jgkurz

I'd pay 250.00. Let me know when I can place my order.. : )

I like the techno toy tuning units better. They look more robust with the gussets and larger tubes. They might be a bit heavier but I doubt the unsprung weight difference would be noticeable. I'd put them on my car in heart beat.

Happy birthday Ron.

I just checked the screen and it was clear. Whew!! My expansion valve should be here tomorrow, just in time for 90deg F weather. Should be a good test.

Any thoughts on whether I should replace the o rings? They all visually look fine. I have not check Nissan or MSA yet but I did find a kit at Black Dragon. http://www.blackdragonauto.com/icatalog/z/full.aspx?Page=78

I ordered a used/replacement exp valve from Danny's Datsuns. Hopefully it will do the trick. I have not check the screen. Thank you for the advice. No. I didn't even know you could. I may try to do a flush before a recharge again. I pulled vacuum for several hours to remove all moisture. I did. I assumed there was residue oil in the system then added roughly 4oz. Thanks for the input.

Anyone ever watch the Red Green show? It's in re-runs now but for some reason it just cracks me up. In case you've never heard of the show, it's kind of like a televised version of Patrick McManus outdoor humor books but in Canada and on public television. Here's a clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh5XVPSx9Dk

Hi all, Earlier this summer I decided to rebuild the air conditioning in my 77 280Z. My desire was to stay with R12 and replace the compressor and receiver/drier. I found a brand new Nissan compressor from a ZX that was almost a bolt in except on a ZX the high and low side are swapped ont he compressor. Weird but easy to resolve with extended hoses. Next was my receiver/drier. For some reason the 77/78 280Z receiver/driers are different from all the other Z cars. I could not find a new, rebuilt or reman unit ANYWHERE. Ultimately I decided to have my rebuilt by a guy in Texas. It was a bit more cost but allowed me to use all my original copper tubing. I had the system charged up and initially got decent results. Vent was blowing at 39degF on an 85degF day. Here's the high and low pressure readings. I think the low side may be a bit too low. I took the car for a drive and the temp through the center vents would not go below 70degF. The R12 looked perfect in the sight glass . (no bubbles or low freon indicated). I also believe I have the correct amount of oil in the system. My guess is that my expansion valve is failing. I discharged the system and pulled out the expansion valve. It looked old but not necessarily bad. I'm not sure you can visually inspect an expansion valve. I found no debris or particulate that could clog or jam the valve. Here's a pic of the current expansion valve: Fortunately I was able to find a used replacement from Danny's Datsun in Roseburg Oregon. I will put the the replacement valve in and see if it makes a difference. If any of you are knowledgeable about Z car A/C please impart your wisdom. Thank you.

Some of my favorites... Ultimate Land Speed Record: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr0KdxhYgfY Burkland's Streamliner: Darius's 240z Supra vs Skyline: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8vAxzLApPs Z car vs Viper: Bullitt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-7IEPTAoTg

Exactly!!!!

I'm not sure why you think I'm caught up on boost. I specifically said "For the purpose of this discussion higher boost = more lb/min". More lb/min = more air which = more HP. (assuming you have the fuel to match) Boost is meaningless unless it equates to a higher volume of air though the engine. Often higher boost just equals more heat and no improvement in flow. Also, when designing a purpose built application I fully agree that there are a multitude of variables to consider when designing an engine. However, I think for this conversation we were discussing a street driven and boosted L28 which allows certain assumptions. I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

Six_Shooter, Wow, you certainly are passionate about your point of view. I'm not sure I have words to form a similar response. Simply put, I agree that a modern engine using the latest technology can leverage a much higher static compression ratio than was possible in past years. Speaking in general terms, is it your belief that a boosted application should NOT have any reduction is SCR as long as modern detonation control methods are used? (electronics, coatings, meth, cam timing, quench, etc...) Maybe our disagreement is that I believe more boost is beneficial over a higher SCR. For the purpose of this discussion higher boost = more lb/min. The VE of an engine can certainly be improved to a point with a higher SCR but cylinder pressures eventually exceed the ability of all detonation control methods. My point is that a 8:1 engine will reach that ceiling later than the exact same engine with 9:1. It also provides a level of safety to keep the engine alive under varied driving conditions. Assuming a turbo has more lb/min to give at a higher boost pressure, an 8:1 engine will make more peak HP since it will be able to injest more air volume prior to hitting the detonation ceiling. More specifically, I believe that the 8:1 engine should make more power at say 25psi then the 9:1 engine at 20psi. That is if you could get to 20psi before breaking ring lands. My numbers are arbitrary and not really the point. My argument is that a lower SCR will usually allow more PEAK HP with a boosted application. That could mean 10:5:1 vs 11:1. I contend that say 5psi of more boost will allow more peak HP than .5 more SCR would. This is a estimate but it should be in the ballpark. As an example, why is it that turbo kits for the BMW M3 and the S2000s seem to limit boost to single digits? These cars have some of the most modern electronics and engine design on the planet but run ~11:1 or more compression. It's because the high SCR will cause the engine to severely detonate with higher boost levels. As for determining the many parameters of a turbo engine, there are some general assumptions that can be made based on experience and where the car will be driven. To summarize, I agree that a higher SCR is desirable, but given two identical engines with ALL the latest technology to control detonation, I will take the 8:1 vs the 9:1 or for that matter a 10:1 vs a 11:1 engine and run more boost hence achieve a higher HP. Maybe we are saying the same thing...???

Your experience is unique and I'm amazed how well it has worked for you. However, ideal static compression ratio for an application is dependent many factors. Additionally, The L series head is no where near as efficient as a modern 4V/cyl cross flow head and will usually require more lbs/min from a turbo to make equivalent power. If you are a person who's priority is max HP from an L28 you will need more boost and less compression. If you want more power under curve (less peak HP) and better street manners then more compression and less boost may be the way to go. My recommendation of 8:1 is a good compromise but not not ideal for a max effort engine. It just depends on what you want out of your engine. Remember, the power benefits of more compression are no where near the power benefits of high boost. An engine will 7.4:1 compression (stock L28ET) will always permit more boost and more "peak HP" than the exact same engine with 9.5:1. That's just physics. So how big will your bore be with a 3.2L? I guess he didn't think thin cylinder walls were an issue???

87 octane.... ouch. You may not be able to pull enough timing to remove the ping unless you run premium. 20 deg btdc or below on boost just kills an L28's ability to rev worth a darn.

I personally run 7.6:1 and have had good luck with my engine. I wouldn't run more than 8:1. In reference your your 3.0L or 3.2L comment, you might consider NOT over-boring past 88mm (I'm at 87.5mm/3.0L). Thick cylinder walls in a turbo engine have significant advantages like minimizing wall flex under boost and better heat transfer to the cooling system. I built my engine for reliability as well as performance so sacrificing a bit of cubic inch was acceptable to me.

Classic!! I definitely drive faster when I hear that song.. How about a vote for Sammy Hagar "I can't drive 55".

Sure, but sending me pics would be quick and easy. Just PM me if you have any available that I can look at.

Best of luck to you Gary. I hope the salt is in good shape this year. Let us know how you did.

It's not easy. Look at the casting of both the compressor and turbine housings. There should be some number(s) inscribed on the side indicating A/R. BTW, a .82 A/R turbine housing is the max I'd use on a street L28 but only if I was willing to sacrifice spool for peak HP. Personally I prefer a .63 A/R turbine.

All I know is that my turbo has a .50 compressor housing and I don't have a spacer. Not sure if it's from a T04B or T04E. It may not matter. Another issue is you will need to re-route your PCV and possibly wrap your exhaust manifold since the compessor only has about 3/16 clearance with a .50 AR housing.

Remember, you only need a spacer if you have a compressor housing larger than .50 AR. The larger .60 housing is actually better if you plan to use a spacer.

My Tec3 can do full sequential with a cam trigger. I'm not sure what I would have to do with the coils. My understanding (no references to back this up) is that the Tec3R has improved starting fixes, better IAC support and no longer had an internal ECU fan.

Thanks for posting, really enjoyable to watch.

Joel, Are you sure about your Tec3 to Tec3R comment? I bought a first generation Tec3 for my Z when it first came out. I have talked to Electromotive many times regarding the Tec3 and Tec3R differences. Supposedly it's a complete ECU swap.