Tony D

Oh, I know EXACTLY where they all are! They have been displayed on my whale tail at MSA in years past. Always gets people to go "ooooooh!" LOL I would have to scan the 432 and the OS Car, they are film prints. The LY engine at least was posted on my Cardomain Page---someone linked to it either eariler in this thread, or over at ZC.C. The 'RED Engine'..... Trying to straighten out the laptop to recover what I had on it, my I.T. department gave me three ghosted DVD's problem is I cant access them. I guess they overlooked that little bit of information, so instead of having access to my photos tonight to put them on my home hard drive, I have to wait till tomorrow to ask them "WTF?"---in any case, I'll put that on the list I suppose!

Reversion is a pumping inefficiency. But if your turbine is sized correctly, there will be no more pressure in the intake manifold than in the exhaust manifold pre-turbine. That means it's all back to pumping efficiency to determine VE. But your last statement is exactly what was said earlier: decrease the pumping losses, and you increase VE. Putting a bigger, less restrictive turbine wheel on the exhaust decreases pumping losses. Air in and air out.

Oh, I just realized something. "I Liked Them All"---geez what an answer! Kind of like a kid in a candy shop. LOL

I liked the TC24B-1 mostly becasue it was in a killer 3.3+L conversion and wasn't the "slow revving" engine that most of the boards comment about. This guy had well over 1 million yen in the stereo alone, I don't even want to fathom what he had in the car totally: TC24B-1 head, 50MM Solexes, HKS Triple Power CDI units, FRP hood, G-Nose, FRP Doors with Perplex Windows in everything but the front, FRP Hatch..... Where did it end? I have photos of this car in my old photo album form Japan Days... It was a hoot to be sure. I don't know that I liked it "the best" simply because of the 432 That I got to drive during the same time period. That was an original 432, with a Grand Slam GTR 2.2 Kit, and needed all of it's stock 10K RPM Tach! It was like running a Honduh, with it's mechanical injection cams and refitted Mikuini 44phh's (owner said the mechanical slide valve setup---which he had stored in old US Army Rocket Boxes---was to difficult to keep running on the street. For the "small displacement revving rush" that car was probably the best all around fun car to drive. It revved and liked it. 4.44 Gearing and positraction, it really wasn't much different than what came from the factory. I don't know the 200CC's from the grand slam kit was worth all that much. it was almost 20 years later when I got a drive in the 3.0L LY car. It's the one posted on my cardomain page. It was a strong runner, but not unlike the better built Non-Crossflow L28's I have been around. The OS Engine was a "gee whiz" kind of addition, I think the breathing helped a massively stroked engine rev much more eagerly. For a street car the 432 with the cams was simply just fun to drive and different than the others which were much more low end grunt due to the displacement difference. I only wish the 432 was allowed for Bonneville Competition. I understand the 432 setup in proper tune was capable of over 300HP, which is stout by any measure for a 2L N/A Anything! And it would take the class record hands down. It would probably run close to the current 3l Class record holder (er, that's us, LOL!)

Bit misleading (and bad form) to post partial troubleshooting information you have received, especially if it's one-sided. I'd suggest you get the FSM and do the component nad circuit tests contained therein. Start at the basics. Like I said there, if you won't follow suggestions and want to argue with what is presented, then I personally won't bother helping further. No time for that kind of round and round any longer. I'm saying nothing more. Good Luck.

Scope the Spark Output as well! Put the thing on a SUN Scope or something and run a lead on one of the plugs to a variable gap ignition tester (like a spark plug with a threaded ground electrode, you can increase the gap without getting zapped.) Watch the flashover peak on the scope till the thing misfires, then try increasing dwell to see if you can reinitiate spark. if it does, repeat. You will eventually find a "diminishing returns" point. I mean, after 60KV, the spark has a tendency to jump dirty plug porcelan, through wires' insulation, from the coil to the "-" terminal on the coil.... You end up having to dielectric every high tension lead you have and continaully look for spark leakage... But you rarely have a misfire problem that is associated with the plug gap! Of course, if it does misfire... then you start seeing all the stuff I mentioned above... BTW, try using a 300ZX Coil (Z31) and be amazed at how sparky they are! On mine, with the pertronix flame thrower HEI, I'm jumping almost 3" of visible blue-white spark that I can see in broad daylight! That coil is HOT! It was after I put that coil in that I found out the PCV hose on the top of the valve cover was made of conductive rubber! Coil wire was "placed in a safe area" and POP POP POP! Was wondering WTF, cranked it again and the POP POP POP was from the coil lead across air to the brand new upper PCV hose I had just installed! Every time it went "POP" when the spark landed it made a little "poof" of smoke rise from the PCV Hose. It was neat as hell, I still show people when they come over, everybody thinks it's cool to see "rubber conducts electricity"! LOL The little poofs of smoke are mighitily impressive as well. 'Dat Sum Spark!' Get it? he he he he he

Especially if you lived in Japan when the head was still in production and have driven/ridden in cars with one on it! (S20, LY, AND TC24B-1)

Er... "We Digress!" lol

Actually, the argument can be made that turbos are not "free" as the exhaust restriction imposed by many costs power. That the payback of the non-linear response of a dynamic compressor outpaces the linear requirements of a positive displacement compressor is the only reason there is a net gain. The belt driven items have a easily calculatable loss, figuring out the loss from exhaust restriction is much more difficult. F1 engines have (had) very low backpressure, but weren't really efficient but near design point.

As a system you are correct. As a system the efficiency increases. But when you calculate the VE of the engine itself, using a proper formula and not one with a lumped-together constant making N/A assumptions, you will find the VE is unchanged. What you have is a "total compression ratio" across the two compressors of 14:1 in my original posted example. In reality, the individual parts are still operating individually and should be looked at as such. Which was the point of the "Boost Compression" calculator fallacy. Same goes for VE calculators using that kind of formula. The VE (Pumping efficiency) of the engine doesn't change. it still has the same mechanical compression ratio. The VE (Pumping Efficiency) of the total system of turbocompressor and engine does increase. Which is what I'm trying to get across. Like "Boost Compression Ratio" is inaccurately applied, so is saying "VE of the Engine increases" which it does not. It's still pumping with the same efficency. That it flows more through it is a function of the supercharger raising that inlet head, it's not pumping that pressure any more efficiently than it would N/A. It's a VE increase for the system, not the engine.

I'm going to mention for no other reason than I saw it above, that I am using CHT on my 260ZT conversion, and scaled it using Easytherm, and it's dead spot-on. Temperature I read there during idle is lower than thermostat housing, but during loaded operation and acceleration is about 10 degrees higher than thermostat housing. So it's seemingly a more sensitive location based on load, which is probably a good thing. If you are having spark issues, and you are using an HEI in any service whatsoever, don't use a cheap one! i had an Autozone Wells part for a while and was disgusted by the spark quality from it. Upgraded to a Pertronix unit and spark quality was dramatically increased. Of course, that upgrade came after the Wells part fried itself after only about a coule weeks of intermittent troubleshooting. After that, the Pertronix unit has functioned flawlessly. On running and then not running. Occasionally the thing gets corrupted. Perhaps the Ms got a static discharge through the box, and the chip got a bit freaked. Have you tried reloading the software and trying it again? I had that issue when I was originally doing the setup. Running fine, then blah baaah blahhh buu buu buu..... Bang my head against the wall for a few weeks then finally reload the program and everything is fine again. ??????? just a thought...

no, on one setup I ran a holley 750 draw through, and has hobbs switches and jets to dump fuel in the linet (egads, that I even ADMIT I did this...) On another there were the ubiquitous Hobbs Switches dumping fuel in the manifold, as well as additional injectors BEFORE the turbo. And FINALLY on a triple blowthrough, again, Hobbs switches with a spearco Injection system using carb jets, solenoids, and a big tank of "anti detonant".... After Spearco Tech Rep got very uneasy finding out I was dumping fuel into the turbo inlet under boost using their non-fuel rated components. So I switched at their insistence to "anti-detonant" which is open for further discussion. On that final setup, I ran up to 22psi without an intercooler, but with injection before the turbo of fluid (take your pick: ethanol, methanol, water, isopropyl alcohol, windshield washer fluid...I ran all sorts of crap through that setup....) BELIEVE ME, MEGASQUIRT IS FAR BETTER! There is also a code available that controls an additional injector for anti-detonant injection before the turbo....... Uses the Fast Idle PWM circuitry I believe.

The answer: "Both"!

To address the original topic question, why bother? Just get the Advance/Retard Can for the ZX dizzy from a European Spec L28ET. They had a vacuum can that did EXACTLY that! They didn't need no stinkin' ECCS. They got no cat, a .82 A/R Turbine, no ECCS, no EGR, and 20 more HP than Stateside vehicles.

Thank The Moderation Gawds, it HAD to be done! Alan can post more information on the S20 (which was the original post topic) but suffice to say they were making well over 300HP on those engines in race prep with Mechanical FI. I wish another 87 432's were produced so that the S20 engine was legal for Bonneville Competition. I need a production run of 500 vehicles (to the general public) to homogolate the engine in the chassis, and using an injected S20 with the Mechanical Injection cam sets would give us about 100 more HP than we are currently making from the L20A in the Land Speed Car. That would make a significant difference in the top speed! I always wanted to produce a T-Shirt with a "No Honda" logo over the pocket, with the technical cutaway of the S20 Cam Drive and Head Setup on the back with the specifications of the Mechanical Fuel Injection engines. Something along the line of "The Real Type-R, GT-R 345HP, 10,500rpm, Fuel Injected, No Variable Valve Timing, 1972" Kinda puts the Honda Boys in their place with their "Latest And Greatest Technology" boast, eh?

I'm with Tim on this one. Take a look at general industry: NOBODY does multiple stages of compression without intercooling. Why? Temperatures would quickly get out of hand. And the temperatures (as well as combustion chamber ddesign) will play the majority of the parts in what octane you require. Many people (myself included) have run 92 octane pump gas to some stupid pressures (in my case 17+psi) without an intercooler. BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT WASN'T INTERCOOLED! At a point above about 10-12psi on pump gas (or about any gasoline for that matter) you end up enrichening the mix quite a bit past what you need for combustion, and retarding timing to keep it running without detonation. Gasoline becomes your anti-detonant. In my case it flashed off in the turbo and dropped outlet temperature of the turbo. No matter which way you try to sort it, PV=nRT doesn't change. it's a physical law. You have to drop the temperature between stages of compression or the temps will soar exponentially. For instance, (ballparking here) you have 80 degree day, and run 2:1 Compression ratio in your turbine. You are running just under 15 psi in your intake manifold. That air without intercooling will be (again, ballparking, offthe top of my head, no calculations done) anywhere from 180 to 270 degrees depending on your compressor efficiency. No biggie, but you got another rise coming. (without boost you would go from atm to 87psi, in this case you will go from From 29 t 188 psi) in both cases the delta is exactly the same, thereforethe temp rise will be the same. BUT, without cooling that 180 to 270 degree air, that 7:1 cr bump will jump that easily to auto-ignition range. now drop that turbine outlet temperature from 180 to say 100, or even better, 80 degrees (through anti detonant injection or proper intercooling) and for all that pressure in the chamber, the temperature will remain the same. if you can drop your intake charge to near ambient temperature, boost will really not be the issue. Blowing the spark kernel out of the plug gap, or combustion chamber design and hot spots will become the focus of your ire... I don't know if this is answering your question, which I think is "how much boost before intercooling on what octane"---and the point I'm trying to get across is that one way or another you HAVE to drop the temperature in between the turbo and the cylinder. While you may not "intercool" it with a radiator, you end up with a defacto intercooler by dumping gasoline into the chamber or turbine inlet to flash off and cool te works before it compresses. in the end anti-detonant is not as an efficient way of doing it, though you can run a lot of boost by injecting it right at turbine inlet. If you monitor that temperature, it will dictate what octane you will need. Most Z-Cars with agressive spark timing (even N/A) will start spark knocking when the temperature is above 110 Ambient under any sort of load. So any time your intake charge is appreciably above 100F with today's gasolines, you start taking timing out, or not being able to load it up really well.

As posted above, the money they ONCE comanded was prodigious. But now with the availability of 2.9 gearsets/diffs from the Armada, their value is dropping as the diffy is stronger. Now, with Subaru selling Torsen-Gleason R200's in their new Turbo Legacy, it's only a matter of time till they start showing up on the market and make things once made of "unobtanium" no longer worth what they once were. No way I would pay upwards of $1000 for it, but indeed $500 would easily drop out of my wallet. The $1000 would be more for the old 3.08 gearset. But as stated earlier, now with the Armada Pumpkins available, an even better ratio (and yes, it IS for a Land Speed Salt Flats Car) is available, for a price probably much less than that and with low miles as well! Damn the march of "Product Improvement"! It shoots your hoarde's value right in the butt! LOL Anyway, don't pay too much for that Torsen-Gleason R200, waiting a few more years and the chances of a cheap one simply showing up in a Northeastern Junkyard in the back end of a T2007 Turbo Legacy is HIGH!

Use a thick enough Engine Plate, and the only thing rotated will be the engine, you can mount the tranny straight up, to the Engine Plate. Then all you need to do is alter it to relocate the starter. The Electromotive 280ZXT was laid over at almost 30 degrees towards the passenger's side of the car using dry sump, and allowing a long curved runner intake manifold. What, only $40K in fabrication, nothing big....... LOL It would probably be easier to relocate the driver's side using Fairlady Z parts to RHD, and really open up that side of the car. I know RS Okinawa used 5" exhaust on it's Twin-Turbo Setups in the Late 80's. But such is the advantage of RHD....

Running across Iowa at 100-110mph in 103 degree June Heat, was at 170 with a 160 thermostat....with the A/C on and the interior of the car at 70 degrees. 1974 260Z, MSA 3-Core, Stock Fan and Clutch, no Shorud, no Splash Pan. 3.70 gearset, late ZX 5-Speed tranny. Running 85mph towing an 800# trailer, with three people in the car, across the Texas Desert between ElPaso and the next outpost of civilization in 110 degree heat, ran 170 with a 160 thermostat, stock radiator, stock shroud, stock fan and clutch, stock splash pan. 3.9 gearset, early 5-Speed. Running 3200 rpms across I10 to Phoenix from Palm Springs, in 120 degree heat, with 3.7 gearset, late ZX Tranny, on my 73 Turbo Conversion got to 180 degrees with a three core, electric fan, no spash pan, G-Nose, no shroud, and FMIC with 165 Chevy thermostat. These temperatures were taken using a Thermocouple and my Multimeter converter plug-in box. Thermocouple installed in upper radiator hose in the water flow. IN EACH CASE, EVEN THOUGH THE TEMPERATURES WERE WITHIN 10 DEGREES F, THE RESPECTIVE READING ON THE IN-CAR OEM STOCK GAUGE VARIED FROM LEFT OF CENTER TO THE MIDDLE OF "M" IN "TEMP"!!! Moral of the story: THE STOCK GAUGE IS USELESS UNLESS YOU CALIBRATE IT TO A GOOD KNOWN GAUGE! (The 260Z, incidentally, has half a tank of gas, when it shows 1/4!!!) Same thing, old cars gauges drift, check em out and make sure they read right or you at least know the amount of drift!!!

Does it do it if you DON'T snap-throttle rev it? I had an issue with my timing offset and the high-map bins where on drop-throttle when the vacuum went high in the manifold, the spark would jump to the next terminal in sequence, and then STAY THERE until I shut the engine off and reset the box by turning the key of and back on. Underboost, I was cool, no drop throttle from boost above 2500rpms, I was cool, but hit any of those 40degree advance bins, and Braaap,Bang,Pop,Poof, BANG! Try taking all your high-vacuum bins to 30 degrees and see if it stops going nuts after you rev it. You may be jumping time one terminal ahead like I was doing! My WAG! LOL Good Luck

heh heh heh, how did that old Viper work out against the Turbinator? Too lazy to run through all the linking required to see it. Though the LSR car was up there in 1999, I remember the Turbinator.

Would you believe now we are running a 4.11 gearset? On 24 or 25" tires and a direct drive Datsun Comp Five Speed? You do the math, it's singing going through the traps at 141mph+ for the 2L Records. With the 2.8, it was going through the traps at 8500 or thereabouts, running alternately a 3.9, 3.7, then for Bonneville a 3.36... Most of the speed is made in the first mile at Bonneville, same as at El Mirage. After that, it's incremental speed increases. So yeah, it might enter mile 2 at 8300, and enter mile 3 at 8400, and go the final timing distance at th end of mile 3 at 8500 or 8550.... So yeah, for basically two miles it's running at 8500... That was after four seasons of racing every meet, and two trips to Bonneville each of those two years. The damage done that did in that engine was the pressed-fit piston pins walking out to the cylinder walls and scoring them .080" in all six cylinders. Blowing by like a mother, it still went 173.325mph... When we finish with the 2L, the freshened 2.8 is ready to go back in an bump that speed a bit more, and maybe get us on the long track (have to go 175+ in the 3 mile course to make it to the 5 mile long course). I figure we will make a bit more power without those .080" pin scores in the walls.... But not redline by any means, last meet at El Mirage trying to diagnose an intermittent sensor problem, the car was held at 9100rpm for 30-45 seconds at a stretch while we waited for the sensor error message to indicate. Kinda Hairy, revving an engine without a load on it... If it goes boom, it goes boom. Build another one, eh? The conversation digresses...

Even worse, and from personal experience: The gear on the distributor drive spindle can SPIN! It is NOT pinned to the quill shaft, and a backfire can cause enough harmonics to change your timing 7 degrees, or 187 degrees (ask me how I know this!). The added advantage of havin a coil in an ideal situation with less than 6" of spark plug wire leading to it means FAR LESS SPARK LOSS. Sure, you can talk about distributor gap, but what that all leads up to is less energy to fire the plug under boost. As for the "50 Degree" limit of a distributor, just for those that aren't making the connection, with 6 cylinders firing 60 degrees apart, if you advance your timing 50 degrees, chances are GREAT using a distributor you end up firing the cylinder INFRONT of the cylinder you intend to fire in the firing sequence. 153624 remember? In EDIS, or coil on plug that is ALWAYS the firing order you will have. Using a 280ZXT CAS with improper phasing, or even with 45 degrees advance you can skip time one terminal and go to 153324! (ask me how I know this, or read Moby's sticky on my 81CAS conversion to find out that once it jumps, it doesn't jump back!) Short of coil-on-plug, EDIS is probably the most powerful spark you can give your engine in regards to usless parasitic losses of spark energy.