TimZ

I would take it to a reputable shop and have it balanced. Just bear in mind that this is a seperate issue from the damping issue. Damping has nothing to do with balance. To elaborate on John's statement, the mod that you did probably effected the damping characteristics to some degree. How much is hard to say. I would have to guess that it is still better than no damper, so long as you left enough clearance around the pin to allow it to move sufficiently to damp the crank vibrations. Trouble is that I can't tell you exactly how much movement that is. I would recommend leaving clearance of at least the thickness of the rubber all the way around the pin. We are hesitating to recommend this mod simply because of all the "if"s in the abouve statement. IF you do all that stuff (stuff that I don't know exactly how much to tell you to do) correctly, and IF the mod didn't remove enough material to drastically effect the damping characteristics (which I also don't know what to tell you as to how much is acceptable), THEN the mod should probably be okay. If any of those things are not right, then worst case is that it's the same as a solid pulley, which is bad.

Man, I bet that if Nissan ( and EVERY OTHER OEM ON THE PLANET) read that, they'd feel pretty stupid for wasting the money on those complicated magic dampers all these years. I know I do. They should have called that Z shop and got set straight. Think of the millions of dollars they could have saved. I give up. Do what you want.

If you get the replacement studs from a Nissan dealer (I got mine from Courtesy Nissan), the threaded part that goes into the head is considerably longer than what you will probably find at the hardware store. If you have the manifold off, you might consider having it's gasket surface milled flat.

Not a stupid question. The electric water pump is an interesting proposition. Unfortunately, the alternator and the water pump share the same pulley, so that won't buy you anything - you'll still need the same number of pulleys. The second pulley is for the AC - in some parts of the country you can't easily part with it in a street car. With a single groove pulley you still need the dampner, but there are some workable solutions available for that.

LOL - Sorry, I thought you were asking about somebody else's car.

Jeff is spot on with his comments. These cranks are well known to have problems with harmonics at high rpm. It's pretty much unavoidable with a long crank like you have on an L6. While there are several suppliers out there making solid crank pulleys, I have no faith whatsoever that any engineering goes into these products, save for maybe making sure they fit (sometimes they don't even do that much). Hell - Unorthodox Racing has repeatedly demonstrated that they don't even understand the issue. This should worry you. Alot. If you only need a single groove pulley, then you should consider the ATI piece. If you need more than that, the options that Jeff is researching look pretty promising. Personally, I never liked the idea of machining the floating part of the stock pulley, and then adding the rotating mass of the trigger wheel to it. The mass of the floater and the durometer of the rubber are critical to determining the damping characteristics of the pulley, and I can't help but think that this mod will screw that up. Because of this, I had a sleeve machined that fits into the center of the stock pulley (the solid part), and the trigger wheel mounts to that, instead. I have been running this setup for five or six years now with no problems (knock on wood) with seperation. One final observation - the pulleys in the picture don't look like they are particularly new. Please tell me that you weren't relying on a (possibly 20 year old) junkyard pulley. If so, then you shouldn't be too surprised that it failed.

I went and looked around a bit, and I'm guessing you are referring to this FPR. That regulator will work. As I mentioned before, that regulator is pressure referenced - it is not a rising rate regulator. There is a difference. Sorry to nitpick, but there is so much confusion out there on this subject.

Looks like maybe an old BAE turbo kit. They used to be THE aftermarket turbo company back in the early '80s. Nice wiring job

The available RR FRPs that I know of are not suitable for your application. They are non-linear devices and add more than 1 psi of fuel pressure for each psi of boost. Rising Rate is not the same thing as pressure referenced. Cartech used to include a Solex pressure referenced 4 psi regulator with their triple Mikuni turbo setup. I have not seen a similar regulator recently. Maybe call Cartech, and see if they have any ideas...

On the Mikuni sidedrafts, the bowl is vented to a hole in the front of the carb body, next to one of the air horn inlets. It shared the same sealing surface as the mounting for the air horns. I'm assuming that the Webers had something similar. When turbocharging, you just need to make sure that this vent hole sees the same pressure as the carb inlets, so that the float bowl has the same pressure on both sides of it - otherwise, no fuel will come out of the jets. The plenum that Cartech used had accomodations for this, so it was not necessary to pressurize the entire triple carb setup. You should also note that just like the fuel injection systems, you will need a fuel pressure regulator that will reference the fuel pressure to the manifold pressure. In this case though, the pressure needs to be maintained at 4 psi above the plenum pressure. If you don't do this, the pressure in the float bowl under boost will be higher than the fuel pressure, and the bowls will not get any fuel.

I always use anti-seize lubricant (nevr-seez, or equivalent) on the spindle pins when I intall them. Highly recommended - I can usually remove my spindle pins in about 30 seconds...

Hopefully it would be 1.) above' date=' as that would be the most meaningful answer. I guess [b']2.)[/b] would be okay if you knew where the reference point was. 3.) would need to be in lb-ft/degree to be meaningful.

Are you sure about that? The right and left control arms are interchangeable, and I don't think that they built any extra toe into the hubs. The rear toe needs to be balanced right to left, or the car will dog-track. To answer the question about which bushings to replace - the ones on the rear suspension. All of them. Sounds like a smart-ass answer, but it is the answer nonetheless. As others have mentioned, I'd just get the master kit and do the whole thing. If the rears are shot, the rest probably are, too.

You're making this too hard - the preload will work itself out. You just need to look at how long your spring will be when it is compressed at its normal static loading. For your example, the spring will be compressed by about 2.9" (650/225). You didn't mention how long the spring was (this is very important), but let's suppose that it is 10". So, at your normal static loading, your spring will be 10" - 2.9" = 7.1" long. Now, all you need to do is place the lower perch such that the middle of the threaded sleeve (or at least some part of it) is 7.1" from the upper perch when the suspension is at the desired ride height (presumably the middle of your shock travel). One thing to note - in this example, if you assume that the strut had 7" of total travel, you might notice that there was no preload on this spring. The "ideal" bump travel of 3.5" is longer than the spring was compressed at static loading. This isn't a huge deal - you can assume that the bump stop eats up some of that travel, and take this into account when you section the strut. Or, you can just give up about 0.4" of total travel. As you start going to stiffer and stiffer springs though, this can become an issue. Another very important thing to look at is how long the spring will be when it is fully compressed (coil bind). You must use a spring that is long enough that the lower perch is farther below the upper perch than the fully compressed length of the spring. In other words, if your spring is still 3" long when it binds, then your lower perch must be at least 3" from the upper perch when the suspension is fully compressed. Sorry it took me a while to notice this thread - it's been a busy weekend.

I believe that this was the point I was trying to make. The P90 has less of a stright line path to the valve than the N42. As far as I can tell they didn't raise the ports - only the valves.

well if you think about it because its got hydraulic valves on the p90a its gotta have a bit more airflow on the valve side What is the logic behind this? Maybe I just need to take a look at a P90a - does it not use valve guides or something? Not trying to be a smartass - I just don't understand the reasoning here. My point was that I don't see anything inherently superior in the P90's port design. It appears to be the opposite to me.

Couldn't have said that better. Just to jump-start the dead horse , what was this about raised runners in the P90 helping the flow? As far as I can tell, only the end at the valve was raised. The port comes out of the head in the same place as on the N42 (i.e., the port has to make a sharper turn - no way around that). How exactly is that going to help the port to flow?

It's also very possible that the plugs could have fouled while the cap was in its death throes... If this happened, the only option is to burn the carbon off of the plugs thoroughly with a propane torch, or just replace the plugs. Carb cleaner and the like won't touch that stuff.

Looks more like $163 to me - am I missing something? Still a good price. The master kit contains more than the sum of the list above it. Namely, transmission crossmember bushings, mustache bar bushings, steering rack bushings and the steering coupler. This is the same kit that I used, and I have been very happy with it. You should note that it does not include the front sway bar bushing. This is because there are so many aftermarket parts out there. If you want the front bar bushing, you'll have to order that seperately, and tell them the OD of your bar. For the same reason, the rear bar bushing might not work, either.

Yes, you still need bumpstops.

My money is on bad suspension bushings. If the car rattles, bangs and/or crashes over bumps, that is more a symptom of bushings, rather than springs and shocks. Especially the part about not handling well, either. If your bushings are shot, there is no reason to try to upgrade anything else - it will still handle like crap. Courtesy Nissan carries a nice polyurethane master bushing set, which should be everything you'll need to do the entire car. Just be warned that this job is not for the faint of heart.

Not if you don't mind riding on the bump stops most of the time...

I thought maybe that was what he was saying, and my comment on that still stands. If you ever see an F1 driver pumping his brakes, he is most assuredly 2 seconds or less from death. The only reason I can think of that he would be doing such a thing would be if one circuit of his brake system had failed, and he was trying to regain pressure in the other. F1 drivers are experienced enough to stay out of situations where the brakes are hopelessly locked. If they do get into such a situation, something has gone terribly wrong. ABS system developers do extensive modeling and development around the characteristics of the tire, and the relationships between the amount of slip a tire has and how much force it can generate in any given direction. They try to control the slippage of the tire and keep it at the point where it is providing maximum braking force. While to some extent, an F1 driver tries to do the same thing, the methods that they use are not very closely related. I can assure you that nocody sat down and said "Gee let's model how an F1 driver applies his brakes and just copy that".