jgkurz

Do you know which one of JohnC's recommended method's would be preferred?

I'm looking into purchasing an adjustable cam gear and noticed a couple differences between the 4 manufacturers. I'm still trying to get information on the JUN unit. Personally I'd like at least 10 degrees of advance or retard capability in 1 degree increments. 1.) HKS - Nice looking (Who cares), Aluminum for light weight (Does it really matter), can be adjusted + or - 20 degrees in 2 degree increments. Cost = 112.00 http://www.2kracing.com/product_info.php/cPath/476_493/products_id/4935?osCsid=cb3615c2c0b50809b09717127588cf64 2.) ArizonaZ - High quality steel, can be adjusted + or - 4 degrees in 1 degree increments ( I'm Assuming). Dave the owner is a nice guy. Cost = 119.00 http://www.arizonazcar.com/sprock.html 3.) JUN - p/n 1006M-N001, Hard to get, I have no other information. http://www.junauto.co.jp/products/cylinderhead-part/cam-sprocket/index.html?en 4.) Nissan - p/n 13024-E4621, Nissan quality, Not nearly as pretty, Seems to be variation of original sprocket which requires chain removal to make adjustment. Adjustments are done in 3 degree increments. Cost = 120.00 http://www.courtesyparts.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=CP&Category_Code=s30_nismo_adjustablecam

Just for future reference, does anyone know which type the Nissan L28ET manifolds are?

The interesting thing here is that this seems to be a common problem. bastaad525 obviously has his new wires arranged perfectly or as Nissan did from the factory. My wires are also secured with plastic seperators and neatly arranged. Although our wires are new and our cars make the expected power the wires may still be the culprit. This is a total guess on my part, but after reading the Magnacor website I thought it was worth checking out. If you go to Maganacor's website they pretty much say thay everyone except them will have problems with (EMI) Electromagnetic interference. http://www.magnecor.com/

I've had slight miss at idle on every turbo Z I've owned. My current Z has a standalone ECU with all new parts and it still has the annoying miss. The last resort I thought about trying was to buy a set of Magnacor wires. Maybe it's just the way the L6 burns the fuel at idle.

Just curious, if Jessie bought a Quaffe LSD for his R200 does that do away with the 2 or 4 pinion parts or does he still have to get a 4 pinion R200?

James, You have email...

The Nissan T-5 uses a unique spline on the slide yoke. I recently had a custom driveline built for my 77 280z and was able to find a 3310 rear flange, but the front slide yoke was only available with the standard size u-joints. If you are having a driveline built, my advice would be to use the Nissan OEM u-joints and reduce the end play down to 1/4 inch. Most driveline shops will tell you you need 3/4-1" end play. This much end play is not required on a Z because the rear diff does not move. The advantage you get is having more of the slide yoke filled with the output shaft. I twisted a yoke because I had nearly an inch of end play. The Nissan u-joint bent, but did not break which is a testament to high quality in my opinion.

I personally like the 3-wire because it charges automatically at idle and senses voltage more accurately. Since installing the GM alternator my voltage never drops below 13.8 volts even with the accessories on. It's a great way to go, but a bit expensive.

I have good friend that has a 350 Chevy with a T-56 in the identical green Volvo. The best he's run is a 13.5 in the 1/4 mile. The crowd goes crazy when his "sleeper" Volvo beats the Camaro's and Mustangs. It's fun to be in the stands and hear the comments. Coincidentally, he's tired of getting beat by my Z so he's going to a 383. I think I'm in trouble......

Drax, I had a T04E 50 trim compressor with a .63 turbine housing and stage III wheel on my L28 3.0L. I was very happy with the power to lag ratio. On a Mustang dyno I made 310RWHP with a poor tune and had very little lag. The 310RWHP was at 13psi. If the AFR's were correct I could have made MUCH more power. The compressor map for the 50 trim wheel is among the most efficient of the TO4 wheels. From what I understand, Jim Wolf Technology uses that the same wheel in their Sport 400 turbo for the L28. I've since upgraded to a larger turbo for more potential peak HP. With the upgrade I have definately added more lag.

Thanks for your comments Rick. I'm starting to realize that everyone who has a standalone EFI has to go through the AFR pains until the MAP is where it should be. I'll send you some files when I get some quality datalogs completed. Regards,

Hey 350Zen, you might want to read the introduction page to this forum so your remarks on your third post aren't so disrespectful. No matter what your intent was you just called drftn280zx2+2's car stupid looking. We appreciate your input, but please make it constructive. Regards,

I do have the ability to datalog, but finding the errant spot on the MAP then how much fuel to add or remove is the difficult part. Last night I compared my FJO datalog in Excel to the Dynojet AFR and the chart matches. However, the FJO has much more granularity. I'm also noticing that the FJO O2 sensor in the downpipe is picking up the AFR about 400 rpm's sooner than the Dynojet sensor in my tailpipe. I was making adjustments in the wrong area of the MAP! I would also guess that the FJO datalog is still about 100 rpm latent from the actual event in the engine. Looks like my only option is to keep making small increments forward until I get it right.

Drax, I use an Electromotive Tec3. I guess what I'm frustrated about is the amount of time it's taking me to make small steps forward in my tuning. In my mind I have two options for testing. 1) Pay a minimum of 75.00 for three dyno pulls or 2) do some 6000RPM datalogging on the freeway which could resulting a costly speeding ticket(s). Either way it looks to me like a major PITA. I have 256 points on my MAP which I can obviously narrow down to a select few for making changes on. Once I've found the errant spot I then need to determine how much fuel to add or remove. The system has an auto-calibrate function which does not seem to be accurate. It's putting values in the MAP I now are totally wrong. Sorry for the rant, I guess I'm just venting. I wish there was a simpler way to get my MAP perfected. Oh well..... off to the on-ramp I go.

Hi all, I finally got my car off jack stands recently and was able to get a few dyno runs and a trip to the local drag strip. So far the car is running as well as could be expected. On a Dynojet 248 I put down 356 HP and 424 Torque. In the evening I went to the track and ran a best of 12.8 @ 115mph with a 2950lb 280z on 205/60-15 tires. It may be unrealistic, but my goal is 400RWHP and an 11.9 at the strip. My AF ratios are beyond horrible so I think I can make some power there. This run was done at about 16psi so of course more boost will bring up the HP. The only way I'll ever get close to the 11's is to shed some weight and get some drag radials. As a side note, I run a standalone EFI and my AFR adjustments are made on a 16x16 point map. I've been trying make adjustments to the MAP with the help of my FJO wideband but can't seem to make any real progress. I'm starting to see the advantages of an OEM setup. My AF ratios are extremely erratic. Does anyone have suggestions for getting a stable AFR? Thanks,

I lined up against a beautiful black STi at the drag strip on Saturday night. With the AWD he holeshot'd me, but after the 60ft mark all he saw was my tail lights..... I definately liked the black better than the typical blue the STi usually comes in. Maybe it made the rear wing stand out less.

Hi Steve (srgunz), I think our posts crossed in cyberspace. I ended up taking the booster out to fix the reaction disc. The brakes work great now! Take a look at my post above yours. Thanks for your suggestion.

I can't believe it, my brakes are finally fixed. The problem was the "reaction disc". I pulled my booster last night and yup, no disc. I finally got it to drop out then I glued it back into place. I put it all together this morning and the brakes are better than ever now!!! The 15/16 MC does require a bit more effort, but WOW do the brakes work well. I'm using KVR pads all the way around and am happy so far. The car stops straight and is very predictable. The adjusting rod behind the booster did not need to be changed. I left it the same length as with the 7/8 MC. What's puzzles me is why the reaction disc made such a difference. Earlier in my troubleshooting I adjusted the rod out far enough to compensate for the missing disc (not know it was missing) and still my brake were poor. Oh well, I'm done trying to figure out Z car brakes for a while. I think I'll go for a drive...... The only thing left to do is to get my Wilwood proportioning valve tuned properly. I can't thank everyone enough for their support and advice. Regards,

gramercyjam, Thanks for the post. jmortenson also suggested the disc as as a potential problem. The link at classiczcars was extremely helpful. The person who started the thread seems to be having the exact problem as I am. Unfortunatley, it looks like I will have to somehow get the "reaction disk" back into place. I guess I'll try this last "Hail Mary" to keep the 15/16 MC. http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=12572&perpage=15&pagenumber=1 I'll keep you all posted with my progress.

jmortensen, I appreciate your thoughts. The above comment concerns me a great deal. I definatley don't want my brakes to drag even a tiny bit. I will be trying the 7/8 MC when I get a chance to work on the car next week. As I understand it, the check valve in question is for protection against significant pressure (as much as 1000psi) coming back into the M/C once the brakes are released. I'm not sure how this could lead to brakes draging unless the M/C was failing. In my situation I believe 1) the M/C has been bled as good as it possibly can be. 2) The M/C is functioning correctly (for a 1980 280ZX) because I've tried this upgrade with three seperate 15/16 M/C's with the same results and 3) I've adjusted the rod and tested almost infinitely, again without success. In my opinion the next step would be to try 1980 280ZX booster which I will not be doing. For some reason the 240z guys seem to have no problem with this upgrade.

Everyone, Thank you for the advice and encouragement. I have tried all the recommendations in this thread without success. What's strange is this is the same experience I had on my 78z years ago. I just could not get any pedal pressure built up. The car was stolen before I could resolve the problem. I chalked the problem up to a bad master cylinder but could never prove it. That's one of the reasons I was willing to try the 15/16 MC on my current 77z. The only fact vs opinion based fix I know of is to put a ZX booster on my 77 with the 15/16 MC. Since I don't feel like going through the trouble so I'm going to give the 7/8 MC a try. For some reason the 240z folks don't have a problem with the 15/16 MC. So far no one has come forward that has a 15/16 on a 77 or 78 280z without the ZX booster. I'll keep everyone posted with my progress. P.S. I'll probably keep the Power Bleeder. Regarding the M/C Shucks will let me swap the slightly used 15/16 for a new 7/8. Later,

OK folks I give up. I know when I've been beat. I refuse to put anymore time or money into this futile upgrade. So far it has cost me 85.00 for a new 15/16 master cylinder, 49.00 for the Motive Produts Power Bleeder and 18.00 for my wasted Ate Blue brake fluid. I've done everything except replace the booster and I don't think the 15/16 is worth the trouble if that's what I have to do. I will be putting my 7/8 MC back on. The 15/16 upgrade on a 280z without the 280ZX booster does NOT work. Does anyone want to buy a slightly used 15/16 MC and a Motive Produts Power Bleeder? I won't be needing them. Seriously, I'm done.

I have a Stage V T3 turbine wheel. I had to make a custom flapper using a stainless steel lawnmower valve.