JMortensen

Tim, you're a true parking lot hero...

I agree with the sentiment, but not the reason. The AZC one is supposed to be STEEL not cast iron, so it should be a lot stronger than the cast iron lightened one from Top End. I have the AZC unit in my car and have for a couple years now. I'm 99.999999% sure it was brand new and not a turned down factory flywheel. Weighs 12 lbs. The scary thing is how thin it is. Mine hasn't caused me any problems, but every machinist I've shown it to has looked at it, looked at me, and then asked if I had a scatter shield. That's 3 different machinists now. I've checked mine for cracks twice, no problems yet, but I'd be a hell of a lot more comfortable with a Fidanza flywheel. One more thing about the AZC, when they balanced mine they had to remove A LOT of metal. There is a guy who has Fidanza's on ebay all the time, usually has a couple Datsuns up there too. I'm sure you could get one from him. I know I would have paid $379 when I was looking.

So what? I'm not saying that [insert your gun crime here] wasn't a tragedy but that doesn't mean that gun ownership by our citizens is not worth the risk. Citizens are capable of wielding all kinds tools that have the capability of determining the life and death of another citizen. That's always going to be the case. Agreed. And there are normal people who go berzerk at the Post Office. Should we end gun ownership because of some jackass who just can't take it anymore? I think not. Lots of people disagree with me I suppose. That's the ONLY legitimate argument I've heard for the Patriot Act. I don't think that the potential dangers of the abuse of the Patriot Act outweigh the benefits, at least in theory. You're compromising the rights of 280 million people here. I don't think that Bush or Cheney are out to get me, and my political distaste for them is not the reason that I disapprove of the act. In fact I will vote for Bush. I disapprove because it would become easier and easier to continue the erosion of civil liberties as more terror attacks happen, and I don't see them stopping. It's a slippery slope thing to me. Agreed. I'll take the risk of the car bomb over the totalitarian govt that prevents it from happening though.

Well the murder rate has dropped in a number of states that have concealed carry laws. They didn't need to read people's email to lower the rate either. How about issuing a buttload of concealed carry permits to citizens with no criminal record? I think he should IF he's a citizen. I have had several friends try to tell me that the US should treat everyone in this world as if they were US citizens, whether they be hostile countries or illegal aliens or actual citizens. That to me just doesn't make any sense at all. But citizens should get the benefit of their Constitutional rights. Just because the Patriot Act is good for the war on terror doesn't mean that it is good for the country as a whole. I think that the terrorists are going to have successful attacks on us regardless of the Patriot Act, and the better way to deal with the problem is to let the ordinary people who are going to be affected by that situation have an opportunity to stop it. I'd rather we all keep our secrets, but when the terrorist shows his hand he comes up against 100's of armed citizens. I know it won't stop the Timothy McVeighs, but I'd sure hate to see us adopt a system where Timothy McVeigh wouldn't have a chance to make a successful attack.

Maybe we'll get some Texans to answer that question Mike, but I seem to remember a lot of Democratic Texas legislators throwing support behind Bush in the last election. Wasn't that the whole "uniter not a divider" thing. Guess he can't run on that one anymore. Still it seemed like he was VERY popular in Texas as governor.

80LT1, that is a RACE CAR. Built to class specs. Weren't they asking ~$60K for that about a year ago? DP is the guy who does the Nissan Comp oil pans. That car should be as good as it gets...

I thought you could get a brand new clutch type for $500 from http://www.differentials.com

Perfect description of the present situation.

The most advance I've heard anyone run on an L on purpose was 38*, all in by 2000 rpm. I think you have too much advance, but if you did it on the dyno and that's where it made the most power, then maybe I'm wrong.

Did you measure from the bottom of the head to the top of the intake port? Cause I wasn't talking about the relation of the intake and the exhaust. Theoretically you'd want both higher, and that's what I thought you got (kinda misspoke about intake without also saying exhaust). This port thing I'm really not sure of, so I don't really want to argue it too much, but a friend of mine told me that as a reason why he used a P90, and he had about 20 L series heads. I **assume** that he measured and I think he said he did, but I'm not absolutely sure. I thought I was pretty much the only one arguing. Dan and I are both stubborn, so it might still be a few more posts. If you can't deal, don't read it. I can say that there have been a few interesting posts on the IZCC list about this... Because it has the L24 bore it has the smaller valves. So in order to take full advantage you'd need to install the bigger valves and unshroud just like the E31. Don't know that I've heard of anyone going that far with the Max N47.

They just stopped manufacturing them. Still totally legal to own, buy or sell as far as I know.

I bought a muffler and a couple of 180* bends from JC Whitney. The straight tube I just got from a local shop because I figured it would be expensive to ship. Took me and a friend a solid afternoon. Just kept cutting pieces and tacking them together. We worked from the front to the back. Cheap and easy.

Well according to http://geocities.com/zgarage2001/head.html the volume of the P79 chamber after the shave is 46cc. The volume of an N42 chamber is 44.6 (Lengine.exe). I would think that you could get damn near the same compression out of either one. Also, the valves in the P90 are .100 shorter (from How to Mod). So you could theoretically mill the P90 .100 instead of .080, and get a little more that way and still be right where you need to be with the rocker geometry.

Thanks, I knew I had that wrong. How do you think these 14:1 guys do it? They don't just mill 1/4" off the head you know. Every forged piston that I've seen for an L series was forged with big pop ups for 12:1 or better compression (actually I think they were all ~14:1) and all of them REQUIRED that the piston be machined. I'm sure that is how John Coffey got his quench area. Just machine the piston to match the combustion chamber. Granted, every forged piston I've seen was for a high compression NA L series motor, and I haven't seen that many (only 2 different race engines). I'm sure you can get flat tops or dished pistons too, but it is definitely not unusual or hard to come by domed pistons that are meant to be machined. Maybe you can't easily quantify it or maybe we're just ignorant of the Q scale or something, but it's easy to find engine builders of all types of gas engines using it to their advantage, and they can tell you why it is advantageous. Actually they use the piston shape to their advantage. Some really funky piston and chamber shapes come out of this. Check out some of the full billet Harley heads. Crazy computer generated CNC milled chambers and pistons designed to optimize the suction on the intake, burn, and the exhaust efficiency.

If Russia were to start wiping out terrorist bases in Chechnya, I would have to herald that event as the world being safer.

OK, so the L28 has a positive deck height of .030mm. The LD28 crank has an increased stroke of 4mm. Norm cut his pistons down 2mm. He could be using 2 Failure Prone gaskets at 1mm each or 2 regular gaskets at 1.2mm each.. That means that he should be at .4mm clearance (.016") with the head, or the pistons should just touch the head. I had this wrong before. Please help me figure out if I've screwed it up a second time. Regardless, doesn't seem right... So we actually agree... man if I ever meet you in person we gotta go for a beer and talk about the time we agreed. Come on man! If YOU'RE going to determine the parameters of what is acceptable proof, at least let me gloat over my ONE instance of "proving you possibly wrong" or at least "less right". The original r/s ratio of the 240 was 1.8. An L28 with 140mm rods = 1.77. Clearly not going beyond the original very successful design. Compression is a known and well proven power-builder in JUST THE SAME WAY that quench is. That's my only point. It's used pretty much universally in pretty much all heads on gasoline engines that I've seen. Don't let the bed bugs bite...

You know what you're right Dan. My theories about rod ratio and quench are just theories. There's a hell of a lot of support to back them up in general terms, but they can never be absolutely proven as fact in every possible circumstance. Kinda like these theories: theory of evolution, gravitational theory, atomic theory, germ theory, quantum theory, etc. None of those are absolutely proven either. I never worry about gravity either. I always "know" it will be there for me.

I don't know much about Norm's setup. I certainly haven't paid as much attention to what he's doing as I have to what you've been doing. I ***thought*** he was running 280 rods and pistons on a stroker crank. That would leave you with a LOT of positive deck height, and I ***thought*** he had to mill down the pistons and run the 2mm gasket to get to the point where he would have quench. I could be wrong. I'll take the wrath I suppose. I don't know how you figure out what to do on your Z. Maybe you just ask someone who knows better than you do, and do exactly what they tell you. Nothing wrong with that other than you're limited by the person you're asking. It sounds to me like DAW has access to all kinds of L parts. When I built my current engine I could have used any block, any crank, any L24/L26/L28 rods, and any head except the Max N47. I chose what I chose because I listened to an "expert" and dumped a pile of money into an E31. If I had it to do over again, I wouldn't have anything like the build that I've got now, and I'm as sure as I can be without spending another $1500 to prove my point that I would be pumping out more hp. Maybe I'm some kind of psychic or something, but I can see a head and a block and rods and crank and I can get an idea of what it's going to do BEFORE I actually build it. Similarly, when I go to the fridge I seem to "know" what I want to put on a sandwich, and when I make it: BLAMMO!!! Good sandwich!!! And I knew it was going to be good BEFORE I bit into it I'll re-read the post in question, but I don't remember it being stated that emphatically. I recall it provided the LD block as a relatively easy way to get past the deck height limitation. You know that you don't know. That is true. But the part you don't say is that you write off anything that hasn't been on a dyno chart that YOU'VE seen. You also fail to note that you BROWBEAT anyone who tries to disagree with you. On the other hand I can apply reasoning to the questions that I seek answers to. Unlike an engineer, I can speculate and USUALLY come out right. I know that other similar situations have borne out the benefits of quench and rod ratio, and that those things should translate on an L series being that it is a gasoline powered piston engine. Nissan made their only aftermarket L-series performance head (non-crossflow anyway) with quench in mind. I have the ability to relate that knowledge to my own build. But I had a good idea that the quench area was going to matter even before realizing that about the FIA head. How did I know this? You hit the nail on the head before. Because I understand the theory behind quench, I could tell just by looking at them. I thought the rod ratio thing might also play out. I had been given the advice to fit the longest rod I could into my engine when I built it by my engine builder, but due to financial constraints was unable to use anything other than the L28 rods. When I found out Devendorf used them, I felt that the point was "proven". Why would a nationally competitive racer use them if there wasn't anything to it? BTW, the book says nothing about him using an LD28 block. I think he used an L28 block and crank, 140mm rods and custom pistons. And I think that would be a badass setup despite the fact that I've never tried it and haven't seen his dyno chart. Did you see that Kameari chain tensioner setup? I had a hard on for that thing 5 seconds after seeing it the first time. I am SURE that it would make a dyno recognizable difference in power, even though I haven't tried it. I'm not claiming omniscience. I'm claiming the ability to see a good idea somewhere else and apply it to what I'm doing. And so far I've been fairly successful with that. From the Gtech comparison I'm fairing pretty well with my budget build vs your high dollar build. EDIT-- I upped my compression ratio even though I have never seen a dyno sheet with the same L series engine with dished then flat top pistons. I just "knew" it would work!

Doh... that's gotta be hard to say, even for McAuliffe...

I used my E31 because it has a bunch of quench. Not a perfect correlation, but it was also just a way to show to anyone who reads this that you don't need the dogmatic F54/240/KA24/HKS/N42 to make hp. It was more a response to your BOW DOWN AND WORSHIP ME thing. The BOW DOWN thing is my problem with your argument. It is always "well I made x by following the formula" or "why WASTE time and money on an impractical experiment that will have no real benefit" and you really don't know that these things have no benefit, nor that they are impractical. For instance, how hard would it be to lower an LD block an inch in the chassis. I think I could get that done in fairly short order. This is what I said: Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you shaved an N42 you wouldn't be able to run pump gas. Right? So in order to get a significant amount of quench out of the N42, you'd need to run race gas. The other advantage to the P head that I haven't been able to verify is the height of the intake ports. We didn't even get into this yet, and I almost don't want to, but supposedly the intake ports are located higher on the P90 which makes for a longer short side radius. I'm sure I don't have to explain the benefits of that to you.

Thank you for getting the title right. 'Bout time you showed some respect. Yeah, that is a pretty crappy comparison, but it's all I've got. You missed my point. My point was that I have a grand total of about $1700 in the machine work on my engine. If you include the ancillaries I've probably got $2500 total in mine. I did it because it was fun. You're right, I haven't dynoed, so I can't see where improvements were made. I can only say with some assurance from my ass that there were improvements. Cars on jack stands and will be for a while yet, and even if it wasn't, there are so many other things I want to buy before I spend time on a dyno that I can't see wasting the money on it. I'm spending some real $$$ on my car for the first time in 4 years, and I'm running very overbudget already trying to get a number of projects done. If and when it gets to the dyno, you'll be the first to know. EDIT--Gtech stuff was with the dished .020 over pistons on the first motor.

Now you're talking, except we should keep more than 1/2 and they should leave us alone.

Look at the arguments and decide for yourself. If you can't tell who is right on the argument, then study up until you can. All the info you want is right in front of you.

Public education and the war on drugs are already in the govt's charge, like it or not. Health care is increasingly in the govts charge, but there are those of us who look at the public education and war on drugs and think that the govt shouldn't be in charge of health care. Those are the people who hate Hillary's policies. I am one of them. I'm not accusing you of this Phil, but it always amazes me when people talk about how crappy the govt is then in the same breath tell you how they want to expand its powers. I don't care about Nam either, but forging documents to slander your opponent? That's almost Watergate-ish.

Well I've actually lightened up. Yesterday I was taking it too personally. Today I laughed when Dan said BOW DOWN BEFORE ME. I guess maybe my sarcasm wasn't evident in my last post.