineering principles or the construction of a 30 year old vehicle. If it was true in '05, it's likely still true today, especially physical placement of compoentry! LOL

Yep, when you datalog your MS, watch your battery voltage, that is a big jump running and not...the charging system may be marginal, and that can cause delivery problems if the pump is not getting sufficent voltage under highest load conditions. I ran a #8 line and used the stock relay to control switching of the power to the pump at the back. It gave me a large enough line for all sorts of power accessories at the back of the car from a common hot stud terminal...not that anything but the pump is back there right now...but it's well supplied off a #8 line from the battery, and then a short run of #10 from the terminal, to the relay, to the pump and then a large ground that is run similarly. It is not chassis grounded, there is a companion #8 wire (black) that goes along the frame rails front to back paired with the hot wire. What can I say? I'm paranoid about the drop. Plus, I kept thinking 'man, if I'd put my battery back here all this wouldn't be an issue...while I'm at all this, I should probably relocate it... About that time the wife yelled 'STOP THAT WHILE YOU'RE AT IT STUFF'... apparently my thoughts were also freely running out my mouth in stream of conciousness and she heard me. She knows what 'while I'm at it means'---two weeks over christmas vacation with no living room floor because I didn't like the floor crossbracing on the 4X4 section I was supposed to splice in and repair in a day...

I didn't see much discussion just acerbic commentary. When the aftermarket heads make the 850 HP at 26psi that the good old L-Series N42 Head did waaaay back in 1983...maybe I'll take notice. But till then, it's just sounding like beating one's own chest over trodden territory. Most of this is done because we can... making a negative statement like you're wasting your time is not a discussion, it's chucking stones. Especially when we can see here clearly the resultant response. Jab, jab, no discussion. I think the O.P. handled his last thread in the negative exactly the right way: I'm not picking your decisions apart, don't do the same to mine, thanyouverymuch! Which is a fair assessment of what was happening. The merits of the project were not discussed, the decision was put into question, and that goes along the lines of 'What is BEST'... Asking for rationale or something else is one thing, chucking a negative attitude into the mix on an otherwise upward beat post is something altogether different and not needed. I didn't see any 'constructive' criticisim, just a terrible misreading of post context, and total disregard for the O.P. originally stated intentions for the build. The decision to do the build in the way it was done was basically called ''not the best''... Like the forum rules say: "There is no best" coming in with factual commentary after starting on a premise totally fabricated out of cloth is just bad form, regardless of what the 'facts' may be. I took it for what the O.P. stated he wanted to do: a study of the intake to meet his set criteria. I simply came in to give some rationalised numbers so there would be a clear understanding of what could be expected, and where to expend efforts in the future. Nowhere did I come in with an intimation that it was a waste of time. Frankly any of this work is a waste of time and frivolous, there are much better things we ALL could be doing for humanity with the money, time, and effort. That all being said screw the rest of the world, I'm going to work on WHAT I WANT TO WORK ON: My Z Car! The manifold looks like it's progressing nicely, and I for one would be interested in the results being quantified. For ANY of the manifolds being chucked out as superior, inferior, or a waste of time. NUMBERS not opinion sway my judgement when someone undertakes a project. And for that, the best course of action is help along the way and see what comes out at the end of it. That, I would see as a positive way to approach this build as an observer (and I think a couple of people have!)

No rollerskates, just do like Frank280ZX did and put a BMW M5 V-8 in the chassis along with the six speed manual and BMW Diffy! (Ad can help with that as well...he he he) Did he supply your chassis as well? Or did you send your existing chassis to him for the cage work? We DEFINATELY need photos of clutch explosions! PHO-TO! PHO-TO! PHO-TO! (Natives are restless, now it's off to Hooter's Shanghai for Hootie Hour. I will return and post inebriated later this evening! LOL)

ONE nozzle stuck in the down position will drop my 260 from 22-26 to 11-15 mpg. Similar for both nozzles stuck just partially down. Fully down... Geee, I wonder what two fully down would do? Bables slipped of their holders, frozen down by years of sludge and disrepair, pulling the lever only moves the cables now, instead of the nozzles which a stuck, frozen, bending the light metal levers attaching them to the bellcranks of the lever actuating wires... "None are as blind as those who won't see..."

No, I was just around in 'the bad old days' of HEI. Apparently not much has changed until they went to the new crankfire systems.

I'd go get a mechanical gauge, stick it in a 't' where the stock sensor goes, and VERIFY the pressure reading. 5-10 psi at idle, and around 10 psi per 1000 rpms is considered normal. The FSM has a spec of something like 45psi by 3000rpms or something like that, and in many cases they are well up around 90+psi at 6K... If it's 5-10 at idle, and 45 at 3K, I'd vote for the sensor going kaput. They do it oftener and oftener as these cars age.

Doesn't the thermostat control the temperature that the CHT is sensing? I think that would classify it as something that can affect how the engine runs. It's an input variable. My vote is for a loose CHT or Water Temperature Sensor. Knock that thing loose or have it vibrate off running along and it does exactly what he's experiencing. I died at the Willow Springs Big Track when mine vibrated off after the holder broked... A coupla quick checks following FSM guidelines will tell all on the sensors, etc...

OH! The delicious Irony of it all... I boarded ANA / China Air 6682 from Nagoya to Shanghai Pudong this morning and what do I see on the IN FLIGHT MOVIE SELECTION FOR COACH?!?!?!?! I find it deliciously ironic that it was subtitled in Chinese and Japanese and played in English on the flight. My second-watching chortles were somewhat stifled when I started to realize they probably WERE accurately translating some of those one-liners...and nobody else seemed amused... And then to top it all off, we landed ahead of schedule but about 20 minutes... Only to be boarded by Infectious Disease/Quarantine Workers who held us on the plane more than an hour after someone in the back of the plane apparently had a temperature, and you can't afford to have case 5 out of 1,000,000,000+ people with the Pig Flu. From Mars Attacks spontaneous utterance: "Ya don't eat pork?"

My understanding is the Mistubishi Starions (turbo) of similar vintage have a beefier 4N than the standard Maxima Trannies (similar mods as done to Nissan 3N's for turbo service: more clutches, different line pressures, governor settings and valving, etc). Bernard may be speaking of picking the 4Planet setup from later 4N's on other Nissan Models. The Starion stuff just has more clutches as far as I know. Change the bellhousing and maybe a U-Joint on the propshaft, and it's more durable than the N/A Maxima Setup at least. Gotta love governmental guidance in Automotive Supply: "You will buy your autoboxes from this supplier, because it's our money supporting their consolidation"---and JATCO (Japan Automatic Transmission Company) was born! So Mitsu and Nissan had the same basic tranny module for years. Hell, so did Toyota, but they kept 2 speeds (Toyoglide) for waaay too long. INTO THE 70's!

Why when the stock BOV in #4 intake runer is very efficient as long as you aren't running some ungodly boost number, or have added a lot of volume to the delivery system (like an I/C and all the piping)? Plug the Emergency Relief Valve at the rear of the manifold with a pipe plug. As long as you are in the 10-12 psi range, you should be fine with the stock turbo and J-Pipe using the Nissan BOV in the intake runner. No complex piping to run to the rubber hose between the AFM and throttle body, and you keep the added benefit of vacuum control for less oil suckdown on drop-throttle situations. This 'has all been covered before'...

An "0" sized drill bit or reamer would move the pintile hole to the large sizes, I think. They make drills especially for making pockets. But many o-ring - o-ring injectors fit the holes without doing anything. With 35psi at idle, 50 sounds low for 15psi, if you have 45psi 'on throttle' and that means "0" manifold vacuum, then you most definately are low on pressure. Best way to know what you should have is to take a 'static' fuel pressure test. Remove the sensing line from the FPR and see where your fuel pressure runs at---you can rev the engine slightly to keep it running if it goes way rich, it won't change with the line disconnected. If you can initiate the fuel pump without starting the car, that is the pressure you can refer to as 'Static'... For an EFI car, the pressure at the injectors must rise equivalent to boost. So at 45psi Static Fuel Pressure you go to 10psi boost you have 55psi fuel pressure, at 15 boost 60 fuel pressure, etc... What's the world coming to? Web cam to monitor fuel pressure. I've officially become a Dinosaur with my long fuel hose and big-numbered Fuel Pressure Test Gague Duct Taped to the windshield for speed runs. I'll probably bet you not only are running out of injector, you're out of pump as well. Take a look through the search on the Porsche 944 Turbo Pump, it should be available locally though a Bosch Vendor through the Bosch P/N. External pump, BTW. If you need an In-Tank pump, the Z32 pump works well, but it may have to be adapted. But you're right, 16-17AFR is 'lean' as in way to little fuel. Does it start dropping gradually, and linearly with the RPM rise as you have your foot in it at full boost?

Only on an intercooled car Bo. In a non-intercooled car, the argument can be made for pre-turbo injection as a more efficient model as change of state at point of compression increases adibiatic efficiency of the compressor, whereas injecting it afterwards only gives you state change, with no resultant increase in compression efficiency. I'm so happy my non-disclosure agreement with Cosworth has expired, I can say this happily, and with a clear concience: If injecting methanol after the turbo wasn't any more efficient, CART teams wouldn't be using Counterflow Methanol Injection into the inlet of the turbines on the CART cars... I'm only parroting the engineers at Cosworth on their explanation to me on why the nozzles were in front of the turbine instead of elsewhere... The cooling effect is one plus. But the compressor efficiency effect is one that goes unnoticed! Most of you guys know that the turbocompressor is a slave to it's thermodynamics. Cool that compression down and those "74%" islands on the map get fatter and fatter... And some other islands may well appear. And when those islands get bigger, that surge line moves left on the graph even further...

I spent many an hour secreted away in the B36 on static display at Chanute AFB while attending technical training there. That plane was just TOO COOL not to break into and check out. Alas, it's no longer there (had an Alley-Oop for nose art) when I last returned. I wonder where it went. It would be a shame if it got wasted... I hope some municipality of museum took it in, it was just neat overall. Suprisingly BIG... All I have is photos of the nose from outside. Having flashes go off after dark was a way to get the SP's on your tail and a 'special gift from the government'....

75 tank is less work, and works out of the box...

There are two versions of that manifold, one for L20E and one for L28E, the head side is larger for the L28, and it takes the Throttle Body pictured on the right, I believe. One has a primary the size of an American Dime, the other about the size of an American Nickel, with corresponding secondary throttle plate differences as well. The primary will run you to about 3500rpms and there is a definate 'point' in the throttle pedal play where you end up resting your foot (like GM did on the Suburbans with a big block)---keeps you on the primary even at high-speed cruise (in my 260, 3500 is citation speed in 5th gear!) with what feels like phenomenal throttle response when that secondary kicks in and travels faster in the last 1/4 pedal than the little plate did in the first 3/4 of travel! BuuuuWAAAAH! I digress... LOL

Wingquist, contact Adrian at VA Motorsports Engineering in Holland. (Posts here as Z-Spec I think...) He uses the AP parts on his own flywheel... a photo exists at this page: http://www.va-motorsport.com/index.php?page=7A He also races FIA with some Shelbys, and has prepped several Z's as you will see from the link. Good Luck!

That would work, but be extremely complex. The issue is the 'knifing' of the flow through each of the respective cylinders as it comes forward. Coming forward is the problem. If all the water for the head exits out above each combustion chamber, then they ALL can go to a common thermostat housing because the flow will be greatly equalized. Even Nissan Recognised this EARLY in L-Head development. The FIA heads DO NOT run thermostats like we have, they have three LARGE water passages and a separate manifold with the thermostat in the end of it. Much like the four cylinder L-Heads have going to heat the manifold... The LY is similar, with a separate water manifold taking water off much higher into a separate manifold and to the radiator throug a thermostat mounted separately. Note the OS Gikken Head has the same (almost looks identical to the LY) water manifold off the intake side of the head with the thermostat in the end of it. And all the above were specifically designated for HIGH OUTPUT N/A USAGE in endurance racing. Nissan knew there was an 'oops' when pushing the envelope for the L-Engine even in N/A trim. But few people run their cars like those racers, so it usually doesn't show as an issue. Large Horsepower Turbo Engines of the 80's had similar setups, the photos are out there...

Hey, I clicked that link, and it said it was an invalid link...... Maybe that's a good thing, eh? LOL

I'm with the crowd here for more than one reason: Stock L28ET injectors are larger, and even THEY start to run lean at stock fuel pressures above 10psi and higher rpms. Add that intercooler and go above 12psi without added fuel pressure (and a pump capable to move it!) Even with elevated base fuel pressure of 50psi instead of the 36-40, you aren't making up for it. What you got is in essence a 4.8 L engine there, and most Mustangs are running 18 to 24# injectors... and that's with 8 cylinders, you got 2 less! that means a minimum of a 240, but more realistically a 320cc injector is the MINIMUM flow you want to have for that setup. Second, you neglect to mention which FUEL PUMP you're using. The stock internal bypass lifts around 60 psi... So you start at 50psi, add 15psi of boost for 65psi... The stock pump bypasses around 60psi... 65>60, you are running LESS fuel through the injector as a function of decreased delta across the orifice from 60psi on up. At lower RPMS you may not notice it, but likley 4500 is where you should use the most fuel, and it's only because of gawds grace you haven't blown anything running to 7K (though you DO pull fuel after torque peak, which is probably what is saving you!) BTW, you don't define what 'Lean' really is, nor your quantification stnadard. If you are running 13.8 instead of 12 like you wanted, your small injectors are simply pulling the fuel you should have been pulling anyway! You're just lucky, eh? The sizing is really dependent on your flow through the engine. JeffP is making like 465hp at that boost level. That requires a different injector size than someone running a stock engine and just cramming boost to it (likely a 450 would do then, instead of a 720!) With a Megasquirt, I'd say get some Mercedes injectors (450cc's) or some SVO squirters (370cc's), turn your fuel pressure back to a reasonable level and use the Fuel Management for what it's there for: controlling the fuel. Shoot for your duty cycle to be less than 80-85%. Realize there is latency in opening and closing an injector, the lower duty cycle you have the more time you have for opening and closing the injectors. The MS shoud easily control a good idle at 450cc injectors, or even 550cc injectors. That leaves you plenty of headroom for mods, flow improvements, or even fuel added as cooling....(digression beckons...) Man, I'm tired today, I'm hitting the hay. Flight is tomorrow at 6AM...BAH!

Don't forget to use the PCV valve off a Nissan! It has flow characterisitics that give some strange evacuation flow rates. You would think at idle it would suck like crazy, and at WOT (low vacuum) it would close up and become inefficient...but it really does work well (uses a tapered spool through an orifice internally to control flow rates almost contrary to what you would think based on volume and vaccum present!)

Holiday? You mean Monday the 25th? It's been here and gone, and I worked it! Other side of the dateline, and not an end to the job in sight! Maybe I'll be back for 4th of July. Who would have thought in 1975, 1950, or 1945 that I would be leaving Japan, flying over Korea, on a flight to China, trying to stall a two week job in VietNam? Talk about the 'Memorial Day Ironies'! I wonder of Hooters in Shanghai will have a BBQ outside for some burnt animal flesh? I think I'm dreamin', but there's no harm in that...