Tony D

Jeebus, it must be spring break here as well...

Kameari has an integral ring gear, it is not replaceable, same as the old HKS units. When you have the HKS unit in your hand, you go 'wow, this is light', then when I hand you the Kameari Race unit, you say 'holy shite!' The old 9# HKS units I felt were acceptable for an L28 in street usage, but that was about the limit for streetability. The Kameari race unit might be a tad light, especially with a grabby clutch. As for reliability and not looking at it for 100K miles....you're setting up unreasonable expectations for a performance setup, and for a fractured flywheel if you have a lightened stocker! A performance engine is INTENDED to be inspected regularly. I know people who were changing two stock clutch discs a MONTH in their street cars in Japan because they were wearing them out that fast. Stock weight flywheel. Get a grippier clutch, something has got to give. Face wear on the PP, or the flywheel, something... Thinking you can assemble it and forget it will have you spending more than what you are considering now with these units! I'm not saying anything would be wrong with it...but to think a high coefficient of friction disc would just happily take abuse and hard driving with sticky tires and not have SOMETHING wear if unreasonable. Someone we all know pulled his engine out (again) and found the RIVETS of his very expensive metallic clutch were LOOSE! Seems 5 days doing pulls on the dyno and 25-50 Drag Launches killed it in less than 2000 miles. Lots of money, and it died. BECAUSE he was doing other maintenence and inspected it, he found the rivets before they sheared or let go and let the disc....well...you know! With his PP, there was 0.010" wear, as was his Fidanza Flywheel. New facing on the Fidanza installed with 75 Inch-Pounds on the fasteners and it was ready to go after Fidanza screwed around sending the wrong facing and then refusing to warranty the flywheel, and charged him another $80 to redrill the facing bolts because the holes were different in the friction surface from later flywheels. Cost him as much in shipping to get it quickly as it would have cost for another new flywheel! The PP was a different matter, but for only $150 it was replaced with a 2200# unit. The disc? It's now using 3/8" grade 8 bolts to hold the components together instead of rivets, and uses a design that doesn't let the rivets bash against the hub when the springs totally compress. You Datsun Guys and your sprung hubs. I swear. Drive a solid disc like the VW guys do and you don't have to worry about your springs compressing...and if you have any competence with your left foot control and clutch release, it drives just as nice as a sprung hub, with less to go wrong! But I digress... My other comments have been reporduced above and stand on their own. And I didn't say the 15# stocker revved as fast as the Tilton, but that it was more like the Tilton's Response than the lighter 13# Centerforce unit. Yes, that means the 15# revs faster than the 13#, that IS what I was saying. It IS possible. Weight is not as important as where it's removed. I had a diagram someplace on sectioning a stock flywheel, and how mine is done is FAR different than most lightened units I have seen here in the USA. Frankly, if there is more than 3/8" thickness (say 10mm) they haven't lightened it as much as possible. And if there is still a square edge near the ring gear, they haven't lightened it in the most IMPORTANT area. Think of a 45 ange UNDER the ring gear to a 10mm thick facing, along with a mating taper breaking the square edge starting from the outer rim of the clutch cover bolt holes... Those two things remove quite a significant amount of weight were it has MOST effect. If you don't have those done on your lightened stock flywheel, you have something that is underpeforming compared to what you could have, IMO. For the record, I buy Craftsman Tools because they are cheaper and they break JUST AS OFTEN AS SNAP ON DOES! When you HAVE to take one back...and you will...you're out of pocket less money. You were right in your analogy, kind of...you just are neglecting to realize nothing lasts forever, so if you spend a bundl of money on it...you're likely just out a bundle of money because it will break just like anything else. This is especially applicable to automobiles and their components. It's not a matter of not breaking, it's a matter of what you will have to do when it inevitably breaks or requires overhaul.

You base that on one response you got? Our testing on the short course you mention has proven otherwise. You should not be 'shifting near the wall', you should be dragraced to almost near top speed before the end of mile one---where decreased rotational inertia helps you UP to speed. Then you will inch up making another 1 or 2mph through mile two, and maybe more or less the same (if you are very lucky) through mile three. Unless you are grossly underpowered, there wont be much 'shifting' after mile marker one. And for sure mile marker two! You are not planning on running a 50cc two-stroke streamliner, are you? After getting up to near top speed rotational inertia beecomes your friend. Problem is, that is more applicable to the long course where you are still accelerating through mile three, and at the same point you are at mile 1 in the short course. While accelerating hard, less mass is your friend. Once to speed to maintain it, mass again becomes your friend. in other words, less helps you more than more. If you have a humongo powerplant, maybe running heavy things will help you. But with lower horsepower cars (under say 5-600hp) the less rotating mass you have the better! The HP you 'gain' from lightening your pistons will be on the order of say 20 hp to be more than generous. It will do NOTHING significant for you in terms of top speed, as over 150mph you need MUCH MORE than that to make a difference. But lower rotational inertia on the wheels and flywheel will accelerate you quicker to near top speed, which is FAR more important than a measly 20HP. Do ANY calculation you want and justify how much more top speed you will get from 20HP at 150mph on a car like the Z or a 58 Buick Roadmaster for that matter! I noted the guy said he did 'research' and 'from what he was told'.... Whereas I posted concrete numbers resulting in the changes we made. I see that as a difference in the two posts.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That was a riot! I often thought that same thing during some of the scenes: "are these guys putting it on, or are they just a switchback away from a sexual-tension embrace?" ROMAFLOL This one got sent to people Via E-Mail.

You should have thought about this a couple of weeks ago and taken a 50$ one-way Southwest Flight to Ontario! You can't buy the GAS for that much! go to GroupZ.com, and download the newsletter from this month (April) Basically, it starts with a kickoff BBQ friday night at the MSA parking lot, then Saturday there is a big scratch-and-dented merchandise sale in their back lot while the driving school is going on at MCAS ElToro, with a dinner at the Rib trader in Orange that evening. During the scratch and dent sale they wil lhave tents up in the lot in front to detail your car and wash it for the show the next day. Show opens to the public at 9AM and is at the same venue as last year Oak Glen park or shady glen something like that. I can drive you there, I just can't tell you what it's called! LOL Friday the 24th of April starting around 7pm till the show on Sunday the 26th of April which ends around 3pm. Come see the Blue Turd on '260 Island'---you can't miss the BIG YELLOW OVERTAKING FLAG painted with krylon on the hood! LOL

What am I missing? I got 17 psi by 1700rpms, and would get 21psi by 2000 rpms if I set the controller there. And that was in 1985. Single turbo. No, it didn't flow 800HP of air, but then again that was using a 70's era design turbo as well. I'm sure there would be much better flow numbers available using todays wheel cuts.

The assumption here is that what you are working on is dirty! If your car is not a WRC Champion, then it should be clean enough that gloves are not a requirement... On teardowns and dirty work, yeah various gloves... But after it's cleaned, not a big deal unless solvents are involved...

I like the hood on the blue car, that was the first application I thought of looking at the other craigslist photo: "That would make for a nice radiator duct area that far back..." From Poop, Comes Flowers! I'm philosophical these days...LOL

A ute is only a shipping container away! And believe me, I've been considering it... A nice older Holden Ute. Gaaaaarrrrrgh! Vintage tow vehicle! LOL

There isn't---if you are discussing between Matte and Stainless from the same model. I think Alan is mistaken on his contention that Stainless/Chrome mirrors were never offered for the S30===maybe not OEM from the factory, but most definately from the Sports Option aspect Nissan did offer them for the S30 and S31's. The bases are what is different between models, though. My son's 510 model bases are totally different than my S30 Bases. And the early models are even more disparate. I see you figured out the adjustment---was it the screw? Don't forget to tighten it back up. Some joker bumps your mirror and you're looking at the pavement during a lane-change and it's no fun at all!

There was a NISMO offered Stainless Steel Version of the S30 mirror that was in all ways identical to what came on my Showa 50 S30 I had in Japan. Identical I actually interchanged parts between the matte black units I had while trying to get my other matte parts 'reblacked' and still drive the car. What is still available, I don't know, but some years ago NISMO USA was clearing out those chrome (stainless steel?) mirrors for $79 a pair...which was about half the cost of a pair of matte units ordered through normal channels! As for using different models mirrors on the car, as long as you get them in the right positions, I can't fathom why they couldn't be adjusted to work and give the right view. Are you loosening the screw at the front of the 'bullett' to allow the mirror to move freely? Because of the distance, only a small movement will totally change your view. That should be WELL within the range of normal adjustment with the screw loosened.

Our L28 Bonneville Motor had peak power at 8250rpms, and we 'inched up on it' for four years before pulling it to go with the 2L engine which has a power peak 'around 9K' but our bearings looked like new after four years of that kind of beating. What kind of weight are we talking about for the whole Flywheel/Pressure Plate assembly---and how closely is it balanced with the rest of the rotating assembly. Ou low-inertia Tilton flywheel/clutch assembly weighs in slightly under 15#, and even that is 'heavy' for what we need. The more weight you hang off an end, the more potential damage you can do. It's curious that bearing and the scoring...you didn't have a filter diagnosis done and look at what you had in the oil filter by chance did you? I'm wondering if you were sucking air/pumping air and it damaged the bearing, or perhaps you have a filter relief valve lift at some time dumping a load of swarf donw the central feed galley into your crank area? On the L28, we ran to at least 8500 before shifting. El Mirage wasn't that long in each gear compared to Bonneville. i wish I had a video to show of a Bonneville Run. It is definately 'inching' above 8K for more than 2 miles, we are at close to terminal speed with our 3.36 near the end of mile one, and then 'inch' floorboarded for the next two miles. And I know our oil feed is good, as is drainback...throw in some corners and I could see how oiling could be more of a problem than in our ideal 'straightline' torture test. Do you have the external oiling modification for the stock pump? Puzzling...

Er.... uh.... We picked up 3mph at ElMirage on Convo-Pro rims. Another 1 mph from an Aluminum Driveshaft. Horsepower 'increases' you are speaking of don't directly relate to that kind of speed increas on the salt, but decreasing rotational inertia in the driveline DOES pay massive dividends. We didn't go with carbon fiber drveshaft because of the $$$ and paranoia. Our flywheel, clutch, and pressure plate assembly weighs less than most people's clutch cover. And on top of that it's reduced diameter for less moment of inertia. If you think people at Bonneville are running stock weight flywheels for some 'horsepower advantage' you are sorely mistaken. "Rev Happy" is the name of the game. The ability to accelerate the mass moving the power to the ground. Every ounce there reduced makes for quicker revving when in gear. And that translates directly to faster acceleration, and therfore quicker achievement of terminal velocity. Do all you wish with lightening the pistons, but if you are running a heavy flywheel at Bonneville, you're concentrating on the absolutely wrong portion of the equation. SCTA 17 World Records: F/PRO, F/GALT, F/GCC Bonneville, El Mirage, Muroc:burnout:

It's only available for OBD2 or never GM ECUs' If it's driving TBI injectors, likely it's OBD1 Tier0 and will not have that capability. Which GM ECU are you using? Something from a Mid 80's/Early 90's 2.8L V6 Pickup Truck like an S10 or S15 should be very close to what you need.

Oh, mack is driving out the MSA again? I'll make sure I have the phone ringer on 'high' in expectation of the 2AM call from Cabazon, or Blythe, or Chiraco Summit... LOL

Hell I'll claim it...173.325mph. That fast enough for a direct-drive top-gear box? Of course, it's a five speed, but the top gear ratio is the same as any 4 speed out there...

Absolutely not. You mentioned H190 / R190 when the OP was referencing an R180. Like R180 parts don't fit on an R190, neither will R190 parts fit on an R200. Different ring gear sizes mean different parts. So regardless of H/R190 compatibility, H/R190 parts will not interchange on H/R180's...(or H/R200's!) I thought my H/R compatibility possibility was clear, and that the ring gear size difference made it incompatible. Apparently not. Don't follow the logic thinking it did, but that is beside the point.

Properly support the pipes off the back of the transmission with a strap and hanger from the supplied tailshaft housing 'ears' and you will never have this issue again. It is my most outstanding complaint about the MSA systems: they do not utilize all the stock Nissan Hanger locations. They went and redesigned the damn 2.5" mandrel bent system to use three bolt flanges when they had a perfectly good (and tweakable) slip-fit system. I don't know how many of those I installed, and NEVER had a problem after I hung the center of the piping from the trans tailshaft like Nissan did on the stock systems. Those Engineers at Nissan knew their stuff. Weld a bracket between your twice pipes, and run your hangar to the tailshaft from there. Put the system up using a jack so you have it where you want it, then tighen all your clamps---THEN install that strap and hangar onto the tailshaft. That should solve it permanently. I tend to put the clamps on in a "U" configuration as well: nuts up. That way when something drags or hits them, they don't booger the threads, or have anything substantial to snag on and pull the system apart. Good Luck!

What it involves is that similar problems return when they change the systems. The government mandated lower EVAP standards, one way to DRAMATICALLY reduce evap is to keep the fuel cooler. Not running a return line accomplishes this. Go measure your fuel tank temperature when you have 1/4 tank! You will see what I mean (and also why people who are perpetually broke have more problems with their EFI---that hot fuel has a tendency to get vaporized in the rail more often than the guy running around with a full tank!) So the solution in the late 70's was to pre-run the fuel pump for 3 or so seconds whenever you turn the key on, and keep the fuel flushed and pressurized. And this worked FINE for DECADES (80's, 90's) but then came returnless fuel systems. Deadheaded cooler fuel in an engine bay that now is running 215F instead of 180F... all those covers, tight engine bays, lots of sound insulation keeping everything toasty... So they have to figure out how to keep it from doing what it did in the 70's. And that answer was to go to a cranking relay. The SOLUTION WORKS! The problem WILL ALWAYS EXIST! It will not go away. You can not change the laws of physics. The thing is, people driving cars today are even more ignorant than they were about their vehicles than they were in the 70's. So it becomes automatic. It reduces warranty incidences, customer complaints, etc etc etc... I mean, my dad killed the battery in his Ford LTD one cold day because he was out of habit flooring the pedal before cranking the car. "Flood Clear"---no fuel goes to the engine. Of course second recrank, he really floors it to 'set the choke' and exacerbates it. So then he cranks it again with the throttle held open to clear out the gas that it wasn't injecting... Repeat until battery is totally dead. It was so common amongst older car owners Ford was letting distribution know to MAKE SURE they instructed their customers that they DIDN'T TOUCH THE GAS PEDAL AT ALL before the engine started! Now, they don't have to do that, either. You just touch the contacts on the ignition switch, and the car auto-cranks and auto starts. In many now, with throttle by wire nothing you do to it will affect the T/B position until after it get's a 'run acknowledgement' from the ECU check cycles. I digress...

The GM setup is very close, but there is wiring changes involved. There is a website out there that detailed a MS install into a Corvette that used the stock GM harness and pretty simple changes. Depending on what GM ECU you have, tuning on the fly is possible, but likely you have something in the late 80's or early 90's with a reburnable prom. You might want to contact Turbo City in Orange CA...they used to do custom burns on GM ECUs to run everything from N/A VW 1600's to Turbocharged what-have-yous! Though MS will drive what you have, and likely will be cheaper to boot! Later (OBD2) compliant GM ECU's have a program called "TunerCat" that has a very nice interface for tuning on the fly. Given the long and short term fuel trim in the newer ECU's, it is a very nice setup. It's my 'dark side' but yeah, I've been helping a buddy with his LT '94 in a 74' Camaro Swap...yeah, I do domestics too. It's not something I'm proud of, kind of like the sheep incident up outside London some years ago...

I would not think it is any different than R200 parts on / in an R190. I could see R/H 180's being compatible, I'm just not familiar with anyone who has done it. This bit of information makes my H233 Frontier happy for the possibility of getting an LSD then!

The R-Series carriers are different than the H-Series carriers from what I understand. The H is what is in a wagon, the coupes use the R-Series differentials. It may work in a coupe, which has the IRS rear suspension, but I'm pretty sure it's a no-go for a wagon with the live rear axle. BTW, same axle is in a 521 Truck...

LOL, sorry... ever since I saw a Ferrari Crankshaft naked and made the revelation "ohhhhhhh...!"

Bit of overkill there IMO. There is far more weight in your Flywheel, Pressure Plate, Driveshaft, Axles, and Road Wheels/Tyres that will affect revving far more than the tradeoff of durability in trying to take more weight out of the rod throws! Everybody raves about their 11# flywheel...when they hang a 15# pressure plate off of it! Never made sense to me... If you wanted crank work, why knife edge when you could have cut the throws down completely and balanced the stub-counterweights (which now won't splash in oil and create windage) with Mallory-Metal? Same total weight, with far less moment of inertia, stability and quicker revs with less lost to windage... Oiling through the rod journals may make hollow rod journals a bit impractical as well.

Yep, that little "S Terminal Bypass Switch" is a quick and easy way to never have to get that irritation ever again. Curiously, has anybody ever noticed moder cars with returnless fuel systems now have a start relay that controls cranking of the car---it's not a direct action from the ignition switch...it has interplay through the ECU. My Dodge Truck only needed a 'tick' from the ignition via key, and the car cranked itself till it started. The rental Altima I has a couple of weeks ago with the 'pushbotton start' was similar... Ever wonder why they do that? Perhaps there is some fuel pump modulation that is occurring that pre-runs the fuel pump to prime a deadheaded fuel rail and compress the gasseous fuel bubbles back into solution before the engine actually cranks??? Hmmmm, could be! The more things change, the more they stay the same!