JMortensen

I don't think this thing would be legal pretty much anywhere, but it is an interesting idea. The website has vids of Vic Sias's BMW autoxing with this wing on it. http://aeromotions.com/index.php

Bad idea. When the suspension compresses the stock fender lip will gouge the tires if you don't cut. You could run wheels and tires that fit under the stock fenders and then put the flares on, but that would be really lame.

Be sure and report back about how badly using the air dremel (that's what it is to me anyway) worked.

Yes, it is possible that a ring/pinion set gets worn in the wrong position, and then even if you set it correctly, they still make noise. That said, I would suspect that what you have is bearing noise more than gear noise. I say this only because I know the R200s tend to lose the ball bearing at the nose of the pinion gear and it is noisy when it goes. I'd say this is especially likely if your 4.38 was set up by Nissan (if it was a 4.38 out of a Skyline or something like that - which it should be if it came from AZC). As far as patterns go, there are some really wacky patterns that are actually considered OK. You can check the pattern against this pdf that has pictures of acceptable patterns in the last few pages: http://www.ringpinion.com/Content/HowTo/TechnicalInstructions/Yukon_Installation_Kit_Instructions.pdf

I can feel a distinct difference between my 12 lb AZC flywheel and my friend's 10 lb HKS flywheel. Hers revs a lot faster than mine. As Tony said, where the material is removed makes a big difference. I also have never had any trouble with stalling, even when I had a stock compression engine with a big cam, triples, the AZC flywheel and an ACT pressure plate, I stalled it maybe once a year if that. The long heavy crank in the L6 is helping for sure. I used to stall my friend's 510 with an L16 running 44's, a Tilton flywheel and roadster comp pp all the time. There is just a lot more inertia in a L6 spinning 1000 rpm than there is an a L4 at the same rpm.

If you remove the stock prop valve this shouldn't be an issue. I'm not sure how hard it is to remove the valve on the 280Z, as I think it is built into the pressure switch. On the 240Z they are separate units.

Ha! Replaced every two years! As if...

They use long shanks because you need them to get to the deepest part of the port. They hold them at the back because that's where the trigger is if they're air tools. I always use both hands so I can get better control and get a hand closer to the collet. Forget about porting with a dremel. It might work for some of the chamber work, but it would take forever and a day to port the whole runner that way. A 1/4" air or electric die grinder is the way to go. Try it out and you'll quickly see why.

Just do a valve job after you finish the port work. I think you'd have to be pretty hamfisted to screw it up so bad the seat needed replacing. If you're just doing the chamber you can put an old valve in to protect the seat.

Changed title. We want people to know what the thread is about before they open it. This helps with people searching the archives for tech info.

I stand corrected.

Wasps do both, and they don't drop their stinger so they can sting you over and over again.

Stiffer so that you don't bottom out while accelerating would be a general rule and I think if you look you'll see posts similar to that regarding drag racing and limiting squat. What's more important for your autoxer is to keep the car flat, limiting body roll and camber and toe change.

I would guess it's more aggressive than the Schneider, because the Schneider has a reputation for being tiny. It's not just the lift and duration, but the shape of the lobes also that has a huge effect on how the car runs. I wouldn't regrind the Racer Brown cam because it is already a regrind, and besides you might find someone that wants it just because it is a Racer Brown cam. Junkyard camshafts are a dime a dozen; get another one to regrind. If you can't find one, I think my brother in law still has about 20. You can email him at matmorrow AT att.net. He's in CA but shipping a cam shouldn't be too expensive.

Tone it down Tony. We want accurate information, but we also don't want flame wars here.

Looks good. If you made a duct that directed all the air that comes through your smaller opening through the radiator you could further reduce the drag.

You're absolutely right. I guess I need to keep up on my GM news a bit better...

Fair enough. For what its worth, if GM bought 2% more of Isuzu, then they would have 51% ownership and they would therefore be building the Duramax.

Remember what site you're on and keep your anti big 3 bias to yourself. As far as the 1.9 diesels, they get the power by boosting the crap out of them. That's the nice thing about diesels, they run on detonation. So you can really run a buttload of boost without too much trouble, assuming the headgasket and bottom end stay together.

You're thinking Bernoulli Effect. It doesn't have much to do with the 45* angle though. Search on the web and you'll see it applies to all sorts of things from carburetors to airplane wings.

I don't know anything about the 6.5. I would be very hesitant to use any GM diesel other than the Duramax though. GM and Ford really stepped up with those engines to compete with the Cummins, and that 6.2 was a real piece of dog ♥♥♥♥.

As you noted, you'd still be missing the velocity stack or funnel taper of the carb body that the larger carbs had. On that same p 109, How to Modify has some pics of bored triples that ran without venturis. You can't really tell from the pictures, but they were opened way up, and that taper essentially takes the place of the venturis. We had a guy post here about 4-5 years ago. He had a set of 44's and the holes on the outside were bored out to something like 56mm or 58mm. Memory of that post is a little weak, sorry, but the point is they were bored way out. My question is would there be enough intake velocity at low speeds to make the carbs work effectively, or would you only really get proper function when the engine rpms were really high. I suppose it couldn't hurt to try, but I suspect the answer is no.

Draw a 4 inch diameter circle on a piece of paper, then draw two 2 inch diameter circles inside it. There is your answer.

Force air under the car = upforce. Force air over the car = downforce. As John says, the big benefit here is limiting the amount of air that comes through the the front end of the car. Stock the Z has a hole between the core support and the front valance, the core support and the hood, and holes on both sides of the core support. It's safe to say that more air gets into the engine compartment than goes through the radiator, and also that whatever gets in has to go out the bottom of the car, unless you have hood vents, and I don't think the 280 vents will evacuate all the air that comes in through all the holes either. When the air is forced under the car, you get lift. As a side benefit, the top of the hood is a low pressure area so air coming out of a vent or a radiator duct will get SUCKED out which should improve cooling. I don't know the specifics, but I've read of race cars with radiator fins removed to allow freer air flow. That might change the dynamics a bit and cause a ramped exhaust from the radiator like blueovalz and 74_5.0L_Z have to create more downforce than they otherwise would.

That's going to be an R4S or an HPS. The blues or the R4 pads won't have any bite at all on the street.