Tony D

JeffP is running the original external gated GT35R with the .82 housing, and will get 2-3psi of boost at WOT at any engine speed below 3400, and at 3400 boost threshold is reached and terminal boost comes on like clockwork. If that is your RPM goal for full boost onset, it will probably make you happy. I know Jeff was upset that they came out with an internal gated housing AFTER (like a year) after he spent all that time making the Tial unit fit his application! LOL

That is really splitting hairs on 'accuracy'. A cheap probe can be much slower to react than a cheap I/R, the key is taking the temps as quickly as possible after each run. While a multiple probe unit can measure across the tread at a predetermined interval and record/display the temps for an instantaneous readout, the same general impression can be had by sweeping with the I/R gun as well. How 'serious' are you to need Hundreth of a degree acuracy?

What balancing spec are you guys using for the balancing anyways? The place I go usually used 57mg/in (0.002 oz-in) which is tighter than the VW Spec of 1gm/in... As I recall, our L20A engine was toleranced around 35 mg/ in total, due to running it higher than normal in the rpm range. Kind of curious, if anybody else has any spec they are willing to share.

ABSOLUTELY! That really is the point! The more the better, IMO. People get spoiled because there is so much to do...

How is that? How do I make it sound like it doesn't deserve it? I'm curious, it was basically a top-line piece for current-production vehicles. Same as a Stillen SC for a 350Z is nowadays, only better.

I'm having a brain fart... Did I buy your 73 Flat Tops? The offer still stands if I didn't!

Rod length will come into it, but look at the calculations with the three commonly available rods used, and you will see the differences in the strok derived. Some calculations will not come to a 'standard' crank trhow, and can be discarded. One should be very close to either the L28 or LD28 stroke. They are different enough in stroke that the different rod length would throw the calculations far enough off to make the results discardable easily enough. As you can see he came up with an 85.5 stroke. Hmmmmmm, what crank does that sound like? L28 or LD28? Factor in L24 Rod Length, L28 Rod Length, and it should become obvious (as close as you can get without a physical measurement) and be pretty certian what is in there.

I went away (out of the country) for the last 65 days... Left on 9/15... look at my posting date, and you see how much time I've had to do any work. And it's cold now.

the 7mm wall was on a toyota block, I was using the measurement for the acceptable minumum wall thickness, to extrapolate what kind of wall you would need to find in an L-Block to allow a 90 mm bore.

Argue if you will, do the work and argue to the referee and see where it gets you. My bet is when you put an 81-83 Turbo Engine (or variant thereof) into the chassis, you will be required to refit all emissions related components to the system that were there, OEM. And since 79's in EVERY market save 49 state cars had CATALYSTS on them...you will be fitting the catalyst as well. But you can skip it, and run it through the smog test. Report back and tell us how your experiment went, I'm pretty sure I know what the Ref's answer will be, though... You are reading it wrong, you are NOT bringing in a 79 Fed car and being told you are having to refit CA emissions (which they CAN require in some instances...) You are being told because you are doing an ENGINE CHANGE and regardless of sourcing Federal OR Cal-Spec, EVERY TURBO CAR HAS A CATALYST IN THE USA, and for an ENGINE CHANGE all emissions related parts must remain with the vehicle. And normally you are NOT required to refit a catalyst to a CHASSIS not OEM equipped with a Catalyst---the fact of the matter is your 79 chassis WAS designed to have a Catalyst in it...my JDM 78 S130 has a catalyst, but because it's registered in CA I am not required to have a catalyst in it because it's registered under FEDERAL smog requirements. There was no Federal Turbo available in 79, so that 79 Fed to 79 Fed swap you mention is not a possible option. And even if you found a federal 81-83, they would have a catalyst, so guess what that means? Confused yet? And if I were to refit a Turbo Motor into my 78 S130 (July 78 Manufacture Date) I would then HAVE to run a Catalyst...even though it came OEM with one, but I am currently legally running WITHOUT one now due to being registered and smogged under FEDERAL guidelines. You aren't selling your engine. But if you sold your 79 engine to a guy who was putting it in an 83, YES, he would have to install a catalyst on it, he can not 'backdate' the engine. This is all in the archives and under the smog stickies. People try so hard to get around rules that are so simple to ocmply with it's sometimes funny. Just put the engine in with a catalyst and the run through the referee will be smooth and take less than 5 minutes (providing your car passes the sniffer). Do it without a catalyst on it, and try to agrue the point, and I know how it will end.

No. If you swap a turbo engine in, (this is covered in the archives) you recertify to that engine year specification, and all equipment for that year/model. And in your case, that means adding the cat, since a 79 CA model had a cat, and your chassis is identical to the 79 CA chassis.

I would agree with 1FastZ, the balance is a combination of parts. Even a VW operating at 4000rpms peak has form thefactory, marks which are to be aligned with marks on the flywheel to keep maximum imbalance of the flywheel/pressure plate combination wihtin specification. I have not balanced a flywheel and then stuck on a pressure plate, the cover and flywheel always went in together. And at a minimum they are individually balanced to the tightest tolerance I can get out of the balancer otherwise, with a 'heavy spot' mark pla ced on them. A good balance shop should be able to give you a printout of hte balance of the item (Shenck and Hoffman do this, not sure on other machines) Knowing where the 'heavy point' is on each component makes arriving on a field balance solution easier if this is required.

Just was paging through some 1983 "Carboy" magazines...and there is a 'How To' on Drifting, and some coverage on local drift events in Japan that occurred earlier that summer. Just a flash from the past. Nice vintage adverts for HKS, Tomei, and an article on an install of a TC24B1 head in a ZX!!!

I had an AMT 380 that would stovepipe with hollowpoints, and a rework of the feed ramp solved the issue. Sounds like yours is a different issue given the other symptoms, like you said, spring possibly. I liked that little AMT, come to find out the nice 'wallet holster' that came with it is totally illegal in CA... But man it made carrying it around so easy! LOL And yeah, it was a .380. Hollowpoints were a necessity. I don't work those hours any more, so it's filed away in 'the vault'...separate from it's nice wallet holster which, of course, is out of state now, as merely posessing it is a no no here...

It all depends on what fuel pressure your injectors are rated at... Generally they want 'Static' fuel pressure for the flow rating---which is fuel pressure key on, engine not running (or running with the vacuum line reference to the regulator restricted/blocked/removed.) What this accomplishes is effectively decreasing the 'size' of your injectors by some ammount at idle due to the vacuum, allowing a longer pulsewidth at idle which most standalones can handle easier. This resolution issue may not be an issue with modern electronics, but in the old days, decreasing the fuel pressure 10psi at idle could mean the difference between a 170cc/min injector and a 150cc/min injector, effectively. It helps get resolution at idle for emissions for sure. And with an old processor.... But all FPR's should be 1:1, meaning they reference manifold pressure and keep the same relative pressure drop across the injector regardless of vacuum, or boost present. This makes calculations on the ECU much easier as it's dealing with a set value for possible injection delivery, and it's basically a linear scalar. This is why most MS setups show VE's very low at idle: you have 'decreased' the size of the injector by manifold referencing the fuel pressure, and at 36psi there idling you are X% in flow delivery below what the internal algorithim shows as delivered by a straight-static referenced 3 -Bar injector with 3 bar on the fuel delivery line. On an N/A engine, you can run straight static fuel pressure, but you run the risk of leaning out slightly at speed (versus dyno runs) if you have any sort of dynamic pressurisation of the inlet manifold from your intake positioning. You will notice on an N/A engine if you simply run static fuel pressure to the injectors, that at idle and cruise portions of the fuel map, you will see a different VE in the bin once it's tuned to run the best than if it's a manifold-referenced FPR.

Very good warning to post! This is hand-in-hand with guys who lighten a flywheel and don't think anything of the mass of the pressure plate... That kind of out-of-balance condition may not affect people running a stock wieght flywheel at lower rpms, but someone zinging up in the rev band regularly on a lighter flywheel will probably wonder what the 'buzzy' feeling is... Good Information.

Only 2 Years? Don't feel bad Derek, I just got back form 65 Days abroad, and hoped to get fill dirt to the house to do some landscaping for the garage...and now it turns out the first rain in three years will delay my leveling of the workpad... I've been trying to get a place to work on my cars since 1997! (And the Fairlady has been awaiting work since 1990!) These things have a way of sucking time from you when you least expect it. To me, this is like watching an F1 car compared to my kid's go-kart circle the circuit. Go-Karts are fun, but sometimes I wish my projects would go 'as slow' as yours! Nice shot of hte Gel-Coat Gooberage. Very interesting development.

Braap beat me to it, if #1 is at TDC, you have your choice with that dial vernier caliper to do a BDC check on any of the other two, and then with simple division, knowing the crank radial/vertical movement is only going to be another 60 degrees to BDC (or from BDC) you can figure out the sweep -vs- vertical travel in the remaining stroke and figure it in additon to the present location of the piston to determine total stroke. Or did I explain that in too addled of a way. I kow what I'm meaning to say, but probably not conveying it that well...

I was perusing the collection of Carboy magazines on the back porch (last half of 1983) and ran across an article in the 7 or 8/83 issue regarding the 3.5L L-6 Engine, along with a photo of thecrankshaft. Crankshaft appears to be billet, full circle, and is 90mm stroke. The stated capacity on this build was 3434cc's. I'm not sure on the bore, but it was either 90mm or 92mm. I ran across several articles and either bore was mentioned (someone can do hte math and repost below, I suppose). I'll rty to get these PDF'd over the weekend, there is not a lot of particulars, but it is showing that there were in existence before the L-Engine went out of production for hte domestic market, a viable 3.5L kit out there. Curiously, the photos of some of the boring shots revealed that indeed they did do sonic testing, and then made a decision on overbore based on the thinnest wall section encountered. In general, on a 7.0 mm wall thickness, they would take a 2.3mm bore. Doing the math it looks like they wanted to retain around a 5mm wall thickness after boring was done. And this is on an engine without liners. There are some articles in the mags from the period regarding Toyota Engines with liners and some really crazy displacement changes form OEM 1600cc offerings... But now at least one article has been located, I'll try and get some pdfs made over the holidays and get them posted / hosted someewhere.

$2.17 a gallon at Royal Ducth (Shell) in Diamond Bar...91 "Premium" unleaded... Unleaded 87 Regular was $1.9X

FLASHBACK: 1978 Substitute "Racing" for "Drifting"; "Monte Carlo or Torino" for "Corolla or Civic", and "Pro Drifter" for "Wisnton Cup Champion" and you have the same analogy. THAT will NEVER change. In my case substitute "69 VW Beetle" or "69 Corvair Corsa" and "Audi Quattro PRO-Rally Driver" and you found the excuse for me then to go tear up fire roads in the national forest... Nothing changes, this is simply another form of motorsport, and the Media, once it gets ahold of it, makes the masses take off in a direction. If there are hard-core dedicated people that take up the 'fad' it lasts. Especially if there is money to be made at it. ESPECIALLY if there is money and womens that go with it. more womens than money from what I've seen.

Quite a few, actually. You minimize the skill required, and are grossly oversimplifying what it entailed in the driving skills needed to accomplish it. Sliding a car sideways on a dirt road is a 'baby step' towards what drifting is, if you want a more apt analogy, try WRC Group B Competition. There is a big difference between sliding your car sideways on a loose gravel road at 35mph, and flipping is sideways at 120mph, 100 feet before a turn to set yourself up for a hard exit on-throttle. What's so bad about 'dirt track driving'---I personally love WRC as well, to see the same techniques applied on Tarmac (which is a tad more sketchy as you rarely have an incident where you regain instant grip when driving on dirt/gravel, but on tarmac, that can happen with disasterous consequences at any moment if you aren't very careful!) I take it with the band wagoners comment, the OG crowd is ok? What of all those bandwagoners here at HybridZ that have glammed-on to engine swaps as the 'thing to do'? Be careful of categorising motorsports enthusiasts as latecomers or trying to rationalise distatste for 'recent arrivals' as it casts a pall on those who originated the sport/hobby as well. The important thing is they are motorsports enthusiasts. They care about car control, power, handling, and improving both their vehicle and their vehicle control skills. That makes them no different than any other racing enthusiast. They are doing it, and you have to give them credit for finding their own niche in the world. I'm not going to down what they do because I misunderstand it, or don't care for it. I at least can respect the skills it takes to accomplish what they are doing. Like I said, there were a lot of jaws that dropped from some pretty experienced Auto-X people when they actually attended an event and saw what it was about. Till then it was all 'dirt driving' and 'powersliding' comments, and clearly dismissive. It was borne out of ignorance for what it really is. Hey, curling looks stupid as all hell to me, but I'm not going to knock the guy chucking the polished stones down the ice, nor the one with the broom. I can't do it, and I'll give the respect due to them for being out there and competing. There's plenty of guys sitting against a wall with commentary of dismissiveness, anybody can do that. Pick up a stone and hurl it. It takes effort to go out and try it, or do it. Saying it's not your bag afterwards is one thing. Doing it beforehand is another thing altogether different. I'm no drifter, I was just around when it came to the US and laughed at 'the "newest" thing' out there. Same as I laugh when someone comes up with a 'new' whatzit or whathaveyou that has drawings in the patent office from the mid 1800's.

Those of us who lived near Torii Station would simply go to the Yomitan Airfield, where the Japanese Police would take their lunch breaks and laugh as we tried the manouvres. I remember running my 77 Sylvia off the rev limiter (MSD) for 15 minutes straight while slipping, sliding, and running thorugh my own smoke. My bud Larry Mason was in the car with me, and just before I stopped I did a nice sideways crossing move through my previous smoke trail. When we stopped, we both were spitting stuff out of our mouths, and I looked over at him, and he says "You got tire sh*t all over your face." "So do you." "What's this stuff in the air?" (pfft, spit, pfft!) I take a look out the window, and the whole side of my car is covered in tire grindings "Dude, I think this is (pfft, spit, pfft!) RUBBER! It's all over the car!" "Oh man, do you got any tread left on the tires?" "Uh oh!..." Man, I loved that old Sylvia. I accomplished my first all-wheel drift going through the valley and up the hill on a series of sweepers to Nakagusku Castle. It was done going uphill which, for an underpowered 1800cc engine was accomplishing something (or so I thought) at the time. I still remember that moment. Like it was yesterday. I miss Okinawa. It was a great place to be! That 'rubber in the hair' thing just struck a chord "Yeah, I remember that!" LOL

Yep, the Gator Supercharger is the alternative I was referring to in the Toro Reference. His little booklet on how to modify turbos into superchargers for small displacement engines is a fun read, and makes you look at those 5HP Honda Go-Kart engines in a totally different light. Especially the ones with built in generators...because when you got a spare megasquirt laying around and a kid with time on his hands....

Not all P90A Heads hydraulic, but the valves are a different length, but that's a stretch.