Tony D

The conversions in a CNG vehicle are safer than a gasoline vehicle. They are DOT compliant for fuel system integrity far better than liquid-fuel vehicles. If you were to hit a CNG vehicle hard enough to dislodge the fuel storage tanks, or break them free from their lines in the vehicle, they each have their own 'blowout' valve that seals the tank...letting it skitter along the highway shooting sparks, whatever, with absolutely no fuel venting. Watching the testing was very illuminating... What is the cost of E85 anyway? For around $4.50 I get 100 octane at the pump (VP Racing Fuel at the local Circle K, about 2 miles from my house)... I'm not sure what it is for the Propane at the tank there, I know it's about $10 for a five gallon refill up the street, so they have to be in that area. Propane, at 115 octane has the 'liquid fuel' mileage advantage---that is you can put enough onboard to not have any mileage penalty compared to Gasoline. If you prepare the engine to take advantage of the added octane you get a VERY nice driveable vehicle. The 'powerless' conversions are universally converted standard gasoline engines. I know the Ford Modular 5.4 Triton has a special CNG part number, Forged Slugs, and 13:1 compression from Father Ford's Factory! Makes for a sleeper gasoline engine if you swap some cams and run racing gas.... But I digress. I'm thinking Propane was 115 octane, and CNG was slightly higher at 120. And those are R+M/2 numbers---pump octane. They do run extremenly clean in both cases. The only downfall I see with LPG (propane) is that if you live where it can get to -40, you end up with insufficient tank pressure for the car to do high speed runs before warming up a bit, so you have some heat in the tank to keep up pressure. LPG's condensing point is somewhere around -40... CNG is cryogenic. It's like -345 or some ridiculous number. You can get that, usually at Bus Stations for Metro Use, or Trash Truck Maintenance Yards. Waste Management in SoCal uses LNG on some trucks, CNG on others. Sad to say, LNG will probably not make it to pedestrian vehicular usage simply because of NASA style refueling procedures. The...uhm...'unskilled laborers' at the SoCal Truck Fueling Stations for WMI had 'issues' comprehending proper fueling procedures. It IS a cryogenic liquid, after all, and there is a modicum of safety steps you should observe! Maybe language was part of the comprehension problem... Lots of vehicles out there to snag surplus parts from, as well as buying new stuff. And remember, CNG is renewable! We make it from trash... 1100btu's per CF... I forget what it's selling for at the station by my house, but it's around a buck lower than Gas...and that's simply an ethical marketing price cap---originally the pricing was supposed to be 20% less than gas or diesel simply as a large enough incentive for fleets and taxis to use it without subsidies (T. Boon Pickens is behind this initiative in many states...). There was finally a point with the price of gasoline pricing moving continually upward that the corporate heads said 'enough is enough' and they pretty much haven't raised prices in over 18 months. Hell, you can fuel at home with a slow-fill system off your home's Natural Gas Line for the equivalent of about .40 cents a gallon equivalent. You just pay with your motnhly utility bill... CNG just makes the most sense in my book, since infrastructure exists to do it NOW, and the fueling at home really appeals to me.

They ignite when you shoot them three times in quick succession with steel-cored Chinese Surplus 7.62X39 Ammo from an SKS as well. So do older AS41 Alloy VW cases. I have THREE of those fans (Corvair) laying around doing nothing...if my Watanabe's didn't look so bitchen, I'd be tempted to make a go of installing them when I found a fourth... That's a cool bit 'o trivia there. Gotta Love a Vette depending on a Vair to handle... LOL

"Surges"---as in power delivery comes in surges, the engine makes an intermittent surging sound, or you think the compressor is stalling and actually reversing flow (surge)? If it's datalogged, you will tell right away what is happening.

My kid found the glowing turbo on Jeff's car immensely entertaining! My photos have some sort of chromatic shift, so his turbo (er, and those rear brake rotors from the run where he left the e-brake engaged...) look pink of all things. Maybe JeffP is revealing something here: "The Pink Turbo Club" LOL

Ignorance, blinding, stifling ignorance! It's like 'The Kings' English' and 'Street Vernacular'.... Once you have gotten used to being sloven about terminology, everything else falls downhill in quick order. LOL

Yes, the Bob Sharp Car did stay with the centrally-mounted T/B. That is a good photo of their setup. The Q45 T/B has a throttle cable actuation, but it is linkaged to the throttle shaft through a VERY non-linear cam action. The first....probably 25-30% of throttle travel will only crack the throttle. I will lay money the Q45 T/B will have better drivability characteristics than the 62mm unit JeffP currently has on his car.

Actually, with all the whining I've been having to listen to about how 'high' gas prices are...this actually becomes a welcome change! See, when I was a kid working minimum wage ($3.35) the gas price shot from .68 to $1.41 in about a month and a half. I didn't complain then, and FINALLY the minimum wage will 'catch up' to the same ratio it was back then in 1981. (The former highpoint in gasoline pricing all-time highs...) Figuring inflation alone, from 81 to now, that gas should be $3.25, and Minimum wage should be around $7.25. So hopefully will quash the minimum wage whiners carping about gas prices. That's the highpoint for me... As for the rest... meh! Here we go again... I should join a union so I get an Indexed Factor of Minimum Wage for my rate instead of salary... muahahahaha!

.020 or thereabouts from what I saw. Define "any kind of boost"... the numbers Jeff is making is with boost in double digit numbers that all begin with '1'... 17 psi was about the limit on the last set of runs that were complete and clean. You got flow, you don't need Boost. I think Tim's boost level will suprise a lot of people as well, given the numbers he's punching out! Tim, What EFI System are you using, and are those screenshots off the Tuning Utility it comes with?

LOL! "Autozone, the definitive cyclopeadic repository of automotive knowledge." 1)"I need a Drag Link for a 1964 Datsun Patrol, can you get one?" Datsun? Who makes that? I don't see it on my computer...

I'll give you a good reason they are called CORE PLUGS and NOTHING ELSE! When you assemble the forms (cores) for the engine block for casting, the water jackets need to be supported. The ONLY way to do this, is to have those round holes from the inner, hollow parts of the engine block to the outside portion of the sand casting making up the outer portion of the block. You see these holes in sand castings with inner passages that are closed from the outside. If they are Freeze Plugs please, oh please those of you calling them that, and using anecdotal stories to support that incorrect terminology....tell me why OH WHY did Nissan see fit to install one of those "FREEZE PLUGS" in the END OF THE INTAKE MANIFOLD PLENUM WHICH ONLY EVER SEES AIR AND AIR ALONE????? Could it be that the CORE of the plenum needed to be supported on BOTH ENDS---with one end being the T/B opening, and the CORE PLUG OPENING on the backside being the other? Methinks so! Game, Set, MATCH! "CORE PLUGS" Though I'm with BRAAP in the acceptance of "Welsh Plug, Soft Plug..." But never ever EVER "Freeze Plug"!

There was a racing team that closed out in SoCal in the mid 90's that sold off a load of those wheel-fans.

What part of the '85' is renewable? M85 is a better alternative, IMO, but both are a lie when it comes to 'renewable fuel' most Ethanol is hydrocracked form crude oil here in CA because it's cheaper. In the midwest Ethanol is a good subsidy to keep people employed, but it's really kind of an irresponsible way to make people think it makes a difference. You can run Fantastic Compression on CNG, and CNG truly IS a 'renewable fuel' as you can (and people do) recover medium btu CH4 from landfills. This goes through conventional stripping and refining processes, and the CO2 is recovered for use to put bubbles in beer, and the 1100 BTU / CF Methane is ready for use as pipeline gas, or vehicular fueling. Alcohol makes for a neat subsidy for ADM, but the petroleum used to grow the corn kind of skews the equation. There is a lot more to it than the propaganda the AG Collective foists on the unwitting media. I'm no conspiracy theorist, I was a TMEN Alcohol Fuel Seminar Attendee (by proxy--couldn't travel to NC when it was happening, so paid the full boat for all the materials, still have that orange folder aroudn somewhere...cost me $$$ back in the day!) Alcohol is sustainable for Farm Usage---that is to say some sort of Mad-Max existence where people make their own fuel to survive. Enough can be made on small parcels using the correct feedstocks to keep you in fuel. But without the freely available petroleum distillate of gasoline it takes a LOT of alky to go anywhere. I produced close to 500 gallons, which drove me close to 5000 miles over a period of a year. The only way it was even sustainable was for me to mix my own 'gasahol' and get the federal taxes back on the gasoline I mixed with it. Without government subsidies, neither M85 or E85 is a viable fuel that would support their own refining and production costs in the open market. You want "fantastic compression" propane and CNG have octane ratings in the 115-120 range! And having driven dedicated CNG and Propane vehicles, the torque you get is tremendous compared to gasoline engines....

Airjockie will confirm this, but the F15C/D hasa a similar .020" copper safetywired pair of switches under the port bulkhead slightly aft of the pilot labeled "VMAX" and "ECM"... During my incentive flight, I discussed this with the Captian flying me around, and it really didn't take a lot of arm twisting for him to flip the "VMAX" switch. We were at Full Afterburner (MIL POWER) and when he flipped that switch it was like someone pushed me from behind...with a UPS TRUCK! It was at low altitude, too, over the Sea of Japan, kicking up a sonic roostertail! I got MY taxdollars worth out of that ride. Normally incentive rides take about 30 minutes, mine was over in slightly under 15 minutes. And yeah, first thing the crewchief did was look at that switch and then run to the tailfeathers and steart swearing. Then he called AGE and PLSC and they started the engine change procedure. MUAHAHAHA! That pretty much made up for most of the "bad stuff" that happened while I was in... To John C's comment about the B36, it's a damn impressive machine. I went in, on and all around the one on Static Display at Chanute AFB in the mid-80's. The SP's were called more than once when maggots caught us inside, but we always escaped! I made a detour to show my son the thing, but the base was decommissioned, and they had moved that thing somewhere... It really was a cool bird to play around in!

"If the engine swap was conducted before May 1984' date=' pre and post dating of engines was allowable" I know this as I tried to get a 71 L24 Induction/Exhaust system certified on my 73 when I moved here. When it was all said and done, it was clear Smog Laws were about perpetuating a bureaucracy and had very little to do with either common sense, nor clean air. My enraged last words to the referee after jumping through every hoop they put up, was 'Screw you, next time you see this car, it's going to have an LS3 454 Big Block in it from a 73 Corvette!' his reply was "Good, we can smog THAT!" Grrrrrrr! Needless to say that was the last time I legally smogged the 73... But to add something to this discussion, remember that there STILL exists a rolling exemption! Yes indeed girls and boys, vehicles manufactured 35 years ago [i']and insured under collector car insurance[/i] no longer have a VISUAL INSPECTION FAIL CRITERION! What that is to say is that my 1973 (if you do DMV Math) with the originally installed 71 SU system on it would only be required to pass a TAILPIPE smog check. VISUAL CRITERION IS DISMISSED because I have Haggerty Insurance on it. The pre-75 cars are a grey area, but the DMV was forced to this through lobbying on SEMA's part during the last round of SMOG madness. When the 76's come due, though not technically approved, a standaone EFI that retained the Catalyst would pass the SMOG test required of it with an aftermarket FPR and Fuel Rail... As long as it passes clean out the pipe, which should not be a problem. It's a little known quirk in the laws. If you have your car insured by Haggerty, or one of the other collector-car companies, remember this fact. They can't fail on visual criterion, the cars with colector car insurance are EXEMPT from a VISUAL FAILURE CRITERION.

DON'T BREAK IT so that you will miss the show in Temecula on Sunday!!! Where is 'racelegal' held, anyway?

Never heard of Wesco, will have to see their product. I have installed Schroth in the past, and it was a very high quality piece, and for a LONG time was the ONLY manufacturer that had DOT/FMVSS approval on their belts (which evolved through their passing the German TUV approval process to sell their parts in native Germany).

Meh... you can run synthetic oil to combat the diluition of the Ethanol. Newer synthetic rubbers compounded for EFI take in to account the Alcohol Content of current gasoline. Making changeout like in the old days un-necessary. I converted a VW to run 100% Ethanol back in the early 80s'. Terrible mileage and hard to start when cold is an understatement. EFI should take care of the starting, and some of the fuel consumption issue... Then again...why?

I am just reviewing these posts...if you are still on the lookout for one of those bars, I have a JDM 'bolt together' bar I harvested from an S30 2+2 just before I left Japan. I'm not up to sell it, but could graph and measure the thing so you could replicate it locally... or maybe take it to Autopower in San Diego so they could do it. PM me.

The roofline may provide some advantage due to the quicker departure of the hatch. I think a lot of the 'aero advantage of the 2+2' talk comes from a misconception about the Bonneville Records we have attained in the Land Speed Z, a 1976 280Z 2+2. The reason we used a 2+2 had absolutely nothing to do with aerodynamics, but rather class rules that class the 2+2 in a 'production' class, rather than a 'GT' or 'Sports' class. Being in production, there are possibly 17 records we can go after with simple body changes, adding forced induction, or running 'fuel' instead of gasoline. If we ran a coupe, we could run and compete for only 4 classes, GT, BGT, GMS, & GBMS...that's it! And the records for 'MS' class are smoking fast in the engine classes we run---prime competition is Ferraris of 3 liter engine size... anybody recognize the name "Bob Norwood" if that says enough. So really, the reason was rules based, like many racing decisions. Nothing at all to do with Aerodynamics.

John beat me to it, Schroth makes the only OEM style three point replacement belt kits I would consider for the Z. They have some VERY nice products available, and like anything good....well do I really need to say the words: "How much is your life worth?" One thing I will add about the guy in Holland who works for the Paris-Dakar Prep Company...he is the panelbeater for the company, and is making aluminum hood and door skins for the vehicle---the guys intention for the rocker panel bars was more ersatz tubeframe than safety. The guy wants to be able to alter any aspect of the monocoque without comprimising the integrity and stiffness of the chassis. Basically 'A Z Skin' to play with as a panelbeater with time on his hands would see fit. It just happens that it's an FIA approved Cage Engineering works, so he has a LOT of competent oversight in the shop to help with his toy. I will have to find the photos and post them.

Usually the check valve is integral with the pump discharge fitting or body. If the pressure bleeds off, look for leaks such as a weeping FPR pintile to the return side, or a dribbling injector pintile dumping fuel to the intake. Either of those would also cause pressure drop after shutdown. You can install a check valve in the line, but if it's one of these other common items, it won't do you any good. Cheers!

JeffP and Bernard are both using it....PM them... I like to have people bother them. Muahahahaha!

Absolutely, JGK! My comment there was apparently misconstrued as some sort of dig. I was simply trying to say that I wish we could get both Jeff's and Tims cars both on at least 'similar' dynos for a comparo of the performance characteristics. Unfortunately, the geographical separation makes this impossible. The closest resolution I could see was for Jeff to take his car over to where we do out dyno testing for the Bonneville Car (same place John C used for the Rusty Old Datsun) and then we would have as close as an 'apples to apples' comparo of the curve characteristics as possible. I don't know about anyone else, but seeing the two curves on a similar graphing (X-Y Axis Scalars especially) really intrigues me. Taking a curve from a Mustang will produce a different curve, so any comparo of those two would be worthless. Where the curves are on the graph really is irrelevant (on the Y axis, I guess is what I'm saying), the characteristic curve is more important. I know talking with Jeff personally, he is very interested in my thought to run it on a Dynojet just so we can compare stuff for our own purposes. There are decisions we have to make regarding our Bonneville engine, and this kind of run will give us some data to use for that decisionmaking process. It has nothing to do with 'biggest numbers' either... most of the detractors will not make half than power, so what is the point (like Tim said) of even bothering with their commentary. I mean, if EITHER of them wanted to get on the 'A-Hole Horse' and be a lower body part about it, they could easily proclaim their engine makes more power at 2400rpm than XYZ.... Meh! What's the point. It's a learning curve, and we're all learning. Part of learning is curosity, and my curiosity is piqued to really see what the difference is between the curve and numbers Jeff gets on the Mustang compared to the Dynojet. Actually, we have now discussed the possibility of doing the tuning on the Mustang in the AM, and then on the drive back to Jeff's house, making a detour to either Superior or DRS and doing a quick 'strapdown pull sequence' on one of their Dynojets so it's all in the same day with similar barometrics. Curiosity about the dynos as much as the cars power production, really... I hope that clears up my part of that mess.

Yes, yes it could.... Maybe a dual plenum lowrise crossram design using Z32 T/B's... LOL Where have I heard that before, Ken? LOL

I can't remember now if I posted in this thread or not about engineering for reasonable eventualities as opposed to every eventuality, but this indeed goes along with what John is saying: there will always be something so horiffic so as to draw your attention and make you go 'I don't want that to ever happen to me!' But you can't live like that---life isn't safe. You just have to take your reasonable risks. Reasonable doubt has turned to 'beyond any shadow of a doubt' today. And that's unreasonable. Prep soft, belt tight, and minimize impact angle to draw out collision time. When it comes down to it, take the hit anywhere BUT the driver's door, and do whatever you can to position the vehicle like that. Sometimes you can, sometimes you can't. You do what you can, when you can, and that's all you can hope for.