Chickenman

Srev, let me know what you use for a plastic adapter. Have a couple of friend who has a Supercharge L28 and has to run IAT in Intake Manifold ) . Heat soak of IAT in this setup is a big concern as Intake manifold ( custom unit for Eaton Supercharger ) gets stinkin' hot.

Since you'll probably be switching the end connector to a GM, although I'm sure you can find the Nissan connector on E-Bay. Here are the 240SX pin outs to GM . Red = 5V ( GM connector pin A ) Black = Ground ( GM connector pin B ) White = TPS Signal ( GM connector pin C )

Rock Auto. Beck Arnley #158-0490. Single connector. $38.79 .1991 -1995 240SX standard Tranny and 1993 -1995 Altima. You don't need the two connector style. The second connection is for Automatic Transmsission control, Picture of Beck Arnley #158-0490 for standard transmission. https://www.rockauto.com/en/moreinfo.php?pk=482658&cc=1209013&jsn=10

Tell us a bit more about the engine. Carbed or injected? Stock cam shaft or one with bigger overlap? Need to know info on Ignition system, coil and spark plug wires. ( Spiral core or carbon core. Brand as well. ). Basically the plugs look a little " fluffy " and rich. But the reason why could be in your engine specs.

^ That's a very good question. And I have no freakin' idea.... nor can I find any reliable information on that. I've been looking for a long time for the answer to that exact question ... sigh. But .263 ms with resistors? I don't think so.

Apparently I didn't read far enough in the Thread that contained the 1.1ms information from RC engineering. On page two the E-mails from the Customer ( Ryan ) were continued and he got back this response. So apparently RC Engineering doesn't have a clue what their Latencies are. Or the receptionist is answering Tech questions..... BTW, AEM recommends .59 ms at 13 volts. Here's a link to the original thread:. make sure you read page two... Oy vay http://www.3si.org/forum/f1/rc-550cc-lag-time-429664/

BTW, I believe resistor boxes add more Lag Time than using PW Current limiting as the the injector receives only 6 volts during the Peak and Hold cycle. Mean while a PW current limiting receives a full 12 v ( 12 v being a measured set point ) during Peak pull up and them the Hold function is Pulse Width Modulated. What does that mean? I'd try somewhere between .700ms to .900 ms. See where your PW falls at idle.

Mind you, this chart says the RC 550cc Low-z injectors ( 3 ohm ) are 0.59 ms at 13 v. Whos' right?? http://www.turbochargerkits.com.au/efi-tech/fuel-injector-dwell-times/ Edit: Ok, I've found a second site that says .59ms at 13 volts. Injector Rehab. These guys I would trust more than some unknown site. http://injector-rehab.com/shop/lag.html

^ Ummm... yeah, I'd say it's a bit low. A bit of a Tip for you. Don't let Auto-Tune or VEAL analyse the VE Cells around idle. It doesn't do a good job.; Open VEAL and highlight a 3 x 3 block of Cells around your Idle speed and Kpa. Right click and Choose " Lock Cells " . Edit: Also limit EGO control to a minimum RPM of at least 200 RPM above your idle speed. Especailly if you are running a performance cam. Adjust idle VE Cells manually using the above method. . When you save the Tune, use the " save As " Option and give the Tune a Unique name like " 550cc Tune Mod #1.msq, 550cc Tune Mod #2.msq, DFWI Tune.msq ( inside joke ). When TS closes it saves your tune as " CurrentTune.msq.... but it only saves one file. CurrentTune gets overwritten each time you make a change and close TS. So you can get lost in a real hurry.

Edit: And the below quote is apparently " sketchy " . I didn't read far enough in the thread to see the replies to several E-mails back and forth. I've used the " Strikeout " command to indicate that this is all questionable information from RC engineering.

Assemble the short block. Just don't put the Oil pan, timing cover or any timing chain components on. Done all the time.

Thank you. That's an excellent write up and very helpfull!!

I would have to agree with that. Drag Reduction. Pro stock cars are particularly susceptible to poor track prep and wind gusts. On a slippery track they are the first ones to complain as the cars skate all over the place on the top end. They have very little down force.

See post #7. There are only three sizes of spacer. Marked A, B and C. Stamping on hub should match stamping on Spacer. Miles included a screenshot of factory sizing which includes dimensions of each spacer. Should be easy to check. If wrong spacer ( too short for hub ) you could add a very thin bearing shim. You would know where to source those locally.

MAT doesn't actually look all that bad..... at least from that particular Data Log. I see a Max of 158 F on that particular which is not too bad. Suspect it may be going higher under longer loads though. Need to see your new .msq, but with this one you are too lean on boost. You should be aiming for 11.5 to 11.0 under Boost. You can cool the engine combustion temps with a bit of extra fuel. Might cost you a few HP... but better than a melted Piston. Track days are really hard on engine Temps and you need to take steps to avoid Detonation. 1: Definitely run the 100 Octane Race gas. Much better than additives will ever give you. 2: Pictures of plugs would be nice. But 7's should be adequate on boost levels below 15 psi. 8's shouldn't hurt though ( at higher boost ) and will add some extra headroom. Depends on how 7's are doing. Shouldn't affect the tune at all. But plugs do have to operate at a high enough temperature to be self cleaning ( 500c to 800 c / 932 F to 1472 F . Source NGK ) . So you can't throw too cold of a plug in either. 3: Intercooler. An Air to water Intercooler with no pump is useless. Fix the pump before the event. If your water reservoir is big enough ( At least 5 gallons ) I'd stay with the Air to water. Pour a ton of Ice in the reservoir before each session to avoid heat soaking the water. That's why you need a big reservoir. If reservoir is too small or you can't rig up a pump in time, go to an Air to Air intercooler ( Starion ) . Put this on your must do list before event. 4: Intake setup. You didn't show Intake setup, but make sure that Intake is not drawing hot air from Inside engine bay. Those Cone style intakes drawing stinking hot air from the engine bay are the absolute worst idea. Air Intakes should always be ducted to outside of the engine Bay. Lots of room on a Z so no reason for Intake to be in engine Bay ( If in fact it is ). 5: Post some pictures of J-Pipe with IAT sensor position and a wider view of Intake system. I'll send you a PM with my contact Info. I've tuned a few Turbo cars on Hybrid-Z and Classic Z and the results have been good. I'll see if I can help you out..

^ In addition to the above very good information. As mentioned, normally you should not have to change the spacer when replacing bearings. The spacer is matched to the Hub machining, not the bearings. The spacer is a big strong hunk of metal and is not going to compress. It's probably an improperly seated bearing cup or seal. But, if everything checks out and the bearing is still tight. it's possible that there is a tolerance issue with the bearings you have purchased. Normally a good quality bearing should be dimensionally identical to the original bearings. A 6203 from SKF will be identical to a 6203 from OEM Nissan. But with some of the cheap crap on the market these days, you have probably gotten a bearing ( or two ) that is a bit " Thinner " than spec. Chinese and Taiwanese " clones " are infamous for being " out of spec ". What brand of bearing did you get and where did you buy it? SKF, Timken and NTN are all usually pretty good. You are better off buying at an Industrial Bearing supply store rather than local Parts suppliers or some " Online " suppliers . Pay a bit more for higher grade and quality bearings. OEM Nissan bearings are also very, very good with dimensions and quality.... as are most OEM parts. .

Steve, what size TB are you using on the Z right now? I found my car was much more responsive with the TWM Big Bore TB ( 60mm ) than the stock size... which I think is 52mm? 240SX TB is 65 mm I believe. Integrated Engineering did some comparisons on TB size for the VW/Audi 1.8/2.0 Turbo engines. Stock TB is 60 mm. They found that the best results for driveability and HP/Torque gains was 70mm. Anything bigger than that and the gains were minimal, but low RPM driveability became worse. It became hard to modulate the throttle at low RPM's.

Found a couple of articles that explain in Laymen's terms why ITB's give better throttle response and efficiency over a Plenum design with a single throttle body. Dyno plots aren't shown. but they are in other examples. As I surmised earlier, the Plenum design with a single TB dampens the acceleration of the air column. This is because of the lowered atmospheric pressure in the Plenum. This reduces instantaneous Torque and that " snappy " feeling of ITB's . This video pops up quite a lot, and effectively gives a layman's description of why ITB's have a much better response than a Plenum design. http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1109383_the-benefits-of-individual-throttle-bodies-vs-a-single-throttle-body A short article from Jenvy UK on ITB's vs single TB with Plenum. A bit too simplistic, but essentially true. http://www.jenvey.co.uk/faq/big-single

It does make for a a good discussion. But there is a lot more than just runner length involved. It gets really, really complicated with stuff like runner resonances and helmholtz frequencies involved from what I've read. Way above my pay scale. In a simplistic manner, I think the plenum volume dampens the intake pulses that you see in the runners as compared to the IR design. The strong intake pulses combined with resonances adds to the Ram tuning effect of the IR runner design. The increase in Torque is not in just one area either. It covers the whole Torque curve of the engine and is significant. That is why you can feel such a big difference in the old " Butt " dyno. I'll see if I can take a scans of the Dyno plots from Vizards carb comparison of 650, 85 Holley DP'ds and the 4 x 48 IDA Dellorto's. It will be later as I'm going out for dinner right now It's interesting to note that many aftermarket Plenum manifolds for both NA and Turbo charged cars use huge Plenums in comparison to the stock size. VW/Audi aftermarket Plenums for 1.8/2.0 Turbo motors are close to twice the volume of the factory Plenums. Dyno plots show no loss in Torque( in fact gains in Torque ) at low RPM's even on stock motors.

I stand 100% by my statements about IR manifolds with independant throttles having more overall torque than a Plenum manifold with a single Throttel. Lots of technical information on it if you do your research. One prime example is in Vizard's book. How to Build Horsepower Volume 2. " Carburetors and Intake Manifolds. Turn to page 99 and start reading on the results of testing a mildly modified shop truck engine ( Vizard's personal truck ) with four 48 downdraft Dellorto's Nothing changed other than IR Intake and carbs 350 ci SBC, 9.5 CR, mildly ported heads, 1 5/8" headers, 256 Intake duration and 262 Exhaust duration at .050" . This mild 350 pulled 445 ft lbs of Torque with a big fat and flat Torque curve. That is impressive if you know SBC... and I do. Tests done with a back to back comparison on a higher output engine revealed: Page 100. On Page 101 there is a further comparison, with Dyno charts of a IR Dellorto setup on a 350 ci SBC with 10.5 CR, AFR aluminum heads, Street roller cam and 1 3/4 headers. This engine made 518 HP and 469 ft/lbs on Torque with the IR Manifold. On 92 Chevron Pump gas. Further comparisons were made between a 650 Holley DP and an 850 Holley DP. The IR manifold with Dellorto's made significantly higher horsepower and torque figures than any of the Plenum manifold. The Dyno plots are shown on page 101 in figures 9-12 This is not a one off example either. Anyone who does some proper research will find that IR manifolds are superior to Plenum manifolds in making HP and Torque in almost every single High Performance engine application. This has been covered in dozens ( if not hundreds ) of technical articles from Race Car Engineering, Race Engine Tech and SAE white papers. Carburation is particularly effective, because of the strong booster signal and lack of restriction. But similar results carry over to EFI. Unless restricted by rules ( and many racing classes are ), EFI independant runners with independant throttles are used by almost all major Racing Engine manufacturers. F1, WEC, LMP , Indy car, NHRA Pro Stock etc, etc. The improvements in Torque, HP , BSFC have been proven for well over 50 years ( IR manifold vs Plenum style manifold ) . The biggest drawback to IR manifolds is cost and complexity. There the Plenum style manifold wins every time. Cost is the biggets factor as to why you don't see them on evry day Econo cars.

A 280Z should have a factory Coolant recovery tank. Coolant level should be all the way to the very top. Otherwise the recovery Tank will not work. Coolant recovery tanks help reduce over heating by eliminating air pockets or steam pockets.

Double post

Sounds like you've got things handled nicely. Question on AC. Did you find that the new fans made the AC blow any cooler when stopped and at idle, compared to old electric fans? That's the only issue I have with my stock 1976 280Z fan setup and my AC. No Air flow through condenser at idle. Water temp stays fine, but AC starts blowing luke warm. As soon as I start moving, AC blows freezy cold.

^ Eggzackly...

Actually, the easy way would be To take a Carb Manifold and either add ITB's or a Plenum to that. There are companies that sell Plenum kits. Design and taper of Plenum is critical, but the good vendors have that sussed out. I'm sure I have a few kinks buried in my Audi archives. Ross Machine Works has parts for making DIY intake Plenums. http://www.rossmachineracing.com/intakepartspage.html