SleeperZ

Nice slip joint on the third tube.

Corky Bell wrote an excellent book on the subject of turbocharging, "Maximum Boost". In the carburetor section he explains that most of the issue with carburetion is the narrow range of airflows that carbs can deal with. There are all sorts of issues with pressurizing carbs you might not think about until you are hip deep in the conversion; like collapsing bowl floats, and the necessity for a bypass valve to keep from flooding on throttle lifts (fuel squirts through the idle jets). With fuel injection these issues either are no-brainers, or simply don't exist. Ultimately I believe FI will be cheaper if you have driveability in mind at all.

Put a turbo L28 in it

Few and far between. It is too easy to do the fuel injection - it is so much friendlier for turbos.

That's why I love driving in Colorado - the cars you mention capable of 12s are only capable of 13s up here in the stratosphere WHERE TURBOS RULE!

Wow, that's a good idea, I never thought of that. The only concern I can think of is maybe the bulb would not last as long from the extra heat generated...

How big are your injectors, and what engine management system are you running? What intercooler? IMO, the best way to "dyno" the car is run it at the strip, then you know how much power you can put down, as opposed to just bragging rights...(dynos are useful tuning tools, don't get me wrong).

I was using a '75 air regulator until boost blew out the element - I replaced it with an '82 ZXT air regulator. I am using all the stock 280ZXT sensors, except the fuel temperature sensor, which is probably the same for all the VG applications. I am not using a knock sensor, and I'm not sure if the '82 knock sensor will work or not. A new one from a Z31 is too expensive to play with in case it's the noisy '82 engine giving me the computer error and not a bad knock sensor.

Yes, last I heard you were going with a big single... but you are staying with the twins I see. Which turbo set are you planning on using now - the Mitsubishi again? Did you move the turbos up to use longer tubes, or for heat soak reasons? I bet you are fabricating a new intake , will you be changing to a center feed across the valve cover?

Why is it a POS? Or is that sarcastic? It looks good to me so far - huge a$$ tubes. How much thermal expansion do you expect along the flange (or how big do you have to make the mounting holes to accomodate the expansion)?

Just my $0.02 - I like the stock suspension. I am using stock antisway bars and an aluminum bushing T/C kit, along with urethane bar and steering rack bushings. I have Eibach progressive springs that slightly lower my '78. Other than that, I am stock, and I love the way the car handles on the street and the road course. I don't think you can "improve" it much and still have the street-ability. You can always slam it and put stiff springs for the ultimate handling on an autocross or road course, but it'll jar your fillings loose on the street.

Good grief!!! That damage to a skirted block is unreal. It looks like all the rod caps may still be still attached, but I love how there are two rod ends with piston pins still attached poking out the bottom

LOL! NFW!

Damn Bob - you may be right. That is downright scary!

I've watched that a number of times now - amazing! One thing I finally picked up on is the speedo is in kph, not mph. I thought this dude was pulling 200 mph+, but it's only going 180mph tops

If you have voltage to the coil but no spark, your points are not operating. Check the ground of the "dizzy", and the operation of the points - they should open and close with engine rotation. If you do happen to stop the rotation when the points are closed, and you register 0 volts at the coil -, but still no spark, you may have a bad coil.

Yes, I have 2 turbo intake manifolds now One an '82, one an '83. And I see the same thing - the gasket matches the cylinder head port quite closely, and the manifold ports are a bit smaller than the gasket (perhaps as much as 2 mm smaller in diameter.)

I've read that before and it didn't stick in my head. I looked at them side by side and found it not to be true, at least for my manifolds. The intake port diameters were identical compared to my intake gasket, and I just ported my N42 to match. The N42 has some bumps inside it, but nothing that would pose any serious flow impediment, especially since I ground them out where I could reach them.

As far as I know all the P90s were the same. They came on the '81 and '82 280ZX turbo US cars. P90 is cast into the lower side of the head near the #1 and #2 plug holes. Don't discount the P90A head either. They are essentially identical to the P90 if they don't have hydraulic pivots - and lots of them don't.

No. sorry. They are exactly the same size. I am using an N42 intake, and I compared it to my old turbo manifold - same port size and runner length.

Are we talking Turbo SVO injectors? Because the other types they have (24/30/36/42# etc) are high impedance, 39psi rated. That's correct, brown-top Mustang SVO injectors from the 2.3 liter turbo. They also came on the turbo Tbirds and Merkur XR4TIs.

Stock fuel pressure is 36 psi with manifold reference hose removed and plugged at manifold.

Welded in parallel, either atop one another or one behind the other would probably work fairly well. Go for it.

I don't have a scanner, but I bought the Chiltons manual for all the Zs ('70 - '88 anyway), and it had all of the ECCS wiring diagrams, which are the ones that matter. It had all the vacuum diagrams as well, very useful book as long as you don't use it for a repair manual

You are correct. I didn't understand the context of your statements. I agree you should not try to boost more than 12-14 psi on the stock fuel system or you will run into reliability issues, especially with the stock turbo.