Tony D
-
Posts
9963 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
74
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Tony D
-
-
Very nice adapter!
Might I posit a question? Would it be worthwhile to put some 'horns' on the adapter to allow a semi-engine plate installation? Using a horn left and right with either an axle snubber or engine mount in place on a C-Sectioned portion of the framerails would allow a very nice, solid mount, relative to torqueover and reaction torque on deceleration, all without the hassle of true solid engine mounts on the L-Block.
Basically rubber mounted engine with very limited torqueover movement.
Even if you don't put the horns on it, with that substantial a plate, simply machining a few holes and making some reaction arms to blot to it would suffice as well, I suppose.
Just a thought.
-
Running two groups of three on INJ 1 and INJ2 and alternating them--one squirt or two per cycle?
I have noticed a BIG difference in the way these cars run depending on how the injectors are staged and how many squirts you use to inject the fuel.
Anything that keeps the fuel pressuresteadier normally helps with the way the vehicle runs. 1FastZ's car had massive fluctuations on his ITB setup, until we switched from 'simultaneous' to 'alternating' and went from one squirt per cycle to two squirts. That steadied the Fuel Pressure so the thing really didn't move appreciably. This will keep the FPR from beating itself to death trying to regulate the pulsations as well. You don't need the pulsation dampner, but it doesn't hurt anything, either. JeffP recently added an aftermarket dampner on his rail because the 750cc injectors batch-firing was doing odd things to his fuel pressure, and it WAS showing up in his O2 Datalogs while on the Dyno.
I'd be curious to see if it gets better switching Simultaneous and ALternating, and going to 2 squirts per cycle. Some cars will not run it gets so bad until the settings are correct.
-
For what its worth, I did some preliminary testing a while back. I ran magnetic sensors on both the crank and distributor drive. Long story short, I found that most of the scatter associated with a common distributor was in the 'plate'... the mechanisms for mechanical and vacuum advance were significant contributors. A dual channel O' scope, on both mag. sensors, minus the advance mechanisms, showed an average of plus/minus 1 deg. scatter. Not F1 territory, but certainly satisfactory for most of us earthbound folk.
The only real problem with the 82/83CAS drive setup is the possibility that the drive gear on the spindle can SLIP, changing timing radically. This can happen during vigorous track activities, a hard cut / reengage on the rev limiter, or something that throws a reverse pulse into the drive while at higher rpms while pumping oil hard...
People say it's not an Issue, but it DOES happen. I have had my drive gear pinned with a 3mm dowel. When JeffP was running his car on the Dynapack at Jim Wolf, the timing spun almost a full 180 degrees! We retimed it, ran it again up to the point where the engine started bucking from running lean, and then rechecked the timing and it was AGAIN off by 7 degrees. Once they slip, they are prone to do it again.
So a word to the wise, if you want BULLETPROOF, pin that damnable gear so it CAN'T slip! There is no appreciable torque to drive the dissy anyway, I suspect it's an inertial thing with the pump being driven. The Nissan Tech that stopped by mentioned that spinning dizzy drive gears, or shattered crank drive gearing was fairly common 'in the old days'--so suspect this little malady is an oft-forgotten or overlooked reason for 'timing drift' in cars.
Just and FYI so it doesn't come up and people are scratching their heads.
Otherwise, it's a VERY easy way to get the Crankfire/Cam Sensor setup for full sequential. Nice idea, I'm going to check with JeffP and see if that scenario is compatible with Lance's Box.
-
I thought everybody used Harbor Freight Dollies!
I put a 2X6 Frame on them, with a little cutout on the right front for the oil pump. The 2X6 hugs the rails of the oil pan, and the cutout lets it sit right down nice and snug---it's pretty easy to make up, and then they sit VERY STABLE on the furniture dollies. Of course, if your storing TURBO engines, there is another slot to cut on the left side to clear the stock oil return. But you can do it with a hammer and hand saw...
This allows you to 'stack' an engine beneath two others that are sitting on the 750# HF Engine Dollies. So you can get four in the place of two...
-
Roosty, you got plans for that trailer anywhere? I could probably knock that out in a weekend, and it would make my life considerably easier.
I could then concentrate monies on a 'real' enclosed trailer for weekend and week-long outings, with that little gem of yours for daily transport duties.
With what I spend on U-Hauls (even at the 'preferred renter rate of $35 Daily for the Auto-Transport) I could have bought a damn trailer, but I LIKE yours much better than anything I see for sale locally!
-
I have cars with all three locations:
1) near stock EFI pump location on stock EFI Pump Bracket (240Z) with primer pump up near where EFI pump is on 2+2's (angled rear floor in front of A-Arms)
2) on right fender well, with booster pump on Stock EFI Bracket in back with EFI pump underneath.
3) On FRONT of Radiator Core Support (Aquarium Filter Surge Tank) with an IN-TANK pump inside the Surge Tank, and the booster pump in back on the stock 260Z Electric Pump Mounting Bracket.
Of the three locations I have tried, I prefer the front of the radiator with the in-tank pump and the Rear of the Car. The car I had mounted on the right fenderwell just made the area inside the engine bay too busy, and like you said: it's hot. Anything you can do in the engine bay, you can do in front of the radiator and it will remain cooler.
Crash integrity is of concern, but if you have a proper pump circuit with crash interrupt (get it from any Ford Product with EFI---I know Tempo/Topaz have them behind the carpet in the Left Rear of the Trunk, and Ranger Pickups are on the passenger's footwell tranny tunnel near the firewall under the carpet) they reset easily, and will kill any circuit instantly in case of Heavy-G impact or Rollover. As long as you kill the pumps, the system depressurizes through the return line quickly to prevent fuel spewage during crashes---if it spills at all.
-
Stock compression for turbo motor is 143 to be exact and I knew this. I want to see any one in here can explain the high compression readings when you get a bad head gasket? Thanks for all the replies.
PS. This time the compressions were the same regardless of my throttle open or close
In that case, I have to question your testing methodology, and the gauge itself. If your readings are moving around, and you are making comments regarding throttle position, you need to follow proper compression testing methodology---I simply thought we were beyond that point discussing it here, so apparently not.
Test with standard methodology, or tell us the methodology you are using in your test for us to be of more help. Leaving things out makes for bad advice, and usless commentary. We may as well be grasping at hairs on a camel's back to solve the Mid-East troubles in that case....
-
OOOOOR, you could have enough combustion chamber deposits that they are affecting the compression readings.
Likely the rings seated better if it was a fresh engine. 145 is a bit low, 175 is a good (better) number...
-
UPDATED:
Due to the thing running well for 45 minutes before having any problems whatsoever after Z-Ya cleaned up myn box and verified his car ran on it, I decided that the CAS possibly was the culprit. I re-accomplished some testing this morning, and datalogged it---I saw tachometer irregularities starting at about 35 minutes of runtime, getting gradually worse as the time went on until at 45 minutes it was nothing but a backfiring, popping, stumbling POS---with a fuel pump that stayed on...
So at that point, I dropped the oil pump dsrive spindle out, and converted to the 82/83CAS. I had to reconfigure my spark settings, but that was quick work, and up and running it went.
After an hour of testing, and datalogging to confirm it, there appears to be no troubles at this point. It hasn't run this good since I initially fired it up on the 8X8 tables in late 2002! Apparently the 81 CAS I was using was intermittently failing with the heat. Today it was around 95 degrees F, and the datalogs showed I started with 34C coolant temperature and 32C Inlet air temperature (ended at 82C and 56C respectively...)
So it appears to all be working now. Sage words of advice from Moby's Sticky: START WITH A KNOWN RUNNING CAR. I bought this out of a J/Y with no idea on how it was working at time of junking.
Many thanks to Z-Ya for confirming the box was good, and doing his magical repairs. That put me on to the failed CAS in short order.
Just finding the time to do it was a chore. Now to do my taxes, as I'm off to Timmons Ontario, directly after my stint in Buffalo NY the next two weeks. Won't be back till after they're due! BAH! BOTHER!
Yaay! MS runs again (finally!)
-
I think this testing station does have the option for rolling road. It's earlier in the post where BJ was posting photos and giving more details. Wether we use that or not I don't know. In either case, the time is close, and I can't wait to see the results, rolling road underneath, or not!
Baited Breath...
-
I will second warnings about DIY Tank Slushing Kits. I always bought my stuff from Aircraft Spruce, and even now they warn that their original kit is for AVIATION ONLY. Apparently some of the new additives in petrol cause the original aviation kits to come loose and clog---so they have a different formula for cars. Apparently AvGas is a bit more controlled as to compounding, probably for just such a reason!
So whatever slushing compound you use, make sure it is for todays fuels, and NOT for aviation usage. Something to do with alcohol or mtbe...the oxygenates.
Otherwise, my tanks slushed with the Aircraft Automotive Slushing Compound work fine. I love Aircraft Spruce!
-
I bought their prototypes when they were doing development work on them, and even those are fine.
The production pieces are better, and have proper brackets. But I'm cheap. Hey, I got mine for $5 at the 'scratch and dent sale' so I'm not complaining.
For the cost I paid, I could rate them 'outstanding'...LOL
-
I will go to hell if I contribute to this post...
Make sure as stated above your exhaust isn't isolated (rubber hangers...) form vehicle ground, and the flame coil ground.
Then make sure you have enough raw fuel to ignite. It's not as easy as it sounds if you aren't injecting it directly into the pipe raw through a mist injector. If you had Megasquirt or a standalone it would be VERY easy to get 'decel enrichment' to a point where you had PLENTY of gas.
Normally, these show units use the raw-gas-injection method for reliable flamage, and you simply use engine exhaust as a preheater and motive force to shoot the flames out the tailpipe, not as the source of the combustible material itself.
Good Luck. Post photos when you get it flaming!
Let it never be said I didn't assist when a good flaming was needed!!! LOL
-
Biggest one (7/16") is pickup, the one next to it that is 5/16" -- return, and anything else is a vent, most likely 1/4"
-
MS can run in that mode as well on a Z...
Don't know why you would, but you could...
-
Did you go to the link I referenced? That directly answers your question.
The F54 has a lot of myths surrounding it. Siamesed cylinders notsomuch, but improved cooling around the bores yes. Due to the improved cooling to keep the bores round, the decreased the wall thickness (as stated earlier)
No matter which way you slice it, the metal used in the OEM casting is not as strong as the metal used in the liners. I can't conceive why you are hung up on logitunidal force transfer they are siamesed in the non-thrust direction.
I'm missing some transferrence in your question, originally your question was why the liners were in the block you had, and I addressed it as best I could.
Is this another question you've moved on to?
You really need to read the link I referenced to understand how liners work. If they could pull over 800HP out of a non-posted, linered block, why do you need it, and what are your plans that make you think you need it?
-
Ohhhhh, young-uns here, eh? LOL
To get the rising fuel pressure from a mechanical pump, you tap the 'spring side' of the diaphragm housing, and supply boost pressure. Your resultant fuel pressure will rise as boost does, and keep original fuel pressure biased by the original fuel pump pressure plus boost.
-
"There is probably no way you can put the engine under 100% load on public roads (I've tried)."
JeffP is in that boat now. Finally got his system to track properly, and now is lighting the cars rear tires up at will. His next step: 300# of pea gravel or aquarium rocks in bags over the rear tires and stickier tires.
Street tuning will save you time when you go to the dyno, but ultimately even an hour on a dyno will reveal horsepower, or something you didn't find on the street.
Right now, JeffP is at the quandary "7500rpm in third gear is go to jail territory and second just won't stay hooked up at all!"
-
I agree, Mike. From what you saw of my response to the post there at ZC.C I think I summed it up pretty well. Phil really didn't have any reason to post what he did on the followup--it only goes to counter to constructive commentary (not something high on that site's list of priories). Phil does a lot with his site to get knowledge dispersed, and undoubtedly will help disseminate what information is gleaned---but the 'I haven't gotten a thank-you' only leads to counterproductive thoughts regarding this effort, and was innapropriate. ANYTHING posted on ZC.C regarding this testing is irrelevant. Contributors know (or should know) where the APPROPRIATE forum is to address the progress. ZC.C is NOT an appropriate forum for such discussion.
Like I said there, 'there is a reason it's being done there and not here'---it pretty much sums it up. There are those there who will continually throw sarcastic stones because their minds are so small they don't appreciate the curiosity/yen for knowing. And by knowing, I mean hands-on. There are some who say this 'has been done' by this magazine, or Nissan itself.
To those people, I say "Show me the results, and where they had the tests performed". Likely Nissan did some testing, but it was more for product improvement of the next generation S130, and not as a precoursor or developmental step to the S30 in the 60's.
I look forward to the testing results, not that it will help me presonally, but because as I said at the outset: Because I want to know the real story, and not something of nebulous origin that has been parroted for 30+ years.
And to confirm my testing doen in the early 90's when I had more time than money. No more money now, and even less time...
-
Monty Burns Voice:
"Ex.....cellent!"
Looks like I will be on that side of the USA in the general timeframe as well. I may have to 'make' my flight route through Charlotte and take a delay...
Wouldn't be the first time. I like to take photos! LOL
-
Oh oh, famous last words:
"I have a friend who may help out a little. He is an EE and pretty good at reading manuals."
They always are, they always are!
LOL
-
Oh, and this:
"I can't see how linering a block makes the block any more capable of supporting more lateral piston thrust. I can see how, if linering with harder materials, it could make it more wear resistant.
In fact, I can only see how linering makes the block LESS capable of resisting thrust forces, as the liner itself is not tied into the block at all, so you are simply removing material that distributes the thrust forces."
The liners are tied hard and fast at the top and bottom through interference fits. They don't 'drop in'---usually they are chilled to -40 while the block is either at room temperature or heated to operating temperature and then PRESSED IN with a hydraulic apparatus. This give more than enough interference fit to lock the block and liner together as integral parts of the same assembly.
When this occurs, the 'unsupported' portions of the liner between the top and bottom of the block they are in function as surrogate cylinder walls. You seem to be making the assumption that they are somehow loose in the block flopping around, and this is far from the case. The liner walls are every bit as stable as the OEM cast cylinders. In fact, piston thrust loads are not really that great, and rarely come into play at all. You could support them on the thinnest of tubing.
What you will notice on most cylinder liners is the upper portion is considerably thicker than the lower portion. The lower portion only handles thrust loadings, but the upper portion handles cylinder pressures directly. THIS is where a cylinder liner can shine. Nitromethane Dragsters have SERIOUSLY thick upper combustion chamber and power stroke depth liners, that taper quickly to almost nothing (comparatively) below the lower ring travel area. That is the difference between supporting thrust loadings, location of the liner in general, and Combustion Pressure.
Combustion Pressure (and more specifically, Detonation Pressures) can/will/have caused thin cast walled blocks to literally split open. The cure for this is liners of sufficient wall thickness installed into the same block, held fast by the deck and main cap girdle area of the engine. I have personally split both VW and Corvair overbored 'cylinder jugs' running 25psi+ of boost. I've also blown the case studs out of both of them doing the same stupid crap... "Splitting a Jug" was a concern with Corvairs on 0.060" overbores if you boosted enough and even slightly detonated...once! If you could look at the thickness of the cylinder walls on those particular applications you would get a pretty good idea of what the absolute minimum wall thickness should be for any water-cooled application. They warp and overheat when the walls get thin, then you blow by...then you detonate and split a jug... Thicker cylinder walls stay round, thin ones don't.
I'm glossing over this a lot. This is the tech link to Darton Sleeves, and it has a load of information on it as to why and how, and etc etc etc. Spend some time there and you will get a pretty good idea what is going on with cylinder liners/sleeves. They talk a lot about abrasion resistance, but containing pressure is of primary concern as well. In this case, with the F54 block, on your application, my bet is someone was concerned about wall thickness after boring to piston diameter, and pressure containment/bore concentricity/ring sealing is why they linered the block.
-
The F54 has (relative to the N42) VERY thin walls. If you overbore to the limit, then there is insufficient wall thickness to support the expected loads.
In this case, linering (and I somewhat mis-stated saying 'dry liner', these may indeed be 'wet liners') will give you a bore of sufficient wall thickness for all loads, compared to the bored F54 block.
I forget the specifics, but the wall thickness on an N42 is something along the lines of 0.400". IMO, that allows a significant overbore wihout regard for core shifting.
The F54, on the other hand has cylinder wall thickness less than that, I'm not sure but some say on the line of 0.0250".
Obviously each block on a 3mm overbore (0.120") will have SIGNIFICANTLY different wall thicknesses. On an N42, you may be looking at 0.300", but on the F54, only 0.130". Generally on a high-quality wet liner you will have at least 0.125 to 0.180" of seriously high-grade spun-cast ductile iron which is MUCH stronger a metal than the general cast-iron block. It holds up better, and therefore would be a better support at that thickness than the cast block at 50% as much more thickness!
This is why the JDM boys use the N42 almost exclusively in big-bore high-boost turbo applications. It is not uncommon to see an engine detonate there and blow the cylinder, then hydrolock. Nasty business.
So given these examples, and throw in a core shifted block that has thin spots at the base or top of the virgin-bored block you can see that a competent machinist would likely decide (for lack of another block to use) simply keep on boring another 0.200 or 0.250" beyond the original bore size, liner the block giving rigid and true bores, and call it done.
Darton has made a big business of high-tensile sleeves to put in aluminum blocks, as well as iron blocks. Having a sleeved block for racing in many ways is preferable. If it comes time to remanufacture the engine, you simply order up another set of liners, LN2 the old ones and shatter them out, press in a new set and deck the block.
You have then, the same seasoned block, dimensionally identical as what you had before, with fresh new bores.
Keep in mind the S20 engine in the 432 had Wet Liners (liners that run directly on the coolant system, and not in a metal sleeve of the block casting for their whole length) primarily because it was a racing-specific vehicle and overboring was NOT an option. When you have 1998 CC's on a 2.0L maximum displacement racing class liners are your only option. It makes refreshing the engine simple: press the old liners out, o-ring and press in the new liners, reassemble the engine and you are ready to go racing.
The issue you ahve is you have an F54, with thin walled cylinders. The common practice for big displacement engines is to use the N42, not the F54---simply due to the wall thickness issue mentioned above. So, for the vast majority of engine builders, they will use another block. Here in the USA, there is a myth of 'F54 Superiority' and that really only applies to Stock-Bore Applications. The cooling the cylinders get is somewhat more equal in the F54 with a stock bore. Knowing this redesign was effective, Nissan cut wall thickness accordingly. In the N42, wall integrity and thermal distortion was countered with metal mass (thick walls). Once you redesigned the coolant flow, you didn't need the mass, so they eliminated it as any good engineering student would tell you to do---saves money!
The liners aren't there to reduce wear, I never said that. Someone else did, and that is in another application (think domestic crap...V8's specifically the SBC) In the V-8 world the metal used to cast blocks is NOWHERE near as high-quality as Nissan used in the L-Engines. in those applications, the spun-cast ductil iron cylinders, indeed are harder and wear better long term than the virgin metal in the OEM block. I mean, I've seen Ford 460's with almost a 1mm RIDGE at the top of the bore where ring travel stops (and only at 150,000 miles!!!!!!!) I mean 'ridge reamer' is an American and British invention! LOL You definately don't need on on any Nissan L-Block.
I hope that made sense.
-
Nice integrated filter/swirlpot. Looks suprisingly like the FRAM unit, save for some extra fittings.
Getting my drift? LOL
Where to buy Dellorto choke?
in Fuel Delivery
Posted
If you are SURE you want that size, simply have a machine shop chuck them up in a lathe and turn them for you to the new size.
I have done this on Mikuinis for years simply because I had a truckload of 32mm Chokes from JDM OEM applications.
You may want to have them turned to 32, do a dyno pull, and see if you are satisfied.