Tony D

That's why mine is in the back of the truck! Hoisting that orange monstrosity along with me was a PITA. I didn't much like the orange jack that was originaly posted about due to a problem I had with mine regarding the hydraulic valve---the star wheel system they used was not the greatest, and mine 'skips teeth'---were they to change that from a star-wheel of a different design, or use the U-Joint like the Aluminum Jack does, I'd be all for it as a stationary jack. For extra height on the aluminum jack, I use a 4X4 block to move the jackstands higher after the car is settled.

174 at 4500? I know with a 3.70 and .74 O.D. 4700 is 125... So that's a 2.65 Differential or thereabouts. Given the same .74 O.D. It would be a 2.31 if it's a .85 O.D....or thereabouts... Who is 'noone' that you've spoken to about the differential. My bud just moved here from NY (Buffalo) and from his exhortations, there is a dearth of knowledge. Have you posted inquiries here about the pieces? I'm sure some here (including HS30-H) would have knowledge of the parts used in lemans-style racing packages from the early 70's.

On the speed sensor issue, is this a bolt-in speed sensor similar to the KA Tranny? I know on the KA Tranny it's a simple substitution of the gear assembly to make it back to a mechanical speedometer. I can't tell from the photos here which type of sensor it is, I'lll take a look next time in the boneyard and see if I can decipher something. IMO I like the e-speedo better as it's easy to recalibrate to accomodate tire and wheel changes. But stock look is nice up in the dash for some, I suppose.

Ditto, I am on my second one. Someone apparently liked my first one so much, they decided they needed to remove it from the back of my truck bed... If this had been a 'real' and not a 'knockoff' jack, I would have been much more upset. But I just waited till it went on sale again, and bought another one. Now it sits in the bed on a short length of chain with a lock on it. Sometimes I tether the Rott to it in the back yard, if they take it, they get the Dawg as well.

A 'mild' Isky Turbo Cam... That's like saying 'Kind of a Virgin'...

Guys with an N/A making that kind of power would accept that first eventuality. Boy, are you picky, Pete!

No. The further upstream the MAF is located (meaning closer to the air cleaner) the more susceptible it will be to 'puffs' of air making it get a false 'high airflow' indication and transmitting bad data to the ECU. You are taking it from an area where there is not airflow blowing on the element. The wheel wells are actually lower pressure. If you remember a few years ago on GRM 2000 Challenge there was a Z31 with the MAF stuck through a snorkel in the hood facing forward. This gave the car 'Full Rich' when moving. In that case, the MAF could read significantly different numbers if you were driving into a 30 knot headwind than going in the other direction with the wind at your tail. In such a setup, a stiff breeze might indeed make the car run rich enough at idle to stumble. Explain that to someone...your car died because the wind was blowing too hard! My kid was like 4 years old when I 'Blew Out The Fire' on a Ford Thunderbird. Picked up the MAF and blew into it, car died. Restarted it, and let him blow into it, and he killed the engine as well. MAF's are VERY accurate at reading airflow---this can be good and bad! This is why most MAF systems have defined runs of piping before and after the sensing element, and why most performance mods center on removing the prepiping and belling a smooth entrance to the MAF (JWT or HKS POP Charger style)---any little change in throttle will cause the MAF to read and richen with these setups. It takes out the engineered deadband in the operational characteristics of the sensing element making it more responsive to changes in airflow.

Personally, I'd run the .120" pads, as the ratio is better that way, you get more lift. I'd get spring retainers that allowed that. It looks like you would have to go with cut down spring retainers anyway the way those .240's fit in there, so if you cut em down for .200's why not take another .080 or .100 off so you can use the .120's and get the most advantageous ratio possible? A centered wipe pattern is 'nice' but not necessarily 'the most performance oriented'... As long as you have 2mm of wipe pattern on the pivot side, I'd be happy with that. In any of these cases, you will likely have to do something about those spring retainers (Upper Spring Perch) to allow thinner pads to be installed. Less weight, more revs...muahahahaha!

That is correct. Electramotive put these cooling holes above every cylinder and ran a paralell cooing header that fed into their radiator or upper radiator hose (I forget which). The later FIA heads had a similar cooling flow with separate manifold. The LY Crossflow heads had another manifold entirely separate in the intake manifold (like the L4 Engines) with three large holes letting coolant out between each pair of combustion chambers. Nissan fixed this on the FIA heads and the LY, but did nothing on the L-Head as they didn't see it as a problem at the horsepower levels they had in mind for it. The LY head motors were all 320 HP L24's in Rally Use, same as the FIA head, dedicated high-specific output (compared to stock) engines. Personally, I think many street driven Z's will benefit from the modifications done here to #4,5,6, not just 5&6 alone. My 260 right now is spark knocking (on 91 octane) to beat the band on partial throttle hillclimbing running SU's. Dropping that temperature will help with that issue, without having to retard my spark. I have a problem retarding my spark running premium fuel on a stock setup which is already tuned rich to begin with! As for the heater being blocked off---that is irrelevant to the discussion. Routing the cylinders to the bottom of the theromstat doesn't do anything different than what is already internal to the head---it just gives it an independent flow channel with less restrictions allowing more flow through an area with stagnant water relative to the front two cylinders. The Water Cooled Turbos will benefit from these mods as well. When your heater is on, it is NOT giving more flow to that area above the combustion chambers, and it is recycling to the inlet water that has already passed through a radiator (the heater core) so that recycle is not a big issue. Don't cool that water flow and you run into heating issues recycling back to the inlet. The hot water that can be recycled is basically limited to what will flow through an 8 or 10mm line along with a mirrored 8 ot 10mm internal passage. And that is more a function of letting the pump flow during warmup when the thermostat is closed. After that cracks open, ideally those bypass lines would close altogether to allow all pump capacity to go through the coolant system, with no recycle. In an ideal world, the turbo would be fed water from the cold side of the pump during operation, instead of where it gets it. But after a shutdown, the coldest water available is on the inlet to the water pump, and that goes directly to the hot turbo...and then to the thermostat housing---meaning the hot turbo can act as a thermal siphon heating the water and letting it rise to the water outlet neck...it will get more from the radiator! Follow?

"As for the FAN affecting the MAF readings? What about a 80 MPH wind, does that effect the reading, or only a fan?? Hmmmmmmmmmm." Take a MAF equipped car, idling, remove the air cleaner, situate the MAF element so you can blow into it, and blow into the thing---the engine will bog if not outright die. On many BMW's now, you can not adequately dyno check their power because they have sensors that monitor airflow through the engine bay and detune the engine accordingly when it shows the car is not moving through the air in real-time. And yes, an 80mph run down the highway would result in different readings that a static run down the dyno---it would alter the AFR. This is why the MAF's have so much baffling and pulsation dampners built into the system beforehand. Most modern MAF equipped cars actually pull air from the fenders to prevent the very condition Jeff is talking about.

valve clearance is something dependent on camshaft selection and actual assembly and testing on the engine. 'clay your pistons for valve clearance check' is the term used in the old days. that will only be answered by assembling your engine and checking it. if clearance is inadequate, have the piston heads flycut for clearance. that's what the trial assembly is designed to sort out.

with the light blue caps and the writing on the nut it looks to be swagelock parts. i believe parkers are black and imperial eastman uses a really dark blue. For the $$$ amount on the swagelock stuff it's hardly worth the savings---I think the eastman fittings are around $6 each in those sizes...may be as low as $3. another thing to know, the stainless steel is very nice for under the car. you can get mild steel for use with the mild steel on the car's fuel lines, they will seal. but they will also rust. and that is a little bugaboo I have with the phosphate coated backnuts on some of the swagelock competitors... you get into fittings overseas, and there are even more knockoffs. curiously they all use the same thread pitch/mating angles/furrel design as swagelock...LOL historically, parker and imperial both used single compression designs until the swagelock patent ran out. until that time they marketed it as a superior design. when that patent ran out, marketing shifted to the swagelock knockoff line they were selling and touting the 'improvement' of the 'new design'. eventually they got tired of customers like me pointing out the change in the winds, and simply started marketing them as '100% swagelock compatible'... if you can't beat 'em, at least sponge of their name! LOL

Just make a couple of punch marks where you can get to it and see them... If it slips you can tell with a mirror and torch, easily and quickly!

blame cygnus, he dug it up! It's probably better you didn't go...there was an accident that totalled a 240 as it was leaving the venue--making a left turn a Toyota Tacoma ran the light at 50mph and took the 240 in the rf corner. It was bad. NO braking on the Tacoma at all, and the Z Driver had full on brake (it's still depressed!)

Compete againt the Belgian Nissan group there at LeMans (Miroux Motorsports) they have an engine they swear is a 2.4.... But I know better! They were turning lap times at Spa comparable to GT350 Shelby Mustangs in FIA trim. There should be a 240Z at LeMans Classic next year from VA Motorsports out of Holland as well. You will have company! Welcome, and good to see another Z on the Continent... Many parts await in an old milking barn outside Utrecht, NL...LOL

Most Swagelock stuff is locally distributed, and if the seller of the stuff is from one of the authorized distributors listed above, they will need to know where you are using the fittings so they can properly credit the appropriate branch with the sales commission. I live in Riverside, and simply LIE to the Orange Valve and Fitting when I buy locally, since I'm supposed to be credited to the 'SanDiego' location, even though the Orange store is 35 minutes from my house, while SD is more like 1.5 hours... But I digress. If you are hung on Swagelock, then that's the deal. Now, if you want knock-off equivalents Imperial-Eastman (Gyro-Loc?) and Parker A-Lock are compatible fittings and are more widely available in general distribution---including from McMaster Carr. When I worked at APCI some years ago, there was a big purchasing debate, so they bought a box of Swagelock, a box of Parker and a box of Imperial-Eastman fittings...disassembled them mixed the components and then did a 'mixed build' randomly grabbing parts from the box and then testing the fittings as they were made-up. The results: Unless you are in medium to high pressure Helium Service, it really doesn't matter what components you use with what. In helium service, they ended up specifying Swagelock only. Curiously, from the Swagelock salesman at the time, it was revealed that the test rig at the Parker R&D Facility was rigged up with Swagelocks (they test with HP Helium!) But for general purposes, and certianly for our usages, it doesn't 'require' Swagelock, and either of the other two will work satisfactorily. Now...more personal opinion. I like Swagelock, and buy it for work as well as home. The quality IMO far exceeds what I get from the other two. I don't like the phosphate coated furrells on either, and have found the Imperial-Eastman fittings particularly susceptible to gall without putting a shot of light oil or Dry Film Lube on the fittings before makeup. For the price of a few fittings, I'd buy the Swagelock. If you are doing a big project and the money gets really exorbitant (like the 3/4" fittings to do an Atlas-Copco ZR6 Condensate Line System...elbows and crap like that, over 45 fittings required at $32+ each...) then the Imperial and Parker will give you the same servicability with slightly less polish and look. When customers are not concerned that much with pricing, I will go to Swagelock simply because they stock most everything they have in the catalog. But the Imperial stuff out of McMaster can be just as workable. And regardless of what all of them say, save for high pressure helium, the APCI testing done in the early 90's shows that it doesn't matter who's furrels you put with who's backnuts, and who's fitting bodies---they all make up and hold thousands of pounds of pressure without leaking. Hope this gives you an alternative. The Parker people have expanded their stores, and they are available in many places that deal with industrial hosing (duh...parker aerospace hoses...LOL) just that many people don't know they exist in that tubing fitting market. And for your fitting, it may be something they will have to order in. Check for a "Parker Store" nearby. OH, and before I forget, if you are using STOCK lines in the chassis, it is NOT 5/16"! It is a Metric 8mm, and both Swagelock and Imperial Eastman make METRIC FITTINGS that will go right on that baby without any modifications whatsoever. The make a whole line of metric to standard adapters as well if you want to 'switch over' to standard stuff near the engine bay for convineience.

The 10psi limit is imposed by ECU mapping, not because the FPR stops working. A fuel pressure regulator works as a balanced unit of spring pressure against a seat. If you have a spring pressure set to 37psi, against a seat presure of 37psi, it doesn't open. If you see more pressure on the seat than the spring provides, then the spring pressure is overcome, and the seat cracks open, bleeding pressure (to the return line). Follow that so far? Now, you add manifold referencing. Put a hose to a sealed chamber where your spring resides, and connect it to your intake manifold. Now you will have TWO forces working to hold the seat closed. Still only fuel pressure working against the seat, though. So you're at idle, and have 18" of Hg vacuum in the manifold. Offhand conversions say 1psi=2"Hg of Mercury. So that works out to be roughly -9 psi of pressure, working against your spring pressure of 37psi meaning the effective pressure on the seat is 37-9=28psi. Under high vacuum, you could have 28"Hg in the manifold, or -14psi, and fuel pressure would drop to 37-14=23psi. This is how the old Bosch EFI systems used the injectors they did to run the horsepower. It allows larger injectors to run as 'smaller' injectors under light load, letting you run an increased pulsewidth because the older systems didn't have a lot of resolution...but I digress. NOW... Lets go into boost. You throw 10psi at it, and your effective seat pressure is 37+10=37psi. Put 20 psi at it and 37+20=57psi. It is irrelevant how much boost you throw at the regulator. It simply is a dumb device that uses spring pressure plus referencing pressue to determine ultimate fuel pressure. Stock regulators have been run to 30psi of boost (I used stock FPRs from a BMW to run 25psi+ on a VW I built some loooooong time ago...) THE LIMITATION IS THE PULSEWIDTH PROGRAMMED INTO THE STOCK ECU! The same FPR works GREAT at 17psi on my Megasquirt system with 440cc Supra Injectors. The limitation is not the FPR. It's programming of the ECU for 'standard conditions---which is to say, they programmed the system to run with a failed wastegate running the popoff valve wide open under all rpm conditions. I know, I did that experiment on an 84 Turbo Skyline. Wired the wastegate shut and ran with the pop valve whistling dixie... The regulator raises on a 1:1 porportional pressure rise. The limit on the stock pump will be around 20psi of boost as the stock internal relief valve lifts and starts bypassing around or just before 60psi (if you are lucky). The limit on the FPR is the burst pressure on the casing. I have put 100psi to them and haven't blown the casing yet...so to say it stops working above 10psi is incorrect. Does it provide enough fuel above 10psi? If you have adjustable pulsewidth, yes. If you are using the stock EFI system and ECU...No. That is the ECU's fault, not the FPR's. Some people will run a solenoid to close the bypass line and run the pump to full pressure when it hits 11 or 12psi...you get a jump from 47 to around 57psi and that is a non-linear fuel delivery which is what the RRFPR's do. Do you 'need' that much fuel at 12psi? Who knows. The only way to know is try. This is a hack-style approach to making it work. If money is the prime concern, I'd stick to 10psi till I had the money for a Megasquirt, and THEN start upping the boost. Drop your requirement for '12 psi'---I mean what is the magic behind 12psi? You end up spending money for interim patches that you end up throwing away when you up the ante further and go with a proper fueling solution. If you don't have the money to do it right now, when will you have the money to do it over? Just stick to 10psi until you have the MS and some 370 or 440cc injectors to install as a set, you will be money ahead, trust me!

270cfm per runner on a ported manifold would outflow JeffP's currnt port which is flowing something like 220cfm at 25" at 0.500" lift. As I posted above, Jeff knows he looses 30cfm per runner, so knowing 220-30=190CFM for an extrude-honed stock diameter runner. That help, Bo? O.T. Threadjack Warning: Are you going to make the "Hot August Days" Group Z Car Show at Rickie & Ronnie's Drive in (Corner of Sepulveda and Normandie in Torrance) Saturday? 10-2? Now, back to our regularly scheduled benchracing....

The original place to vent these lines was via metal tubes and a banjo bolt which put the venting down by where the stock cast iron manifold and headpipe joins. In the USA they used lines to the air filter for evaporative emissions concerns. They WILL off-gas especially after a lift-throttle at high rpms as with the stock system you are pumping something like 7psi against the floats and have no consumption so it sinks the darned things, and you puke a little fuel up out of the jet---and in extreme cases of a long-rundown you can literally fill the float bowl to overflowing... Indeed raw gas smell can come from up front. May want to make sure firewall gaskets are intact. Keeping the stock air cleaner assembly on does have it's advantages! Keeps the smells down quite a bit!

These parts are availabe new from the Nissan Dealer as well. They are not as expensive as many people think...

I don't have any photos with me...I don't know what I could show with exteriors... I know Ianz sent his 240 bumpers to the same place and was really happy with the result. He's as anal as anybody and if he's happy... He did this around the time of MSA, and has gotten them back. I think his orange car will be at the Hot August Days GroupZ car show at Rickie and Ronnie's Drive In on the corner of Sepulveda and Normandie in Torrance (10 to 2) this Weekend. Check out www.groupz.com, the newsletter should be up on the site soon for details on time, directions, etc. The car should be there to check out the bumpers in person.

Gata is somehow related to 'engine' the L-Engine was referred to as 'L-Gata' in Japan. Hence, Tabo-San-Gata is basically 'The Turbo 3-Liter L Engine' and dey runs forever'.... As for the sleeves being of higher quality...that may be a herring. Metal analysis would be needed. The L-Blocks were of extremely high quality compared to many other vehicles, even today. Sleeves are constructed in the foundry differently, for better density as well. They may be 'better' than the original early L-Blocks, but then again, they may not... Sleeves make repairs easier in the future, though, for sure. Especially if you want to keep a set displacement. The Nissan S20 had sleeves installed from the factory for just that purpose. Replace pistons, sleeves, and rings and remain within your racing displacement class (1998ccs against a 2Liter maximum!)

WOT on an inertia dyno can be set in about 15-20 minutes. I mean everything. Complete. The rest of the time is the 'drivability portion' of the map. Places where you are accelerating from a given load cel at less than WOT. For 'economy' (and others can chime in here) anything below (on a stock cam car) 65KPA and less, and below around 3500rpm...those cels are usually best tuned for 14.7 to 15.5 AFR instead of 12:1. Sure, it wil lrun well, and fat, and have some more torque. But your fuel mileage will be atrocious. Anything with 'high vacuum' and 'low rpms' is not where you need WOT AFR's. If you look at the specifications for the stock ZXT's you realize most of the cars don't go 'open loop' until 3500rpms, or 35% throttle opening. So basically, where your car spends 95% of it's time is NOT tuned for 'power' but for 'economy' with the leanest AFR you can get by or tolerante without burning valves, or having drivability problems. My wife's frontier tach juuust under 3500 at 80mph. So you drive 78 and the thing can get 20mpg (and you can see the O2 sensor feedback) speed that up to 81 where it's juuuust over that 3500 Closed-Loop setting in the ECU, and you drop almost instantly to 16mpg. That kind of difference! I need to go eat, so I can come back and flesh it out more if you need, but that's the general idea. If you've been dirving your car for a while, you know where that dot floats in most road conditions. Cruising speeds you tune lean best, for economy. WOT and above a given load cel block or rpm where it becomes clear you WANT more power, tune those areas for 'rich best'.

The ARA conversion originally used a flex-hose on the lower radiator outlet, for the exact same reason you mentioned... The accumulator dryer is pretty much a universal fittment R12/R134 anyway, it's simply silica gel or activated alumina in there to soak up any residual moisture when comissioning the system. After that is done, it simply acts as a buldge in the line giving a place for liquid to settle and accumulate before offgassing into the compressor. Compressors don't like refrigerant in liquid form being ingested.

I agree with Bryan...get it in the ball park, and then it's 'control-shift-arrow up or arrow down' to figure out where your peak numbers are. Most people will run to peak power, then richen slightly to ensure nothing is 'too close to going boom'. The entire map should be done within 2 hours-3 at the outside. WOT will be done first, then spend your time doing runs to fill in the load points below. Generally, a Dynojet tuned car will 'run lean' when you take it out on the road and do a test run. Generally, as stated above, the dyno operators will simply highlight the whole table and bump the fueling up incrementally (less than 5% or so) to give the correct 'true load' numbers you need to run correctly on the street as opposed to on the dyno. This is if the dyno is inertial only. If they can load brake you and hold the load point, then you can get a more accurate AFR for the engine loaded, and not just accelerating through a point. And like Bryan says, once the map is optimized, changes for this header, or even a total displacement change only takes a few passes, and well less than an hour. When we went from 2.8 to 2.0L in the Bonneville Car, the setup took 45 minutes to retune. When we changed header primary length, it was about 15 minutes. Changed the exhaust system configuration to run the belly pan, about 20 minutes...but most of that was B.S. ing with the operator while it was warming up. I think we made three passes and were done! It's all a matter of playing with it, and changing only ONE parameter at a time. You got time, just go back and do the fueling. Once that's done, play with timing. Then go back and recheck fueling, just to be sure. There are no set rules for a magic AFR or timing number. Advance it till you see no more power and back off a degree or two. Fueling, go rich, then lean and see where power is hiding. Then move a bit off that for 'margin of error' ... Usually you adjust rich to lean till you see power stop raising, and then go back rich a couple of steps. You can go until you actually see power start dropping before backing off and putting in that margin...but I'd only do that for cruise spots where it's lightly loaded. For WOT, generally rich to lean till power stops raising then back a coule steps rich (rich best) For cruise, rich to lean till you see power actually fall, then back a couple of steps rich (lean best) splitting hairs I know, but it returns dividends in fuel economy. After your base map handles slow roll-ons enable accel enrichmnent and start stabbing the throttle to get the accel and decel fuel cut working correctly. Sounds like a lot, but if you're methodical, it goes pretty quickly. If you have a ZX, go to the dyno with the bumper removed for easy fan access to the radiator! LOL