Gollum

After reading WAY too much useless information, it seems like the guy running that company has tried to engineer a kit for several cars with little success. I think the problem is that the kit costs ends up being too high to be competitive for what the performance is on paper. He also doesn't seem to want to sell them bare, as he doesn't want to be "at fault" for peopling blowing up their engines with bad tunes. I really wish he'd just sell them bare and work on building them in quantity, then let others design kits for their market of choice and sell them.

Well tony, you HAVE seen that there's a company continuing the Latham design haven't you? Quick google came up with: http://www.axialflow.com/products.htm definitely looks interesting, but it also looks kinda "mom and pop", which isn't always bad. But I have no idea of the capabilities versus price.

Now this is a better price! http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/TOYOTA-PREVIA-91-97-2TZFZE-OEM-SUPERCHARGER-_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQhashZitem2eafa98842QQitemZ200515618882QQptZMotorsQ5fCarQ5fTruckQ5fPartsQ5fAccessories#ht_1678wt_1165

That was only a LITTLE random Tony. Still loved it though. Thank you for the info!!! Will definitely be looking into it. The Merc stuff I've seen is outrageously expensive for old used parts. I guess that'd be fine as long as you could convert it to a better pulley. You don't want to run 60%+ more power than NA on a standard V-Belt. I wouldn't even shoot for 30% actually.

I'm not sure you read the sarcasm in my post...

Thanks for the input guys. I'm not sure why I never thought about a clutch system, since a S/C IS a pure linear speed based device. I'm not sure I like how the MR2 is vacuum based though, as even stated in that thread it'll turn on at higher freeway speeds, when in reality the engine load isn't very high. I don't see why you couldn't make a table with one axis being vacuum and one axis being throttle. So that way it should be fairly "load" based, with some programmable definitions to allow a "highway" range that leans out nicely. I'm not tied to the centrifugal idea, it just seemed easier for a wastegate idea, since it's literally half of a turbo. I've always been more of a fan of a twin screw supercharger. I do wonder how much a huge twin screw supercharger will allow to flow when it's not spinning very fast though. Any thoughts on this anyone? Do you think it could/would be a flow restriction worth noting for economy sakes?

So I had the idea a few weeks ago, of trying to get the on/off economy nature of a turbocharger with the temperature and package size benefits of a centrifugal supercharger. If your EFI system is MAP based, I don't see why you couldn't use an electronically controlled wastegate of sorts to control the manifold pressure relative to throttle/load of the engine. Everything I've found on the topic via google searching comes up with people who want to OVER spin the S/C and use a wastegate to bleed of excess air on the top. That's not what I'm interested in. I'm talking about designing a closed system that's matched for "heavy load" conditions, then add an air bypass system for light throttle/low load scenarios to allow for economical tuning possibilities. I've always said that the biggest benefit a turbo has that I can really grab hold of, is that it turns off and that "boost lag" is a good thing allowing very predictable low RPM use. Tell your girlfriend to keep it under 3,000 and she can drive your 500hp car to the grocery store (if you're so brave), while a S/C engine doesn't always offer the same leniency. We've also all seen how factory turbocharged cars usually get almost identical highway mileage as their naturally aspirated cousins, while a supercharged variation of an engine just plummets in MPG. So tell me the pitfalls. Help me see the obstacles I might not have noticed. I think I big one is that the wastegate vent would be pulling air into the engine at vacuum, while any air filter or such would be a serious flow restriction when bleeding off boost at cruise. If not properly designed the system might just sit at 0 vacuum/boost until the wastegate shut off turning the boost on full.

This is one seriously overlooked issue. ...

Car - 75 w/L28ET Stock EFI Stock Injectors EFI/Engine Mods: No cold start fuel or vacuum control. EFI has been stripped to it's basics. Don't have O2 hooked up. Just AFM, Head Temp Sensor, Dizzy,TPS, and Knock sensor. Background. Car had run fine for years, minus massive exhaust leak that turned out to be the head gasket. I daily drove this car for almost a year. I swapped the head recently, and it ran like crap. Found out that the Cylinder Head Temp Sensor was bad by switching it out from another car and it ran fine, but I needed that sensor for that car. So I just went out and bought a new head temp sensor, and it's not running right.... I've redone the TPS wiring, but I'm 90% positive I got that right. So right now I've got no throttle control, and it's so bad that driving is extremely difficult (have to feather the throttle to get going and once you do you're either accelerating or coasting). Is there multiple variants of this sensor with different curves/values? The one I got the guy said that it said "canadian" but neither of us knew if there was a canadian model of the Z car back in 82', so he figured that where it was made.... Could it be the wrong sensor? But I really doubt it's the sensor, because I switched it back out with the once I used before and it ran exactly the same... I know it's running lean on transient too, because if I just crack open the throttle and then open the AFM to richen the mixture then the engine will rev all the way up to 6k+ at just a crack of the throttle. So it's massively lean at low/mid throttle positions. Also, I loosened the AFM to richen the mixutre, and it didn't see to make a difference.

How many have you weighed? How many have you stripped? My 81' tips in at 2640 pounds. And stripped the bare chassis is lighter than the S30 bare chassis... Now, if we're talking about a fully loaded 83' they CAN reach over 3000 with a full tank of gas and misc stuff lying in the car. BUT, most aren't that heavy. And my point is that luxury feature for feature it's lighter than the S30, not commonly talked about. Gut it to the accomodies of a 70' 240Z and you'll be amazed at how much weight it sheds.

Rebello, or BRAAP, hands down. BRAAP has some of the most competetive prices for work performed that I've seen. If you really need help taking the head off and putting it on I can coach you through it, I'm in Benicia and even looking at moving to Vacaville soon.

199rwhp 192 f/lbs.

Full-time AWD Now let's see if I can prevent myself from killing this thread again... 225/50-15 or 225/40-17?

I was about to say "now who in hell would do a swap like that?" but after reading it I'm not surprised.

Well, considering that I didn't know you didn't have a source yet for a L28ET, I'd say go with the VG30E then. They're incredibly easy to fit, but it might still require custom exhaust headers (can be made cheap if you DIY it or get a friend with a welder to make one for some beer). These came with good ECU systems, and you could eventually turbocharge it down the road if you like. In fact the NA compression is better for boost imo, much like the L28EvsET motors. So yea, since you have access to it, AND you seem fairly competent, then go with the VG30E. It' s there and available. They're also incredibly light and small, and have fairly bulletproof bottom ends from the factory. (for the year and all, if you're shooting for 500+ you might still want to rebuilt the bottom)

I think I'd RATHER have a 20k tube amp... I could get some serious MILEAGE out of a trainwreak amp!!! Shoot, even a good top hat emplexador would suite me fine. So yea, I'm not sure I could care much less about a company wanting to reproduce old hat technology. Now, if they gave it a complete redesign to allow for larger, more efficient ports, and priced it somewhere reasonably that MIGHT get my juices flowing a little.

You should put in a SBC because that's the BEST! (see my smirk admins?) Actually, if you don't know the answer to this, we can't really answer it for you. You haven't told us your goals, your skill level, tool availability, or which you're more familiar with. You might as well asked "which is a better color, blue or green?" There's not really an answer to that. Now, if you asked "which is a better color for a tree, green or blue?" We could at least give you SOME direction. Personally, I'd say go with the 280ZX turbo engine, for one BIG reason over all others, it's EASY as PIE compared to almost any other swap out there. So if you're skill level is lacking, never done many swaps, don't have access to tons of tools, nor have much money, go the traveled and documented route of the L28ET. But that's my opinion, that's all. I DO love the VG30E motor as well.

So ummm... where can one find one such tank engine?

As controversial as the styling is, 30k isn't a bad deal for that car just considering the parts and work put into it. If you like it, then even better!

First turbo kit is out! Here's the brief overview for those who don't want to click the linky. 6-7 PSI Stock longblock Conservative "safe" street tune Guaranteed 530RWHP Borg Warner 72mm S400 turbo http://www.fastlaneturbo.com/2011mustang-turbo-1.aspx So by my calculations that's over 600 crank HP pretty easily enough. They seem to have a lot of faith in those rods that the guys at ford that designed the engine called the "weak link in the system". If that "weak link" can actually support 600 crank HP for a reliable enough period I can't even imagine what a built SVT bottom end might be able to handle once we have a 5.0 GT500. Also an interesting note is how large that turbo is, but I guess when you have heads that flow that well it takes a lot of air just to get to 6-7 psi. I bet even at those boost levels that's a sick street car.

Is this Dizzy the same one you used before??? Do you know what engine it's from? Get your timing 100% straight first. 1. Set Crank to TDC 2. Pull valve cover. Are the front cylinder's cam lobes sticking up like bunny ears? If they're down then rotate crank 360 degrees 3. Once timing mark is at TDC and cam lobes are sticking up pull the dizzy cap. Is it pointing towards your #1 spark plug wire? If all this checks out then your timing setup is good mechanically. It's amazing how it can be off without you realizing though. Check this video so you can actually see what I mean about the cam lobe positions I think he starts talking about the timing around the 2 minute mark. Good guy, knows what he's talking about. He's also running Halteck E6k iirc. So again, if all this checks out, your problem is probably related to the haltech. But we'll need a lot more info to troubleshoot that side. It's probably not the spark plugs. I bet it's a timing issue. It's really easy to get the cam timing off. Did you at least crank it slowly by hand to make sure there wasn't any clearance problems? (not a condoned method by me, but it's at least something for those that are tight on time)

Ummm, I never said the tune wasn't A problem, I'm just stating that the flat tops WON'T be a problem. ...that's all. If he had issues with the tune before, he'll still have issues. Turn the boost down to 10, should be fine unless it's a massacre. If his tune was "perfect" (which we know it wasn't) then it should be reasonably close, hence the point of my post. I might dial the low end of the timing map back a little for part throttle use, but under boost at high rpm should be pretty good.... again, if already perfect.

Don't sweat so much about the tune. I think I stated this before, but the added quench you get from flat top pistons will counter act the increase in compression. Tunes will be nearly identical, you'll just want to pull some timing, which is probably what killed your last engine.

Reaching almost 80 torque per liter and 84HP per liter at only 6500 hell yea I'd imagine it's their best flowing head! Dang thing looks like it's a stone's throw away from the 2008 GT500 HP!!! And in usual ford fashion it seems they're underrated a taste. Most dyno's are comming in at least 367 (lowest I've seen) to 390 (highest I've seen). Even if we figure the low number that's an impossible 10% drivetrain loss to make the figures match... These things are putting out at least 420hp in stock form.

Well there ya go, who needs fancy forged H-Beam rods? 9's on a stock NA longblock... Wow. I want to see what they'll do with force induction on pump gas!!!