Gollum

Another Deck/Bock term you'll hear now and then is "siamese block" vs "non-saimese" blocks. A siamese block is just one that has no coolant passages between the cylinder sleeves. Just as most hardcore drag racers won't want an open deck design, they'll also want a siamese design if they can, as it gives them more meat between cylinders. I know it's not really a deck type, but it's just a note to think about when you'll looking at a deck and how it's designed.

I still think my idea I posted might be the most economical flat plane crank idea possible, but nobody seems to want to comment about it. At the recent BBQ meet people were about ready to throw ME onto the grill.... Maybe that's why everyone on the forum is so quite about me idea?

Thanks for the insight paul. And for those curious, the other cars I'm comparing it to for a future DD are: 510 Wagon (accidental project?) 89-91 Civic Hatch (blaa) 04' WRX Wagon ($$$!!!) And cars of the like. I need space, usable space with easy loading. I really don't want to have to get a loan for it, so sub 4k at most. The better mileage the better right? I drive well over 10k a year, so gas prices hurt. That's why the civic is on that list.

So here's a question for everyone who knows their bimmers. What does everyone think of the E36 hatchback model that has the E30-esk suspension? I know they didn't sell that well here, but where quite popular in europe. I figure if they can be had for the same or less than other E36 models then it'd be worth checking out for me since it seems the 3 series wagon never made it to the states, which is a crying shame. I just figure the trailing arm rear is a worthy trade off for the cargo space combined with the large hatch opening. If it doesn't offer more rear cargo space than my S130 then it's still a pointless daily driver change to me.

No worries, we all have our moments. 2 years from now you'll go back and see your post here and laugh about it.

I think a bigger problem with american engines creating good aftermarket support is that the american manufactors don't care about continuity much of the time. It's take a LONG LONG time for the Ford modular engines to really start having some good and affordable part options, largely because you can't just make a part and have it function for 100% of the engines, or even 50% for that matter. One engine plant makes the iron blocks, one the aluminums, but wait there's exceptions to that. And they'll change things mid-year so now that aftermarket part is only good for aluminum block models, from a certain factory, for these select few years, no later than X month. The 5.0 aftermarket grew wonderfully fast and I think much of that was because the motor could use so many parts from the earlier small blocks, but even the EFI system upgrades moved in relatively fast. You just can't expect a company to make parts for a car when their parts will only apply to a few production years. A lot of it is also dependent upon how popular the cars that the engines were put into are, and what kind of owners these cars have. You can't expect the new hyundai V8 to have a rapid aftermarket growth unless they put the gem of an engine into a sports car with owners that actually WANT to modify their cars. You need the people to show interest before investors are willing to make the parts.

Ribbed Epoxy Resin or Polyester Resin?

I've still been stuck on researching these VFR engines, trying to figure out on paper how to really do this. I was thinking that the best way to go about the transmission issues would be to disable the stock one, and fabricate a custom setup to adapt it to something common, light, affordable, etc. But the ratio options for this engine's power band just doesn't work. Sure, you might only loose 2k rpm when you rev a L28 to 8k, but the farther up in RPM you go the more RPM you loose, since it's a %, not a consistent number. So when you're reving to 11k, even a "close ratio" commonly available transmission just doesn't cut it. Point being that any commonly available tranny that's going to cost LESS than the engines themselves is going to really hurt the overall feel of performance of the setup. So I've been working through figuring out how to use the stock tranny. It's a 6 speed with these ratios: 2.846 2.062 1.578 1.291 1.111 0.965 I figure the only way to get the transmission to hold the weight of a Z, even at only 1,800 pounds gutted and lightened, would be to use BOTH transmissions... Luckily the primary and secondary shafts both have snouts at both ends that poke out of the block. So really what's needed is to machine the front end of the primary shaft to accept the output of the other engine's primary shaft. Something I don't think I could even engineer on paper until I have the engines on hand would be the shift linkage setup. I can't stop thinking how bad arse a real slap stick sequential 6 speed would be in a Z. Something is indeed wrong with me.

Have you READ any of this thread? That manifold won't just "bolt up" to ANY engine. You'd HAVE to have the same exact custom setup he has, which any machine shop with half a brain would charge you upwards of 10k for.

They work if you copy/paste the link without including the URL tag at the end.

Or a motivated dog...

I meant guitar cab. I currently squeeze an oversized 4x12 into my 280ZX, and you can hear the strut tower cover interior pieces yelp at me as I shove it in there and close the hatch. It's basically a 30" x 30" x 15" box that angles in the middle to bring the top down from 15" to 10" or so. Oh, and it weights about 50+ pounds. It's a beast to get into a 280ZX. It'd fit in the 280Z if I massaged the towers in back a bit...

I'm with mag58 on that one actually. The SR deserves respect for what it is, but many fail to realize that so many other engines are just as worthwhile. We here in the US get raped by the auto companies in many ways. I know a lot of people around the world envy us here in america, but there's so many great cars and engines that have yet to make it to our shores. I'm just glad lotus is finally strong in the USA. Might actually be able to own one someday now.

Youtube 110V or 220V?

LS2 VG30ET or grand national engine?

Lots of time and no money. No point in money if you can't enjoy it. I've made a hobby of finding affordable ways to do the things I love. Garage full of tools but no space to work, or a huge garage with no tools?

I know that the more you shift the weight back the more work you need to do to get it to handle right again, assuming it was doing well from the get go, but there's a plethora of amazing sports cars and even exotics with much more rear weight bias than you'll probably ever get in a Z with an engine in front. I think in the end it all comes down to suspension/chassis tuning regardless of what engine you choose. But I can see what you mean though. With the KA and it's stock tranny that's a very light engine/tranny combo that's now pulled a ton of weight off the nose. The stock drivetrain isn't insanely heavy like some say, but it's also long and mounted far forward from the factory. Just moving the stock engine back to the firewall makes a huge difference. Taking 2 cylinders off and having it far back just accentuates the difference.

BRAAP, he gives his perfectly good engines up for Hybrid Swaps. Dr. Hunt or Grumpyvette?

Holy Turbo Batman! I knew it'd be BIG, but damn.... Since you're doing an extension tube, you'll have a nice spot to weld an external wastegate too! Then you won't have to worry about cutting the stock manifold, and you can get it welded up without even removing the manifold, which saves time and headache. +1 on keeping the boost controller lines shorts. That being said my buddy Adam in his STI has his inside the cab. He's also running a dual controller setup though so I'm not sure how it relative it really is (stock is electronic, he'd have to tell you the details himself as to why he added the manual, I think it solved his creep issues or something).

That's also a carb'ed 289. Those intakes are less than half the size of a full 5.0 EFI intake setup. The later 5.0 blocks are "slightly" lighter, but definitive weight differences are hard to come by. The two engines should be within spitting distance. Terry's engine is very light for what it is, remember that too. Sure he weighed it with everything on it, but it's also not a steel flywheel, no power steering, no ac, etc. LS weight came up in another thread in the last few days and Paul (braap) agreed with my ballpark range of a LS being around 410-430 or there abouts. Both are close enough to not argue about, but something about the LS just makes me give it the benefit of the doubt (and I'm a die hard Ford guy at heart).

Just tons of experience around the 5.0. Obviously they came with iron heads, and they generally weigh in around 500# in stock trim depending on what's bolted to it. With aluminum heads most guys are HOPING to get them down bellow 450# at best in running trim, and I believe there's proof enough that the all aluminum LS is significantly lighter than that. The LS engines have about the same bore, and are all around only larger when it comes to deck height, which is about 1" taller. The LS comes with much lighter intake options which I think helps a bit. If we were comparing an iron block V8 from GM right now I think the 5.0 would definitely start to fair better, but I fear the strength, or lack there of, of the 5.0 block would start to show greatly in that comparison.

Wicked sick! The added weight is well worth it I bet. And as much as I'm more of a Ford than a chevy guy, this makes more sense I'm afraid. The LS is considerably lighter than the 5.0, obviously comes with much better heads out of the box, and won't split the block when you start pushing the numbers to the extreme. Oh, as good as the pics are.... This Thread Is Worthless Without Video... I need to FEEL those open headers!

This thread is stupid, horrible in fact. I was perfectly fine the last several months thinking that the most well rounded car for my needs as a DD would be an 04' WRX wagon, but now you guys have me researching E36 wagons. You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. So... does anyone know how well an oversized 4x12 speaker cab fits into a non-wagon E36?

I figured it out I think! Ok, so in my last post what I suggested would have given you a crank design that was 180 degrees, but oriented like a non twisted dual plane V8 crankshaft, which is why the firing patter doesn't make sense in Ferrari land. BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE! Ok ok ok ok. Follow me here. The Ferrari pattern is 18364527 numbered like this ^Front 51 62 73 84 The Honda numbering is more like an american V8. Odd on one side, even on the other. It gets confusing I know. I've been spending hours trying to figure this out and now wonder why I didn't just build a model or something to make it simpler to grasp. If you split the block into two halves so we're talking firing pattern spacing like two V4 engines, the two halves have the same degree spacing as the honda V4 engine, so I figured there must be a way to do this with what the engine is. The front half of the engine goes: 1 - 270 - 6 - 180 - 5 - 90 - 2 - 180 (back to 1) The rear half of the engine goes 8 - 90 - 3 - 180 - 4 - 270 - 7 - 180 (back to 1) The Honda V4 goes 1 - 180 - 3 - 270 - 2 - 180 - 4 - 90 (back to 1) If you think about it the 3-4-7-8 is already identical to the honda V4, but the front half has a different pattern. Instead of mimicking the 1324 of the Honda like the rear half the front half goes 1423. SO!!! If you spin the even bank cylinder's camshaft 180 degrees you get this magical timing... 1423... Now just take this revised pattern and stick it in front of the stock Honda V4, so you've got the modified timing in front and the stock in back and orient the rear engine to fire cylinder number 4 90 degrees after the front fires it's #1 (or 180 degrees backwards in relation to the front engine) and you end up with this firing pattern... 1-8-3-6-4-5-2-7 (that is if we're using the weird Ferrari cylinder numbering which puts 1-4 on one side with 5-8 on the other. This pattern is indeed a balanced L to R design) I know this still might be pointless information to most of you, but I'm honestly thinking I'm going to do this eventually if nobody else does. I think it'd be a sweet project that will take more time than anything else. Hopefully my posts might spark some interest though. Comments, feedback?

You guys are killing me with the price of chevy tranny comments. Just because the motor is so affordable for what it is doesn't make the transmission "expensive". Getting a T56 onto ANY ford engine will cost just about double what it does for the LS chevy engines, used vs used, or new vs new. I routinely see T56 transmissions out of camaros on craigslist for well under 1k, usually closer to the $500 mark than the 1k mark. You can actually FIND those from time to time in wreaking yards even. A good manual 5 speed is also easier and cheaper to find too (let it be known that the T5 for the 5.0 is easy to find, but for anything in a reasonable price it'll probably grenade with sticky tires). I'm not saying it's "cheap", I'm just saying let's make sure it's understood it's not crazy expensive. It CAN be done on a budget if you look around instead of in a catalog.