Gollum

260Z = best S30 chassis imo. Nuff said I think. Other than: Post a link to that cars thread once you get it started EDIT: Sorry, there is no best. But I'll still say that the 260Z is a least hassle chassis for those of us trying to go fast in the S30 chassis.

Sweeeeet. I give a big thumbs up to the S12, and even more so it's not the STOCK turbo CA... The DET motors are certainly interesting and it's sad they don't get more attention.

The real question is: If its just a parts car, do you have room and time for it? If so, buy it no matter what.

Goals Goals Goals Goals If we don't know your goals for the build how can we actually help? Is this a street car? Will it see track use? What kind of track use? What kind of budget are we talking about? What kind of level of performance are we talking about? Fast as a new mustang? Fast as a Corvette? Fast as an enzo? What's your experience level? Have you done engine swaps before? Can you weld? Rebuilt a motor before? What access to tools do you have? Have a cherry picker? Welder? Grinder? Decent Bench? Assortment of jacks and stands? The list goes on here... JohnC's response is quickly becoming a drone response. I almost think he might have a script that makes that post for him... And there's a GOOD reason why. For any of us to make the decision of which engine to go with for you is WRONG. That's like having us tell you who you should marry. It's YOUR choice to be made. Sure one girl might have the goods in bed, but the other one might cook, clean, AND make decent money... We can't tell you which is "right". Now, all that said... ANY of the datsun longblock combos, including your stock '79 getup will make an EASY 300whp turbocharged. And that's without any porting, aftermarket cam, special intake, etc. Basic list of parts I'd suggest: Turbo manifold Turbo (T3/T4 hybrid works well for a street setup) 300cc+ injectors, 400+ preferred Any 'ol intercooler that fits Turbo intake will make integration with HVAC easier 36-1 Trigger wheel + Sensor MS 2, or 3 Coils (LSx work great, or EDIS-6 is fine too) MS Wire Harness Laptop with serial port Manual Boost Controller That's most of what you'll want to get started. It's important to not even consider using the stock EFI to turbocharge your current engine. The ignition timing will be WAY wrong and there's no good way to fix it without computer tenability. The stock turbo dizzy is easy to hookup to MS allowing you to use the factory coil (as long as you have the turbo vehicle's ignitor or convert to a GM HEI box). The downside is that the turbo dizzy is getting hard to find for cheap, and you can easily just install a trigger wheel and sensor and have something that's a cleaner install, possibly cheaper, and much more reliable of signal. But, if you have very little tuning experience and it kind of scares you, just buy the RB or SR, whichever you prefer. They're both fine motors. They'll make power with much less brain input.

You can always convert it. I know guys that have converted the same car back and forth a couple of times... Easiest, though not always the cheapest, is to just find someone getting rid of a manual S130. Finding all the parts piece meal can be quite annoying, especially if you're trying to do the conversion in a weekend.

262 isn't terrible for 12psi with no water/meth on pump fuel. What intercooler setup does that car have again? That car has certainly made some decent power in the past, hopefully you can only improve on it.

Where the hell is the datto in this pic? ...aww just kidding. Nice cars all around, even the fobra. I'm personally partial to manual transmissions, but that's because an auto never really does what I want, when I want. To me they're only useful for going really fast in a straight line, and consistently.

So sad. Not only does this "other V8" section get very little traffic, but Z32 stuff doesn't get much attention either! I'm sure 90% of us think this project is awesome, so don't feel like we don't love what you're doing!!! Keep the updates rolling.

I won't deny that's a possibility, and I'd rather not get into the politics of it either. But it SHOULD be noted so that people understand, there were more Ford Model T's sold as alcohol cars than gasoline cars. That's how prevalent alcohol was back then as a motor fuel. Alcohol was made by most farmers at the end of a crop cycle with the excess that couldn't be sold or stored, especially if it was rotting. Thus alcohol was easier and cheaper to find than petroleum fuels. When oil became big oil alcohol disappeared almost overnight with the lower cost. As the oil barrel price is high, alcohol becomes viable again as long as agencies "stay out of the way". If I chose to get the required permits I could make alcohol as a fuel for under $1.50/Gallon. Standard 100% markup and I'd be right near gasoline price per BTU. Thus, I personally feel that for some, this will always be a viable fuel, and we all know there's been an alcohol class in NHRA for a LONG time, and it ISN'T going anywhere anytime soon. As stated before, it's history in the automobile industry and racing industry is actually very deep with a lot of heritage. The whole "green fuel" thing is more of a political move. There's nothing "new" about it. Other than corrosion obstacles (which ARE able to be overcome with relative cost effectiveness) there's not a single "bad" thing about it. I personally hope E85 gets killed off in favor of an alcohol fuel that DOESN'T contain gasoline, but that would require manufactures to design engines with enough compression to not be gasoline compatible.

Or you can run E85 which is now commonly available in much of the country, and really I would understand completely doing a "mild" street L motor with 11:1 with that head if E85 is the intended fuel. If the head can be found for cheap, that's a pretty darn cheap way to make a decent little motor for not much coin. You'll spend more money converting your fuel system than you will on the longblock rebuild/assembly costs. I only bring this up because E85 wasn't nearly as common just 5 years ago, let alone almost 10 years ago when I joined HBZ. In today's world, a budget E85 street motor might make sense, while 10 years ago I'd say you were a bit strange for doing such a thing.

If runner size can be RPM power specific, and if exhaust manifold primary size can be RPM specific, why can't valve size? I can certainly agree if the statement is made that the larger valves won't hurt low end enough to matter to most people. And I agree that valve unshrouding is far more important than actual valve size. But at the end of the day nissan used smaller valves in certain combos for a reason. You see the same thing in the V8 realm to an even greater degree. You can find two SBC motors from the 60's, one from a truck, and one from a muscle car, and they'll have radically different valve sizes. They were designed around two totally different power bands from the ground up. At the end of the day, I say arguing about valve size is never a reason to not "get it done". Don't have much cash? Reuse the valves you got. Going all out? Spend the time to put in larger valves and unshroud as much as you can with them. But never flip flop back and forth if it's delaying your project.

I think a large part of that debate is that it can really depend on the build. If you're going for 300+ NA HP then larger valves never hurt. If you're building a street motor that will see mostly sub 4k rpm 95% of the time then maybe the smaller valves are fine and will actually help down low. It can also depend on the displacement. Is it going a on 2.4 bottom, or a 3.1 stroker? Changes the topic entirely. There is no best, no magic bullet. That makes it hard to definitely say which valve size is better.

Hmm... $8.19... I can't make one out of wood for that price if you consider labor at min. wage.... Then again, last time I needed one I just split a piece of wood down to size in about 5 minutes and tapped it in... Definitely going on my wishlist though.

Nissan's published figures aren't in question, and we're seeing at least a .03" difference between what was measured and what should be there... I'd call that significant.

Oh, I should mention, that if you've really got any of the "A" cams in there, and you're only reading .385 total lift on the valve then you've either got a severely worn cam or you need to work on your rocker geometry quite a bit... it really shouldn't be that low at all.

That car is save-able. But.... that's a butt ton of work. That's right up there with the "rust-free" car that mull got himself into. LOTS of work needed. And like morbias I gotta ask... this is an upgrade??? I'd look for a clean shell somewhere else, and fly to it if need be. Hell, if you think about it, the money you'll spend getting a clean running Z home is FAR less than just a FRACTION of what time you're going to have to put into a shell like that. Example: Say I pay myself $5 an hour, which is probably less than the minimum wage just about anywhere in the USA and is probably even less than what the illegals make around my neck of the woods. It'll only take about 200 hours to have paid myself $1,000. So lets do a basic estimate of hours. Get shell home, in the garage, and parked where it's going to live for the next millennium: 5 Strip interior and put worthwhile pieces in bags, bins, etc: 10 Gut doors: 10 Remove bumpers, hood, airdam, hatch, etc: 10 Pull Engine: 10 Put car on jacks and remove easy suspension parts: 10 Tear down suspension into pieces: 10+ (spindle pin...) Remove Dash: 5 Label Chassis wiring: 5 Gut chassis wiring: 5 Remove glass without breaking: 20 Remove fuel tank, fuel lines, brake lines, etc: 10 Remove other odds and ends, ebrake cable, master cylinder, etc: 15 Total: 125 hours You might just about have a clean chassis ready to be stripped now. Each of those 10 hour chunks are good weekend projects, so realistically you're looking at half a year to tear down a chassis if you're doing it casually on the weekends. The guys that do it faster are spending every evening they can on it. You're going to then have to have the chassis blasted (unless you want to go the slow way, by HAND) to make sure you've found the extent of all the rust. Then you still need to do all the rust repair! Hours of cutting, grinding, measuring cutting new pieces, trimming new pieces, welding new pieces, grinding welds, filling in weld seam, sanding, filling, sanding, painting. Once all that's done you get to reinstall! And remember, this part will go MUCH slower than the removal. You're going to be much more careful and pay attention to all the details. I'd say 200 hours is a "middle of the road" estimate for an average "no major mods" re-assembly of a car from the chassis-up. But.... you could just find a car that is in good enough shape to not even worry about tearing down. Or find one that someone has already done all that. There's also always a clean shell somewhere that has either just been sandblasted, ready to be sandblasted, or has even had it's rust repaired after being sandblasted. And they sell for a SONG!!! Last one I saw was around $1.5k and it was a clean chassis that had just been blasted and suspension put on just to roll it around. If you look at the work involved, that's a DEAL and I bet the owner just wants the project gone, which means for that price he'd probably throw in parts, or lower the price if you pushed him. End of the day, I just don't see the point in buying a car you plan to go through all that unless you are retired and can spend the 60 hours a week on it, and have it done in a few months. Otherwise, be wise with your time (which IS money, worth every penny to your family. Learn to spend it with them, or spend it on things for them.) and just save time in the long run by spending more money now. Money isn't terribly hard to come by (says the man who's signature says saving up for MS for the last 2 years....), it's how we choose to spend it that makes it more or less available. If you buy this car, you'll be throwing pennies at it constantly from start to finish. Or you can spend the money now and not run into so many "gotcha's" as you go along.

Real men don't run windows. Saves quite a bit of weight. Common' man, it doesn't get THAT cold up there.

Valve lift is different than cam lift, and you're going to get different readings than what is advertised as cam lift on websites, catalogs, etc. In the pushrod world this is well understood, and people all understand that catalogs are just showing you "cam" specs on cams, because that's what they are... cams. But then you've got your rockers which can be run at various RATIOS, giving more or less aggressive valve lift. Even the datsun design has a bit of ratio play in the geometry and even how the valve train is setup can effect the overall lift of a cam.

Some might say that the 4.11 gears might actually help make 1st gear easier to take off in. The most important things in any car to keep the car easy to take off is #1, how heavy the flywheel is, and #2 how forgiving the clutch material is. Just practice. It was kinda funny, one person I taught to drive stick was having a hell of a time getting it down, but once I explained that "it's OKAY to let the clutch slip a bit while the car gets moving"... he was fine. He was used to bikes where you basically go from off to ON with virtually no slip. In a car, slip isn't just okay, it's a necessity (to an extent). In a car like a V8 mustang, you can basically just ease the clutch out in 1st gear with no throttle and the car will take off just fine. But that's an engine with lots of torque and a heavy flywheel. I've driven porsches that were just razor sharp to get used to. Insanely light flywheel, HEAVY clutch engagement, and not nearly enough torque to be kind. The result is a car that you have to give substantial throttle, but time it just right with initial bite. Throttle too soon before clutch grabs and you will either eat through the clutch, or eat through the tires. Too late and you stall. The key to driving any stick, is learning that place where the clutch just starts to bite. In my ZX it's so high (right now, at least 80k+ on this clutch across 15+ years) that sitting in traffic I never go to the floor to disengage. I just put the weight of my leg down and it's enough to hold it just past where it needs to be, then when I want to get going again I just lift right to where I know it's going to grab and start giving it throttle as I ease it past engagement. It's all about learning this dynamic of rolling the throttle on, while rolling the clutch out. You'll get used to it. Practice makes perfect.

I kinda wish you hadn't just said that. The 3.8 is NOT a rev happy engine. It's a low RPM brute. It's a 90 degree V6 which means it's inherently imbalanced. Combine that with the fact they just plain never built them to rev and you've got an engine set against you when shooting for high RPM. The stroke also isn't the shortest in the world, but that's not necessarily a problem that can't be overcome with good pistons. There's also a common "long rod" swap to use longer rods with pistons that have a shorter pin height. Helps reduce stress on the rods and will help the engine in the upper RPMS. But it'll still make 500hp before 5,500 with force induction, and lemme tell you, that's FUN! I still hold that the 3.8 would be lighter than the VG30, and the VG30 isn't far off in weight from the VQ at all. It'd definitely be more compact than either. But if you want something that revs to the moon, is small and compact, and affordable.... ...it's called the L series. You can even build a 170ish rwhp motor for under $1,000 if you're really careful and take your time. And no swap costs... They aren't REALLY that heavy since it has a teeny head. Not extremely unique though. Now that you threw the rev argument in there it'll be a tough nut to crack. Lemme think about it and come back to this thread.

Which is why I continue to stand up for the VG as a decent engine choice. I'm just saying, it's not like he chose to go with a terrible motor. The SBF has it's own merits to stand on. I bet with aluminum heads his total package weight will be about the same as a turbo VG30ET, or quite a bit less than a VG30DETT...

No platform is bulletproof, and if you decide to sell the 383 then you'll be spending this next season, if you make it out at all, sorting out bugs and shaking down the car all over again. I personally feel the LSX will give you less problems in the long run, but you've already come so far with this 383 it just seems so sad to see it go after all this work. I mean dang it mike, it's IN THE DAMN CAR, and READY TO GO! I personally wouldn't waste all that work just to be rid of the headache it's caused. Who's to say it doesn't run like a champ all season and do nothing but right by you? You'll never know if you sell it right now. Made sense right after the last ordeal, but I'm not sure it makes sense this very second. But of course, it's all up to you, and I'm just some guy on the internet. It's not like I'll be upset if you don't give a damn about my opinion.

Oh come on now, you don't have to be THAT mean. Dollar for dollar the 5.0 isn't a terrible motor. Some patriot heads, cam, and EFI tuning can get you well over 350whp with less than $2k in mods. Not terrible bang for the buck if you ask me.

There ya go people, it's not a hard equation. HP = Torque X RPM (divide for scale conversion) You want power? Increase torque. How much you add where is going to tell you exactly how much power you're going to make. Like JohnC says, there ARE people out there making absurd power on SU's, but they're only running SU's because of class limitations. You can bet your monkey's uncle that if they could swap to something else then they would. I personally feel the most reliable way to get power is to call someone who knows what they're actually doing. Having a head built by someone with extensive datsun experience will usually turn up good results. The head is where the power is at, and it doesn't need to break the bank. $2k goes a LONG way with most head builders in getting a hot street head built, and honestly, isn't more than american V8 guys spend on their heads. Also: I see you've done some "shopping" which can be absolutely useless sometimes. You spec things like the kameari oil pump, msa header, ztherapy SU's, all of which are just throwing money away in my opinion. Stock oil pumps are great, turbo oil pumps are even better, and hell I've got one sitting on my shelf that makes a tempting door stop. Header options are almost limitless and the MSA one isn't all that special and it's generally agreed upon those actually MAKING the power, that too many people look for power in the header that just isn't there. And to be honest, I've always felt that the ztherapy su's are a bit of a show piece for the people wanting an "all original" 240Z show car. They have little value in my world of budget hot rodding. This is not meant to be an attack on ztherap, on the contrary, I think they charge a fair price for their service, but on the other hand there's a lot of other options out there for the performance minded. And one last note. If you want to run 10+:1 compression you're going to want something better than just the 280ZX dizzy. Do yourself a favor and get something that's programmable, and preferably multiple coils. One of the biggest upgrades you can make to an older engine is to upgrade the ignition to something with a controllable curve, and has a lot more energy. And high RPM is where the power is at, and you'll want a spark system up to the task. In many cases you'll end up needing to pull timing in trouble spots to prevent detonation, which simply can't be done without a computer controlling spark. And of course, all this information would have been at your fingertips... had you searched...

Because there are other ways to prevent surge, some of which have been experimented with in motorsports since the 80's. Surge is caused by TWO axis of the compressor map, one of which is easy to control. I agree that the overall frame size needs to be well matched to your application, and the difference between .63 AR and .82 aren't enough to lose sleep over and you're better off just getting something in your car and going. And for the record I'd never run a grossly offset turbo, trying to spin a T6+ sized compressor with a T3 turbine. That'd be dumb. IF you can use that much air, you can push enough air to warrant the larger turbine that will have adequate inertia leverage on the compressor. I never meant to imply that the proper wastegate was a magic bullet. As you state, the manifold design is EXTREMELY important, which anyone who's looked at turbo F1 designs should see. They put a LOT of work into their manifolds to ensure that gases would flow almost as well out of the wastegate as they did out of the turbine. I never said they don't matter. Actually the opposite. I find that too many people use a larger turbine AR than necessary to avoid other complications. To me it's a band-aid and the largest reason turbos historically have such a bad reputation regarding lag. It's only with the more recent ball bearing and wheel improvements that we've seen people able to get away with cheaper/simpler setups, thus the stigma of "massive turbo lag" is slowly becoming a subjective thought to most people. Agreed. Also the reason when helping on a friends STI build we stuck with the stock turbo as long as possible, and might have broken a record making the power we did with the amount of stock parts. GET ER DONE!!! has been my philosophy as of late. But if we can make nearly 40% more power than others expect you can make on a turbo, I'd say that QUITE OFTEN people buy more turbo than they need, and tend to assume they need more turbine flow than they actually do. Agree. I don't think splitting hairs between the two will become an issue until you're asking for 400+whp from either. And even then, if you like the response of the .63 but find yourself hitting surge once over a certain RPM then you can look into solutions for the surge, or decide if the easy route of the .82 is the better option for you at that point.