BJSZED

I had a 72 L24 pickup and an 81 280zx l28 non turbo pickup and both were the same.

Zcardepot has a fuel injection kit for the stock intake https://zcardepot.com/fuel-injection-retrofit-kit-fast-efi-280z-280zx.html Personally, I prefer the looks of the 4 barrel efi setups. Don't know about function, but to me it looks cleaner. An ITB setup would be sweet. Megasquirt sounds intimidating. Brent

I would like to do this upgrade. What were your final results ? Voltage at idle etc. When your fans come on, is the idle stable? I have a 60 amp alternator on my Z now and when my 2 cooling fans ( apprx 20 amps total ) come on the idle dips. Was considering the 91 Dodge Monaco alternator swap as well.

Can't you just change the joint ? Should be able to unless I'm missing something.

To pay for materials, overhead etc. Standard business practice.

I think it's totally justified to ask for a deposit when doing this type of work. And if I was the business owner, I wouldn't do any work without one. There should also be an a contract of some sort with a timeline offered.

Compare your voltage from the heavy power lead on the alternator to the voltage at the battery. If the wiring is stock, the power flows from the alternator to the fuse box through the ammeter back to the battery. I had 1 volt drop on my 240z between the alternator to the battery and it melted one of the connectors under the dash. Not saying this is the issue but it is possible that the alternator is putting out more than what your battery voltage says IF the flow of power is stock. Run an additional heavy wire from the alternator terminal to the battery so the charging current doesn't have to run through the dash. This is even more important if you have additional accessories like electric fans etc. run from the battery. Ask me how I know ! Downside is the ammeter wont read correctly as it will be partially bypassed.

Respose from Evans on my testing: Hi Brent- Thank you for your thoughtful inquiry. I reviewed your questions with my manager, Evans' Technical Director Dave Wright. The air-over-liquid condition in the radiator and in the overflow, allows a siphoning situation which could pull more moist air back and forth. Coolant at operating temp will "give off" some moisture, and the cooling "pullback" will suck some back in. Over a very long time, in a humid climate, some moisture could accumulate in the system. Like 3% in 10 years-maybe, in Dave's explanation. Our suggestion: Maintain the air space in the rad, and leave the overflow tank empty. It is expected that due to the inherent minimal expansion, and minimal pressure differential, the coolant will never release out of the rad. The secondary cap seal, or "vacuum breaker" may just momentarily "pop" to equalize pressure as needed, then snap shut. No coolant involved, very little air, and very little moisture will transfer. If you'd like you can send us a small sample of coolant from; A) the engine/ radiator, and the expansion bottle when cold, we can verify actual water content as a baseline. Evans also now has a lower-cost refractometer available, p.n. E2196 @$29.95 to allow you to monitor the system going forward. Please contact me with any further questions. -Pete

I left a little coolant in the overflow bottle and it sucked it from the reservoir. The only way back in is through the vacuum valve. I have spoken to Evans again. They still recommend keeping an air space in the rad. I might install an expansion tank with a rad cap on it and put a zero pressure cap on the rad, that way the rad can be totally full and the expansion tank would act as my air space. The vacuum valve in the cap would still open though.

Project Tetanus,,,,now that"s funny.

Well, That was a good theory but failed in practice. It worked fine while running, no coolant expanded to the reservoir tank but when cooling down after the engine stopped, the vacuum valve built into the bottom of the rad cap opens allowing air back in. Maybe, I'm overthinking this and need to just occasionally check water content ? Three percent is the maximum allowed.

Well, I called and will post Evans response to my questions for anyone considering this product. My concern was absorbing moisture from air in the recovery bottle. This will happen according to Evans but it will take time to build up water in the system. The preferred method is to run the cooling system old school like my 240z originally was. You can have an "overflow bottle '' but don't want any fluid in it so it's not recycled over and over. He said to lower the coolant in the rad an inch or so or let it puke out what it doesn't want from expansion. And I can keep the overflow bottle but wouldn't have coolant in it, just there to catch any excess in case it gets real hot. The idea here is that the system will build approx. 6 psi hydraulic pressure which will only compress the air in the rad but that wont be enough to overcome the 13 lb rad cap which will keep the system sealed preventing any moisture from the atmosphere from entering. So, new school coolant with old school air space in the rad.....too easy !

Thanks Tim for your response, I'm going to call them today with a couple questions. If I may ask, how did you handle coolant recovery? I have a recovery bottle in place and the coolant expands into it and returns to the cooling system after cool down as designed. Now, seeing that the Evans coolant is hygroscopic ( will absorb water even fro the air ) my concern is that it will absorb water from the air in the recovery tank ? Water is really the only thing that can screw up the properties of this coolant.

Wondering if anyone else on the forum has converted to Evans Waterless Coolant ? I just made the switch and am considering going to a 7 psi rad cap to reduce strain on the hoses etc. If anyone else converted, what cap are you running and thermostat temperature?

You lose more than a couple horsepower even with a clutch fan....Motor Trend just did dyno testing, google Engine Masters. Would provide a link if I knew how ! With a shroud loses are greater

Take a look in the fuel delivery section

Been down this road. You will be lean on one side of the intake if you hook the pcv up to one side of the intake....better to use the PCV port on the carb or drill and thread in the center of the plenum divider to equal out distribution. I would use the original pcv valve as it will flow the proper amounts.

Hi John, If it's not too much trouble, could you post a photo of the port vacuum hole in the throttle bore in relation to a closed throttle plate. I had a lot of trouble with that on my fitech and am curious if holley handled that better. I know on their carbs the position is perfect. Here is a photo of the stock fitect port vacuum hole with a closed throttle plate.

The shiny one is in stock at performanceimprovements .com............$1478 Canadian

That should work well with the Sniper. I thought you were putting it on the L6 ! The Sniper should have better Holley support. I would have tried it on my L6 but am probably only at 200 hp. I set mine up with the rubber lines for quick setup as that's what came with my kit but stainless Teflon ( not rubber core ) is the way to go if you can. My lines started to split at the ends in just a couple months. Lot's of good info at http://www.chevelles.com/forums/89-efi/ on the Sniper as well as other efi. Happy reading!

I just replaced the high pressure rubber line with Carbon-Teflon core, stainless braided fuel line. The rubber lines don't seem to last long and I was getting a lot of fuel smell through the hose. The problem with the barbed connectors is they screw up the special coating on the inside of the lines and the hose ends then deteriorate and split at the fittings. The stainless line I bought wasn't bad price but the fitting prices are insane. You can order line from Fraggola and they will custom make the line to length with the fittings attached which can be a lot cheaper. Another thought on rubber line is that when the rubber degrades between the filter and the throttle body, the bits will end up in the fuel injectors. Which intake manifold are you running?

Yep, it is a lot easier...want to try 12.6 to 1, type it in to the handheld, done.....easy changes, can have different tunes for different goals, mileage etc...easy! Look forward to the Sniper write up...........

Yep, good solution and no venting issues

Ozconnection, Have been reading that TBI systems generally run better with an open plenum instead of dual. Especially, if the fuel is injected below the throttle plates ? Seems to be the case with V8 engines but not all. Mine runs fine with the Arizona manifold but would be interesting to try a Clifford one day.

I have the FCC and it is not all roses. Definitely not suitable for any kind of circuit racing due to the float. The vent from the FCC is really a return, do not run it into any factory vent line that is for burning off fumes as you will be sucking raw fuel into the intake manifold. Ask me how I know ! Run the "vent" line from the FCC to the factory return line and let the factory vent line act as a vent. Also, since there is no high pressure fuel return to the tank, the fuel recirculates inside the FCC and heats up which then can boil. This is why people are removing the float and running the "vent" as a return which keeps the low pressure side flowing cooling the fuel. Fitech is now offering better set-ups like the Rob MC unit...check them out. The FCC works but may need some tweaking, many reviews on-line. Like I said if you go TBI, start a thread. As you can tell, I'm serious about it ! lol.