mikedc528

The free version of Avast has been going strong for me for about three years and counting.

This is awkwardly true.

http://www2.panasonic.com/consumer-electronics/shop/Cameras-Camcorders/Digital-Cameras/Lumix-Digital-Interchangeable-Lens-Cameras/model.DMC-L10K_11002_7000000000000005702 My personal pref...

But then it isn't a four door E46 M3, now is it? He says he did because of insurance costs, but I'm pretty sure he had other intentions in mind. Coming from an E46 sedan owner, I think it is kick ass, and if I had his $ and his friends, I would have done the same...

http://forum.e46fana...=578901&page=46

Do you really have a swap manual!?! That would be way cool, not that I am planning a swap, but it would be awesome to just read through that thing. EDIT: Got way tooo excited about the S52 into Z swap that I didn't even read the post correctly! +1 what he said!

"With L28's being able to rev to 9000+, and a destroked 2.5L (L20A Crank) being even more revable, along with a larger bore for better valve unshrouding and high rpm breathing...." L20A not so easy to get in the states...I personally have never stumbled across one as easily as a L24 crank. Once again, R/S ratio...no answers on that front....incomplete theoretical arguments are what I am trying to have answered... Some info on what I was reading when I first posed the questions. http://forums.nasioc...ad.php?t=424283 http://www.stahlhead...od%20Length.htm Another question is, if you do the math, using the L20A crank in the L28 block gives you almost the same results as using the L24 crank in the LD28 block without spending a fortune or lots of time finding the crank. I know you might have easy access to these cranks as you are a very well traveled man and have many personal connections to Nissan and L6 gurus from your stories, but from what the OP has available to him and from what we mostly have available here in the states, he might be able to pull off a motor that mimics your 9+k shifting Bonneville car at a cheaper price. (If I understood it correctly you built an L20 for class restrictions, might be wrong) Thus my question as to why it isn't more popular.... As for the comment about larger bore, this hasn't been proven, I've read the thread about the 4.0L L6 and there doesn't seem to be a conclusion. Only a statement about sonic testing many blocks with negative results, but same could be said about regular gasser blocks. I am thinking knowlegably, maybe I should pose this question in a thread about internal combustion engine thermodynamic efficiency and how the compression cycle is effected by slower piston speeds (longer rods, shorter stroke). Another point of reference....I am by NO means comparing the flow numbers between L series heads and RB heads. But the idea is very similar L24 Crank 73.7mm LD28 block bored to say about 86mm Looks really familiar. RB25 - 2.5 L (2498 cc, bore: 86.0 mm, stroke: 71.7 mm) RB26 - 2.6 L (2568 cc, bore: 86.0 mm, stroke: 73.7 mm) LD28 Block L24 Crank N47 Head Z20E Rods L28 Flat Tops 1mm Head Gasket Rod/Stroke Ratio:2.069 Bore/Stroke Ratio:0.857 Static Compression: 9.471 With a displacement of 2.569L and 0.000 Deck clearance I am also not arguing the fact that the L28 is bigger, has more stroke so creates more torque motto, this is all a learning expierence, nothing is the best and nothing should be put down ( if this were the case you wouldn't be posting on hybridz now would you ) As part of my learning experience, please explain why this wouldn't be a good candidate, even as a turbo motor.

Are those Appliance wheels?

Way better rod/stroke ratio which may or may not lead to less detonation. (Probably not true, but read an incomplete argument on this site about the possibility of it lowering detonation) Not saying that it is the holy grail here, just saying that I wouldn't just think of it as a crap idea. With all of these LD cranks being pried out of these block, using them for their extra deck height might be good. If anything else you can still build another L28 with a better r/s ratio. Like you have said before, it has all been done, I just wanted to know why it isn't more popular.

I posted this in another thread...I still believe that it would be amazing high revver. LD28 Block L24 Crank N47 Head Z20E Rods L28 Flat Tops 1mm Head Gasket Rod/Stroke Ratio:2.069 Bore/Stroke Ratio:0.857 Static Compression: 9.471 With a displacement of 2.569L and 0.000 Deck clearance. Might be good for a high revving option.

Wow....that thing is beautiful!

The top itself doesn't look very good, but wow, the body lines just seem to pop on this drop top. This is not my AD, just wanted to show you guys this nice Z. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/AWESOME-1-KIND-1976-DATSUN-280Z-ROADSTER-351-V8-/120571851368?cmd=ViewItem&pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item1c12a47268

KA24E not DE

Wow! Talent...

Not planning on painting a RB25 valve cover...planning on painting a L28 cover . I thought about going to a paint shop, but I don't have a cover for them to match the color on.

Just a quick question, does anyone know the engine paint code for the RB25DET engines? Specifically the paint on the engine's valve cover. It is a mix between gold and a metallic beige. Another set of questions, would a Nissan dealership carry this paint? Does anyone know of a non-oem company that produces something similar, ie Krylon, Dupont, etc.

I would think the only difference is that there is no restriction at all during full throttle from the throttle plate, since the roller doesn't have a throttle plate. ie: the throttle plate is still in the path of the air, just has a significantly reduce profile when at full throttle. The roller throttle seems to have no restriction, but would that really make a noticeable power difference to warrant something which looks extremely complicated to manufacture?

Full-time finance student and intern for the new biggest consumer electronics company in the world (the title just came to us recently). Bet you can't guess what company it is.

I wanted to paint my Z LSB......I hate you! It looks great!! Good job man!

Yes, it would move the entire engine assembly about an inch higher. What I was actually looking for were the cons vs pros of having that high of a r/s ratio without drastically reducing the cc's of the engine. I know that 3.1>2.8 and that 2.8>2.6 which ultimately means that 3.1>2.6, but I was wondering how the r/s and b/s ratios would help this become more of a 3.1 > 2.6.

Hey Dan, While I am at it, is there any way to have a feature where clicking on links just opens a new tab or new page. It seems with the new layout everytime I click a link I am taken away from the forum. Any insight is appreciated. Thanks!

Comp ratio could be changed from 7.1 to 8.0 depending on the use of the P90 and N47 respectively (accompanied with L28 early or turbo dished pistons). Does anyone have any feedback on a set up like this? Any for foreseeable downfalls if built as a turbo engine (not really interested in N/A, even though 9.0+ comp ratio is great)? Any thoughts would be great, especially on the 2.1 r/s ratio.