preith

try the search function. Here's a few threads that came up: http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=89116&highlight=manifold+webbing http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=82768&highlight=manifold+webbing

I sent ATI an email and someone actually called me back! It looks like they can supply me with the actual crank mount for the dampner with a pulley mounted behind like the nissan unit. I'll keep you posted for anyone who's interested. EDIT: It turns out they are going to custom machine a new crank adapter from a Pinto unit, go figure. The crank piece is about $100 and the custom machining, $40, which doesn't seem too bad.

We're getting waaay off subject here, but anyways....I visited a friend in Grand Forks (north about 80 miles I think), and I did not notice hardly anything outside the norm. Although I'm from WI so go figure.

I think most of us are aware of your project, someone had posted a zcar.com link with this recently. Looks awesome BTW. I'm at a loss as to how you'd weld it, but my first thought is you can do any straighteing by a combination of heating the whole thing up and bending it back along with milling it. EDIT: as for the cams, maybe you could mill the caps down and align bore them?

Did a search and only found the ATI referenced, but no one mentioned any pulley issues. I just picked an ATI dampner as part of a package deal on a dry sump setup for my L28. It seems to be a great part, and I'm estastic that I got this, but there's one problem. The Nissan comp unit has the fan belt pulley behind the dampner where as the ATI unit is flush against the front cover. There is a mandrel which has the alt. belt and dry sump cog on it, but this puts the pulley waaay out, probably about 3 or 4 inches from stock. I have yet to contact ATI, but does anyone know of a water pump and alt. pulley kit for this? I'm guessing it's going to have to be a custom deal. I wonder if other ATI models are more like the Nissan unit?

Don't know why I typed this in the addess bar instead of doing a google search for the show on Discovery channel, but check this link out. http://www.americanhotrod.com

I knew a guy who had a bone stock 924 and he said it was a better handler than his also bone stock '76 Z.

Don't know why I remember this, and daybe I shouldn't post this one because it's pretty sad I noticed, but John Candy in Delirious, the Ferrari GTO was a Z based replica. I'm pretty sure Newman also raced Bob Sharp's original CP 240Z, which was the same car his son Scott won the championship in '86 or something.

You might want to try emailing Craig. Last time we corresponded he mentioned Ebay's prices were getting out of hand and was going to find other means. I did by his entire engine bolt set and am happy with it. The other set that wigenOut-S30 posted looks good too, but they don't appear to be stainless.

Craig Bordon over at zcarcreations.com has a nice stainless stud kit for $40. Just bought a set for my car, so far they seem to be great.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6472&item=4534612194&rd=1

I had an excellent book by Tom Monroe, "HT Rebuild Ford 351C/351M/400/429/460" who also authored "HT rebuild your Datsun L-series", spoke of an aussie head with ports somewhere in between the 2V and 4V heads. Those sound like they would be cool to have, but I wonder how difficult to obtain?

Thanks, that clears it up. However, I'm almost positive the 400 had canted valves, but like you say the ports were much smaller.

I don't deal with any V8's so please excuse my ignorance, but a few years ago I had a '74 LTD that for some reason I took a liking to. I had plans for a little hotroding, but ended up selling it. Anyways, it had the 400, which is a derivative of the 351C. From the reading I've done, it's a great motor, but considerably heavier than the 302, and I think there was a catch with cylinder heads; aftermarket aluminum ones weren't available, even from Ford Motorsport. I seem to remember you could adapt the cleveland heads to the 302, but not the other way around.

What I don't get is why is this not an issue now? There are plenty of GT-2 cars here in the states that are putting out healthy amounts of hp, and I never hear of this. One guy who I know very well, used to prepare a CP car in the late 70's/early 80's. It was dyno'd at over 300hp, had a bone stock crank, and they regularly rev'd it to 9500. When Malvern was still around he told me they had problems with the crank actually breaking apart (not bending), but this was solved with a Tilton dual disc and dampner up front.

Dave passed about 6 months ago. I guess his inventory is still there and slated for liquidation; alot of very nice high dollar equipment from what I hear.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6187&item=4534370454&rd=1

Call me cheap, but $100 just for the valve, no thanks. The cable setup looks intreging, but $60 is venturing into the "too much for me" territory too. EDIT: forgot to mention. I mounted mine in front of the passenger seat with a manual valve; can just reach it strapped in.

I'm kicking myself because I sold my PS2 last fall, but from the reviews it's what I expected. They've all been good games at the time, but my biggest complaint was always the sound. How is it on this one? Nothing more irritating than having a 600hp V8 sound like grampa's sedan. Some of them were decent, but I never understood why they couldn't at least copy the same good sounds over the similar engined cars. I hear ya. In GT3 it got to the point where I deliberlately started taking slower cars and beating the faster ones anyways. My favorite was the Toyota GT-1 w/1300hp vs the formula cars. EDIT: I also wanted to say I can live without GT4 because I have Gran Prix Legends on the PC. It's an older game, the graphics fall behing in some areas, but nothing is more challenging, and the physics are excellent.

I guess you could compare it to a second pump. Basically there's a diaphram in the inside, with a small amount of air pressure behind it. When you run the engine, what ever oil pressure was present when the valve is closed is stored there is held until the valve is opened again. It does not connect to the oil pan. The easiest way is if your running an oil cooler, or remote filters, and intersect the oil lines somehow. I'd be real leary about buying that one. Accusumps are about the same price, and seem to have the market pretty much cornered. I never see any other brand on cars which do have a pre-oiler. http://www.accusump.com/ http://www.racerpartswholesale.com/index.html *see Canton products.

At glance it seems to be the same as an Accusump, which is a more reputable brand that I'd go with instead. It does pre-oil the engine, and compensate for any momentary loss in pressure, but I've never known anyone to try it with a stock pan, could work though.

I guess that last post was a bit misleading. Yes I do have an oil cooler, but temps were never the issue, just the crank going through the oil. It's more about power loss than anything. But I think you're right, I'm probably just overanalyzing it. I totally agree. When I was shopping for mine about 4 years ago, Nissan had a hard time stocking this, and at the time it was about $550-600. So I actually dug up my old Zcar magazines (not Z-sport), started calling all the zcar shops advertised, and was fortunate enough to find a used one for a bit less. But anyways, $750 is venturing into dry sump territory!

That's the point I've been trying to make from the start. Is there a happy medium there? Is 8 qts the maximum capactity, or the recommended level?

Thanks guys. I was aware that the pan was sold as an 8 qt, but maybe I'm making it more complicated than it has to be. What got the wheels turning was in "How to Hotrod Race..." he has a picture of the same pan, but what I beleive is the 4cyl version. He says it's a 7.5 to 8 qt pan, but should be filled to 6 to keep it below the windage tray. I assumed the same rule would apply to the 6cyl one. When I initially filled mine, I found 7 qts put me right at the tray. Then I thought about with it running, it technically would be well below, but maybe that was taken into account?

I've been brainstorming, and have to throw this out there. I have the Nissan Motorsports pan. To fill it just below the windage tray, takes about 7 qts. My thoughts were technically one should fill it up over the tray because during operation, it's probably down at least 2 qts. Does anyone have a more concrete figure on this? Any other thoughts?