Tony D
-
Posts
9963 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
74
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Tony D
-
-
Curiously Ford did the same thing for Fox Bodies...
We called them "Donkey Ball Retrofits"
It was two round, lead balls on the end of a length of cable. You put the offending car on the rack, slipped the 'donkey balls' over the driveshaft about midway, and then slid 'em down to the nose of the differential where there was a notch that the cable would catch in... Same thing: NVH (Noise Vibration Harshness) Customer Complaints.
Changing the mass of something to stop resonances is the same thing slapping that dynamat in the center of a door panel, or the center of a flat floorpan...
-
You got 'called out' because you made a bad guess.
Live with it. You got dyno results, you just chose to ignore them.
Like I said initially, this isn't a Honda Forum, expect to be bluntly presented with information by knowledgable individuals....who may or my not answer your beck and call to present empirical evidence when they are 11 Time Zones from where all their sh*t happens to be stored.
If you make a boneheaded comment, don't get defensive when you're informed it's incorrect. It's that easy. You simply got well over the edge on sarcasam for no good reason.
If someone makes a bad, incorrect statement, should they NOT have the correct information posted? Kinda goes counter to what this site is all about, doesn't it?
-
Scratch and dent stuff is usually available cheap. Many of the ricer parts sold for Hondas at Auto Zone and Pep Boys are easily hacked up to fit a Z as well. I took mine off and reinstalled the stock filter housing with a K&N filter in it because the Open-Element CAI simply was too damn noisy...constant hissssssssss-ing. Frankly, my G-Tech and 1/4 Mile Times didn't show any loss after putting it back to 'stock' with the K&N aftermarket filter element in it. So I guess if you want something to do, you can replace it, but from my testing I didn't see any improvement in anything, and a definate detraction in additional noise.
Speaking as someone who works in and around factory environments in Mainland China, don't be quick to dismiss the 'trashing' people do regarding who makes what or how in China... Unless you have seen it firsthand, a lot of the stories would sound 'made up', & wouldn't believe conditions if told simply because the frame of reference is so foreign to western ways of thinking. Conditions given to the same western minds during the industrial revolution of the 1800's though...would think the conditions 'progressive'.
-
Is the RB20 transmission any different from the L-6 Tranny? Originally the RB20DET was placed in the same chassis that formerly had L20ET's in them and I'm thinking the tranny was the same in those applications.
Of course it went into the Z31 Chassis, so that kind of throws a wrench in the 'possible transmissions used' department. Does anybody know if the 200ZR used a standard Z31 Transmission, or an earlier L-Based one?
From my recollection of the fuel consumption data at the time, the early RB20 Turbos were consistent with their L-Based Brethern...meaning fuel consumption very near the same. Later RB's, like from the GTS-T Skylines had quite a bit more HP, and I would venture a guess...more fuelish appetities.
-
Beta Motorsports is 1.5 Hours drive in LaHabra. Knows Z's and Rusty Old Z's....
Talk with John...
-
Hmm... does he have any pictures of how he routed the tubing? I think he shouldve tried working out the bugs...
When the engine blows up 2X and screws you out of two paid track days...you start wanting something you can actually drive!
It's easy to make someone else's decision for them, if it's not you hammering till 3AM every night after work trying to make the next track deadline.
The superturbo will simply go into his street car, something he doesn't need to have running by any date. His plans are already working toward the readily available BMW tuning components in his homeland. Chipsets for the ECU, Supercharger...
You got to understand, Frank (er, his surrogate shipper-parts goopher in the USA, me) spent more than $256 in shipping costs in a single week to get some bearings, and then some lash pads overnighted.
Frankly, the parts are hard to come by, and I believe his choice of powerplants...for where he is...is a FAR better choice for what the intended use of the vehicle will be.
He has less into the BMW V8 swap than he has in broken components from the first L-Engine Failure. Plus, the engine and transmission is considerably less weight than the setup he took out...as well as being completely behind the front axle line...mid-engined if you will. He wasn't going to get that with the setup he was using. The more he added, the heavier the front end was getting. Not good on a track car without power steering!
-
(Bump)
Just because I think all those cool photos deserve to be viewed some more....
-
I am diseased...
-
Boost is your friend Brad Man...
I have seen the stock hydraulic cam spin 450 rwhp. The profile is decent, it just makes the HP at lower RPMS than is 'exciting' for most people.
Some porting on the head and intake manifold, and you can get real good power on a turbo Z with a stock hydraulic cam!
-
I said moving the ports up and using a Mikuini Style Manifold would be easier and probably result in similar valve-approach angles as tilting the valve.
One would have to draw it out to see if the approach angles could be made using this approach.
Drawing board and drafting machine are 1/2 the world away right now, so I can be of no help till I return home to check it in that manner.
Someone with CAD could probably do it far quicker.
-
Doug 71ZT pretty much nailed it with the ratios.
We were considering the T56 with the turbo and a 4.11 gearset for Bonneville, as we need to go 224+mph for the record. Though the 3.54 and Z32 tranny may work in this resepct as well, and allow us to change gearsets to 4.11 for the 'short track' in SoCal.
The ability to lope around at 2K rpms is overblown, even in an L6Turbo. They still like 2700 as he stated, and it's grossly misdriving the vehicle if you want any sort of performance without downshifting two gears while you mat it...
With a SBC I could see the T56 in a street car... But generally if you have the torque to pull the ratios, less gears will be faster than more gears.
Corvettes once came with three speed manuals...LOL
-
Check your post at the other Z-Site, you got a detailed answer there...
Not going to retype it here. If you want to cut and paste the answer....
-
and Tony, a lot of people would appreciate it if you got those measurements
lucky you, I wish I had a fairlady 280zx -__-
Here is what I will do:
When I get back from 'The Desert'...
I will go an pull my mirrors off my Fairlady 280Z (X) and do a proper measurement to the centre of the mounting holes.
I just was informed my original 280ZX drawings have arrived in the mail back home, so I will transpose those to the line drawing, same as Alan's S30 Diagram. I will CLEARLY label on the diagram LHD and RHD locations (most likely two different drawings for clarity's sake).
I will ALSO label the drawing as "Mine"...LOL I can be creative with this point...
Then I will post it somewhere---maybe here. Probably will post it to ClassicZ's as well.
That should give people a place to find the correct information and know if it's for an LHD or RHD vehicle straightaway.
Hummus and Garlic Cloves for me tonight...la la la la la la la la:hijack:
itsaprothing, are you a member of the West Side Z Coalition? Marcus at WSZC jsut affixed his fender mirrors using Alan's Template but I never asked if he transposed R&L and haven't seen the car since he did the change so... Anyway, if you are in Burbank, you should check them out---they have a site on meetup. The coordinate with Group Z in Orange County on events and drives, etc...
-
Actually, that's MY diagram. I took the measurements from my Fairlady 240ZG ( obviously RHD ) and drew them up on a scan from a Nissan 'Service Shuho' booklet on the 240ZG model because it offered a nice overhead outline drawing of the 240ZG to give the dimensions on. I did this in response to a request for help on the classiczcars.com forum.
At the time, I pointed out that the mirror mounting points are assymetric and would need to be transposed to give ideal LHD lounting dimensions.
If you remember Tony, you yourself took the original diagram and made an LHD version from it. Both of these versions are now knocking around, bouncing off the walls at various forums with people 'not remembering' whether they have the RHD or LHD version. Cue mucho confusion.
Now we have another one to thicken the plot and muddy the waters.........
Point well taken Alan---that was your diagram to begin with...like you said it floats around!
My reference was only in relation to who posted it here...the credit for the original diagram should have been made in the original post. I considered it, but I'm groggy and 11 hours ahead of the Time Zone I'm supposed to be in...
And I've been informed Lufthansa has cancelled my flight, so it looks like I'm going to be routing back through Heathrow...eventually...
Muddy the Waters? Me...never!
-
It won't fall off, but they can shift around a little bit from impacts and jarring movements.. I was referring to clamping the Cow Magnets to the filter---they are round cylindrical magnets (for those who don't know what Cow Magnets look like) and if you don't hose clamp em' they all end up on the bottom of the filter after the first good bump!
Flatter Alnicos will stick on the filters and not move around at all, because they have a lot more surface area in contact with the ferrous alloy.
-
All I can say is you can't change the rules of physics, and common sense dictates the flow numbers speak for themselves. Added to packaging ease it's a no-brainer...
Our Bonneville Car runs twice-pipes and I can show even with twin mandrel-bent 2.5" straightpipes, you loose horespower from flow restriction on an N/A L28. And packaging on a car with 1.5" of ground clearance is kinda critical...a single 3.5" or 4" pipe would not package nearly as efficiently in the package. "Stock" ITS 2.4's run at least a 3" mandrel bent exhaust to cut the power losses in the exhaust end...so obviously a 3" mandrel bent exhaust is a hindrance. How do you get more flow through the same available space? Double Up smaller pipes for a flow equivalent. It's not rocket science.
-
I had an S130 Template made up for someone here and was going to give it to them at MSA, but they fell off the face of the earth...and I suppose I probably have shredded the cardboard template back in June after I got laid off and started cleaning things out...
The photo diagram above by JSRB26ZCar was for a RHD car, and if you followed those directions, I can see where you ended up with problems on an LHD Car.
The mirrors do need to be staggered so you can see down the side of the car properly---thing is the RHD stagger will give the results you mentioned if applied to a LHD Vehicle. For the life of me I can't remember the 'back from the headlight bucket crease' dimension, but it was less than half a sheet of legal paper.
Most people I've seen that mount their mirrors without using a proper template put them too far back on the fender, and too far inward. Giving poor results. The stock fender mirrors are very effective showing the entire side of the car, as well as the entire lane to the left and right of the vehicle from the doors back. They pretty much take away blind spots altogether...even with the crappy small inside rearview mirror. Like mentioned, add a Broadway and you should never be cutting anybody off...
I do have a Fairlady 280 Z(X) sitting at home that I suppose I could pull the template off of again...
Whenever I get back home.
-
The stock fuel pressure regulator is manifold referenced---meaning the fuel pressure is spring set to be a set pressure ABOVE manifold pressure. The stock FPR IS a 1:1 fpr with a 37psi preset bias.
A rising rate FPR changes fuel pressure NON-Linearly. For every psi you get in the manifold, you get 2, or 3 X that change in the fuel pressure. For band-aiding a stock EFI system with STOCK sized injectors it works to give more fuel under boost.
With a standalone, a RRFPR is not required. With stock ECU and Stock Sized injectors it will give you more fuel flow under boost than the stock injectors would normally be capable of doing.
For a Turbo ECU, ANY stock regulator from a Nissan EFI system will work fine---it already has 'boost flows' compensated into the fuel mapping up to around 10psi. And yes, you can use them on the aluminum fuel rails simply by mounting them on the firewall, or wherever, and using a barbed fitting at the end of the rail.
-
Floating takes away horsepower? Ever look a 'restricted lift' competition cams? The design a ramp to 'throw' the lifter off the nose of the cam, thereby giving the effect of actually having a higher lift than what you actually do. "Launcher Cams" they are called I believe...
You got to understand many SBC in the 70s had such terrible springs that they would float the valves at 4500 rpms! Machining tolerances weren't the best, either.
Remember, this ain't a SBC we're talking about, it's a Datsun L-6. Different animal.
This same myth crossed over into the VW World some time ago as Hydraulic Adjusters were available out of the box in Mexican Beetles. With as many solid-lifter cams out there, and with the 60+ years of development into them, anything that didn't give the predictable results of them out of the box during development of the newer grinds was given a bad wrap.
But after a short teething period, the Hydraulic Cams in the VW Type 1 now support pretty radical performance. Solids are still all over the scene for the above reasons, but for street engines and especially street turbo cars the Hydraulics with no noise and no adjustment (every 3K miles on a VW!!!) and comparable performance to around 7500-8000, more and more people are using them.
Right, it's not 10K rpm like the competition engines, but a competition engine on the street is a big mistake in more ways than one.
Corvairs don't have any of that reputation unless the lifter components are swapped around during rework of the lifters. All competition Vairs have Hydraulic Cams, and they rev same as SBC's with solids. But it doesn't stop people from lamenting 'if only a flat-tappet cam was available'...then again, if it works, why bother with the hassles involved? Especially on an engine that GROWS 0.100"+ from stone cold to hot operating temperature. Kinda makes a self-adjustable lifter system nice...
-
1974 Michigan State Police Detective's car...454 Four Barrel, calibrated speedo, different suspension, dual exhausts and no catalysts or smog equipment at all... Almost like a 69 specification (or 72 for that matter).
Old lady next door had it when here husband died. In a teenager's dream one day we were talking and she asked me if I could take it up to Monument Road heading out of town and 'blow out the carbon for her'...Talk about doubletake. She explained to me that her husband told her that the car needed to have that done at least once a month or it wouldn't run right.
Like I needed to be asked twice. Suuuure I'll do that for ya Mrs Papke!
Worst traffic stop ever: coming back down Monument Road, and being stopped by the MSP at a triple digit speed. Trooper comes up, says "who are you? isn't this Papke's car?"
Yes sir, Gladys asked me to 'blow out the carbon' for her, and she says I have to go at least 140 or the car doesn't run right. Her husband told her that...
"That sounds like Papke, er... Don't tell anybody about this, and keep it on Sunday Mornings, O.K.?"
Yes, Officer!
(Glowing Look of Incredulity on Face Rest of the Day)
Apparently nobody on in the post wanted to screw with anything related to Gladys because she would camp out at the post desk and make their lives a living hell till they either relented, or someone up in higher HQ got wind of it and did something over their heads to placate whatever got under her bonnet. Never met her husband, but I was SO GLAD he told her to blow out the carbon every month!
Curiously, the later 70's Impala MSP Cars with the 350's were pretty good handlers, and would give a stock 240 a run around most auto-x courses believe it or not. Don't even ask how that bit of knowledge came into my realm! LOL
-
Er...
Well, my 73 240Zt has dynoed upwards of 325 to the rear wheels using the JDM Trust / Greddy dual pipe setup that is a mirror image of the OEM Z432 Exhaust System, only smaller.
The Design Impetus for the Twice Pipes in the JDM was the Z432, which had twin 60mm pipes to support a full-on 2-Liter running above 10,500 rpms in competition and restricted to standard componentry in it's racing class.
So Greddy/Trust simply copied that system since that is what the early 240's are designed to accept straight out of the box.
It's far easier to package that JDM system in an early car (see photos earlier in the thread for the obviousl 'twin humps' in the differential crossmember) than it EVER will be on a single 3" system!
Unless, of course you change to a later single-cutout diffy crossmember...
So packaging an exhaust system that WILL NOT BOTTOM OUT (just like the OEM setup) and retains full flow capabilites more than sufficient to support over 300HP sounds like a good way to go to me. I guess you missed those dyno numbers the first time...as well as the PRIMARY reason for doing it in an EARLY CAR: PACKAGING EASE. It's what the freakin' designers of the vehicle intended for the chassis! Look at any number of 3" systems out there, and tell me they aren't scarfed where they pass beneath the differential...what good does a 3" Mandrel Bent system do you when it's smashed to 2.5" at the differential due to bottoming out. And if you haven't swapped to the later diff member, chances are good you're crushed more than that! Your comment is foolish on the face---it's like saying there is no difference in dyno numbers between a 3" Mandrel and 3" Crush-Bent system---simple cross-sectional diameters will show you there is a flow difference, and flow means HP---ESPECIALLY on a turbo engine. Now, if you are talking on a bone stock N/A engine, sure you may not flow enough to have it make a difference, and threfore use the dyno numbers to 'prove' the mandrel bent system is 'useless' compared to crush-bent. But even on a stock turbo the addidion of a 3" mandrel bent tube exhaust is worth 20HP on a ZXT... But then we come full-circle to packaging again don't we? And the argument of 'how good is a 3" exhaust if it's crushed 1/2"?'
With your retort, you really need to read a bit more to realize people posting here aren't blathering out mindless drivel. You made a bad guess, the supporting documentation was posted earlier in the thread as well. Live with it and drop the attitude. It's not a Honda Forum.
Oh, on the JDM thing...er, what 's your point. I lived there at the time I bought it...and let me say that the development level currently being experienced in the USA on the street is only now approaching the level of Japanese Street Tuners of 20+ years ago. So I proudly state I have a JDM Aftermarket exhaust system that has been on my car since 1985, and was almost 7 years old when I bought it. Never used a 'special header gasket'
never had a tube rust through. Sometimes quality counts, son, and these are quality parts, well thought out and engineered far better than their counterparts available in the USA for years...
As far as 'faster or better' than anybody else...I think I am faster than any other F/PRO competitior in the world as certified by the SCTA/BNI, amongst other classes. Never said I was better. But I damn well am certified faster than anyone else on the planet competing in that classification...
I digress...
-
This question may have been dodged,...
Maybe I'm not paying full attention here??
Yep, the consensus is that welding the ports and raising them will give you the same effect as tilting the valve.
Draw out the port configuration, and look at what you get tilting the valve 3*. Then see where you are with the valves in the stock configuration (no headaches) and raise the port and straighten it with a mikuini style manifold and not something that comes straight out the side of the head like a cannon.
When the top of the port is almost touching that valve cover mounting surface, you got a pretty straight shot to the back of the valve...
And remember, the L4's have nice water circulation out the bottom of the manifolds, as opposed to the L6's where you have to drill those damnable holes above the ports to get decent circulation at the back two cylinders...
-
Blocking of the holes in the balance tube simply cleans up the top of the manifold. Look at the "Euro Manifold" Balance Tube and you will see something with only the Brake Booster threaded hole.
I don't know of anybody deleting the balance tube...it's agood thing to have for the operation of the engine (smooths things out).
People take the coolant hoses off the manifolds for any number of reasons...cool the intake charge by keeping the manifold cooler, etc.
There are actualyl two circuits on the later manifolds, one for the carbs to keep the throttle plate section of the carb from icing up in humid ocnditions and another that heats the manifold during warmup to help cold-running. Ignorance mainly dictates the removal of the whole system, really, as once the engine warms to 170F, the manifold heating section of the water passages is shut off by a thermostat at the rear of the engine as brokebolt says---it really helps promote faster warmups of the engine by allowing considerably more recirculation of the coolant within the block... but who am I to argue with everybody that looked at a 72 Manifold system and never looked any further???
I can see the anti-icing items being plugged, as well as the upper manifold portion when you aren't running EGR...but if the system is functioning it really helps with warmup and cold running cababilities of the setup. Biggest issue with the parts at the back of the engine is sedimentation from dolts who didn't use anti-freeze and sedimented up the thermostat...
-
I know old tech was simply to raise the ports as mentioned. The FIA heads have ports already raised. For the standard L-4 heads, many builders would weld into the valve cover area and move the ports up so far to be almost touching the valve cover gasket...very straight shot to the back of the valve head.
Truthfully my first thought was with all the work "why in the world didn't he use the barrel throttle assemblies"---45 barrels flow as much as 48mm butterflies, yet have tip-in response of much smaller carbs for better drivability when feathering the throttle to get underway...
Seriously, that is exactly what I thought.
Blocked off the lower half of my grill
in Body Kits & Paint
Posted
I really like the look of that setup! Niiiice.
Couple of recessed 5 3/4" Cessna Landing Lights in there, with a flush plexiglass covering would add 'flash to pass intimidation' to the list of additional advantages with your mod!
LOL