SHO-Z

Get an extra set of rims and put studded snows on all 4 corners and drive like you have an egg on the gas petal. I had 2 Zs in Colorado and the studded snow tires made the biggest difference. I had to chain it up a couple of times without studs. One other thing I had trouble in with the stearing linkage bellows freezing over with ice in slush conditions. It is not fun when the stearing wheel will not move.

Well Back when I still had hair!!! and surfed a 9-8 Yater, Used a TR3, VW Bus, BMW 700 Sport, Chevy Nomad, Study Pick Up, Panard, and a 57 Ford Wagon. The board would fit inside of the VW Bus. It would be fun to show up at different car lots with the board and try to fit it inside just to watch the car salesmans faces! I would go with the VW and try to find a camper model.

Here is a picture of my box and vent tubing for the floats. I figure that I will loose about 1 PSI of boost through the intercooler and piping. I will be running a stock Subaru WRX intercooler, it should take care of 10 psi of boost. So will have to bleed off some of the excess pressure to the floats. Tony D thanks for the input on jetting and on this entire thread it has been great reading and information.

Here is a sketch of what I am planning on running. There is a tube that runs from the supercharger discharge to the float bowls. There will be a needle valve for tuning between this line and the plenum box. I will use the pressure drop through the intercooler for the differential pressure. My Carbs are SKs and have a small cover plate that I fabed new ones and installed a 1/4" fitting for the tubing. To answer the question of 2 air cleaners, the supercharger has an electric clutch so I can run it when I want extra power.

Your modeling of the air flow looks neat, but at your highest velocity in the intake you are over sonic velocity, choked flow! At 6000 rpms a z flows about 8550 cubic inches per second in a perfect world, half of you model. It seam that boundry layers, the higher the velocity the thicker they are, were missed in the model. This might have been picked up and not shown in the computer model. I still think the design is great and is a whole lot better than my 4x4 box with a hole in the end!

I am lazy http://www.superchargeronline.com/hp_calculator.asp

John Washington has cowl induction hoods listed for $350 on his price list, But only for the 240 to 208z. http://www.kitcarz.com/

They will flow some air, a single one of these is used by the TR6 folks on thier supercharger at 6psi boost set ups.

Here is my fender vents, Camaro molded in

Shuyun GT-240 was looking at changing out his Blow Trough SK racing set up to FI. He is located in Richland WA. SKs are an earlier version of OERs. Do a search for him.

Do a search there is alot of information on what you are looking for. You could be reading for hrs on the subject. I am working on tripple SK racing supercharged set up. TonyD has the most information on turbo carb type of set ups.

This is a good read on exhaust sizing John Holowczak on Exhaust Design January 18, 1998 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following are some comments and observations on exhaust system design that I've absorbed over the years, as applied to the SHO. Hopefully they will provide some meaningful guidance to any of you that are pondering designing your own custom system. I welcome any input or debate anyone wants to make here, other than the "Doug sez they rattle" or "Ted sez they're better in his book so it must be so" dual vs single debate we've heard too much about. All of the below is IMHO, and FWIW, I do not design exhaust systems for a living. First off, the ability of one pipe vs another to flow gas can be roughly approximated by their cross section areas (a paper towel roll being easier to exhale through than a straw, for example). For a stock SHO, as well as the Contour SVT 2.5 liter, the intermediate pipe is 2.25 inch in diameter, for an area of 4.0 square inches. For a 5.0 H.O. in a Mustang, dual 2.25 inch pipes are used for an area of about 8 square inches. The interesting thing about these two comparisons is that the SVT has a high winding 2.5 liter DOHC engine, similar in some respects to the SHO engine, but with lower peak horsepower. The engineers at SVT felt a single 2.25 inch pipe was ideal for high peak power, without reversion hurting low end torque. If true, the larger 3.0 liter SHO engine should need a 2.5 inch intermediate pipe (area of 4.9 square inches, 22% increase) for its 20% higher displacement, and 13% higher peak HP. The Mustang engine is added here because its factory exhaust is often noted for having very low backpressure for an unmodified 5.0l V8 engine, and because its peak horsepower is equal to the SHOs, or very close. In order to effectively burn enough fuel/air to make 215 to 220 hp, the Mustang has double the rough exhaust flow capacity of the SHO engine, even though, at peak hp, the amount of fuel/air consumed is roughly the same. The reason for this difference in size has to do with reversion, which is back flow of the burned exhaust gases back into the engine. The bigger that the pipes get, the better the chance that flow can reverse and contaminate the incoming fresh air/fuel charge. On a Mustang, the large displacement keeps the total volume of gas going though the exhaust high (at low rpm), and a moderate amount of reversion is even desirable to help reduce peak cylinder temperatures and keep NOx down (the 5.0 having a basic layout and chamber design that is not ideal from an emissions standpoint). With the smaller displacement, bone stock SHO engine, dual 2.25 inch pipes would likely allow too much reversion at low RPMs, hurting low rpm torque. This latter effect can only be mitigated somewhat through additional fuel/spark a la an LPM, but it can not be eliminated completely, irregardless of what you may hear elsewhere. It is well known and widely accepted that an otherwise bone stock SHO can pick up 8 to 12 hp through a less restrictive catalytic convertor Y pipe assembly. On a stock MTX, the pipes from the exhaust manifolds are 2", on the auto 3.2l, they are 2.25 inch. The rear bank 2" on the MTX has a restrictive 90 degree turn into the face of the converter "brick". SHOshops replacement features a smooth bend, and 2.25 inch pipes into and out of the cats. The problem I have with the SHOshop Y pipe is that its configured to fit into the OEM space (i.e. the exit flange terminates at the same location as stock). The rear bank's 2.25 inch pipe joins the front bank's pipe immediately after the rear bank cat, and the flow is forced down to a 2.5 inch diameter area immediately. I think Vadim keeps this flange location so that the Y pipe and cat back can be done separately, he wisely knows that alot of us can not afford to upgrade the whole exhaust at one time. I think this design leaves a few HP on the table, one which the dual exhaust "pioneers" are able to pick up on. Vadim's testing of various cat backs on otherwise complete bolt on stage SHOs, while admirably admitting that most are worth only 3 to 5 hp, is missing the small overall volume of the rear bank converter/collector and its potential effect on HP. Vadim is further quoted in the FAQ as saying that a customer with a dual exhaust SHO was able to use the same LPM program as that used by a hi flow Y-pipe/single 2.5" cat back user, and surmises from this that the added exhaust flow capacity was not adding HP, a conclusion that I'm not totally conformable with (and its not clear if that customer with the duals had 2.25" pipes between his cats and exhaust manifolds. True, if "true duals" really did make an additional 15 or so HP over a good single system (as claimed in Ted's book) you would expect to need some additional fuel at WOT, however, such a (dual) system with the same program could still be making say 3 to 7 hp over the hi flow single system simply due to reduced pumping losses, without requiring additional fuel. If all this sounds like an argument in favor of dual exhaust, I'm now going to let you all down. I do want to note to those planning dual systems that Borla, and others, have dual inlet/dual outlet resonators, and mufflers - I used such a dual in/out design on my LTD LX 5.0 H.O. due to space constraints imposed by my secondary fuel pump. In your designs, pay most careful attention to the area downstream of the manifolds; remember that the exhaust temps immediately after the cats are still 500 to 800 F and need volume to prevent backpressure. Once past decent cats & collectors, the pipes can likely be combined (further towards the rear of the car than stock), with common sizes being 3 inch, 2.75 inch, and 2.5 inch. While a single 3" system offers 7 square inches of flow area, any resonator or muffler will not quiet much, and the 3" diameter tailpipe will act like a megaphone. Also, once the exhaust is down near or past the shifter, it will have cooled such that a 3" pipe is unnecessary. Since 2.5 inch components are commonly available, a short 2.5" resonator and single 2.5" in/out low restriction (i.e. Borla) muffler is likely all that's needed. A dual 2" system offers 6.3 square inches of flow area, and is probably warranted for those going to aftermarket cams (note 2.25" pipes should be used up near the cats). A dual 2.25 inch system makes perfect sense for those with or planning superchargers - 350 flywheel hp engines are going to need the flow capacity, period. I don't know whether larger pipes can be fitted to a SHO given the space constraints. For my 95 5-speed, the cats are still under warranty, and I want the car to stay legal in Gstock. Since SCCA rules permit any mod after the cats, I'm thinking of adding 12 to 18" 2.25 pipes, with nice transitions from the cats themselves, mating downstream into a section of 2.75 inch pipe. Then neck down just ahead of a 2.5 inch resonator (unless I can find a 2.75 inch in/out resonator) and on to a 2.5" in/out Borla or Walker Superturbo. I know that, going this far, I should get rid of the 90 degree turn ahead of the rear cat, but that technically violates the rules. I would appreciate any comments on this proposed exhaust system design.

Do a search, there are pics of a couple of Yellow Converts to look at. One has the cleanest engine bay out there.

Here is an Option I have on my 260 http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=111359&highlight=turn

Evan if you do not need a PE in the field you are working in now it will open a lot of doors. I got mine and really have never used it in my work; there was nothing on the test that even went with the industry that I am in. I am in the construction industry working petrol chem. Projects. The design drawings are all stamped by a PE. One of my professors in college said his PE is for his retirement so he can do contract work at a high rate. If you want to go into any type of consulting business using your engineering skills the state engineering boards will require a PE. Another professor put engineering this way “We Add, Subtract, Multiply and Divide, Look in up in the book, understand that the answer makes sense and am able to tell someone else about it.

I am a ME with a PE working in the oil fields in Prudhoe Bay AK, technically it is not that stimulating, but the pay is good. Try to look at what type of work you want to be doing 10 years after you graduate. CEs build targets MEs build the bombs to blow them up.

If the hole is not too large here is an old school way. Clean the metal both inside and outside. Place the repair metal on the back side with a soldering paste like Nocorode on between then and pop rivet in place. Solder the panels together using BODy Solder. It is made for doing body work. Grind off the pop rivets and fill the holes with solder. Then do your normal body work. I have done this in the past. A mig welder is realy the way to go. Get with the Denver Z club, someone should have a mig welder and help you out.

A good radio for tunes and a TV for sports!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This has been covered before, do a search. I had to glass my rear one in, to fill the 1/4" gaps. The front was really a bolt on using the existing body holes. I used 3/8" bolts and washers on the front and the existing inserts on the back along with some drill screws on the ends.

On my 260Z the webers were made for the Z conversion. I only had to cut and modify the bell crank on the fire wall. If you have round top SUs I would not bother with the webers. The SUs are a better set up.

Unless you are going wet turbos, blowthrough cannot go over around 12 psi from my research. Over that and you will crush the float bowls. High boost equals EFI.

The only turning, if at all, it will be doing will be due to the friction in the clutch. There is HP losses on every pulley in a system. One more thing, all of you FI guys might want to look at his FI conversion on this project.

I just found this, I know it is a TR6, but the set up is neat and utilizes a system that the supercharger is not running all of the time. It is close to what I am working on. http://topshamautoparts.com/tr6/index.htm

I just found this pressure drop calculator for air flow in pipe. You have to use absolute pressure so add 14.7 to your boost pressure. At 6500 rpm and 10 psi of boost and 250 on the air temp on 2.5†pipe the loss is 1.3 psi for every 10 ft of pipe, 3†pipe is .6 psi per 10 ft of length. Elbows add around 10 ft each for short radius and 4.1 for long radius. http://www.pipeflowcalculations.com/airflow/index.htm