Gollum

Sweeeeeet. Nice to SEE some progress. Are you going to be able to weigh the engine before final mounting? Even engine + trans numbers would be nice, if we knew exactly what was on and in the motor. (flywheel, clutch, alternator, water pump, power steering, AC, oil, water, etc. Too many engine weights out there don't give those types of specs. If this swap ends up moving the weight farther back and lightens the car overall it could make for some nice driving characteristics. Though JohnC preaches that weight balance doesn't matter as much as we like to think, and I agree with him; but that doesn't mean you won't notice an improvement. And 240 stock HP isn't bad. 240HP is HARD to achieve in the L series unless you're going to have head work done and run a decently loppy cam. Should scoot pretty good.

I personally will always take displacement as long as it meets the size and weight criteria. If the engine needs to be 500hp and under 400 pounds... boost is cheaper and more effective per $. But here's the big question: Turbo or Twin Screw?

Pen It's easier to make blacked out sections with... Van Halen or Led Zeppelin

zune - kill the fashion symbol of apple (me? biased? Never....) geo metro 4 door wagon or ford pinto

Sorry!!! Umm think fast think fast... Top Gear or 5th Gear?

What 302 block do you have? Is it the earlier 302, or the later 302? They removed a bit of weight from the blocks at one point, in the late 70's or early 80's I think, and the ones made after the change are the ones known to crack. The boss 302 has proven to be able to widthstand much more than the run of the mill "5.0 HO" blocks tend to take. I'd say go with the turbo 302. But that's just me. I can't bad mouth the LS6, as it's a great engine. It's just prefference.

I've thought about it. But I really want to keep this engine as budget as possible. I'll be going to school comming this fall, and still working a full time job. I'll have a hard enough time working up the money just to pay for megasquirt and such. That's kinda why I think I'm just going to have to get a flat top piston bottom and be happy with my P90 on top of it. That only gives me about a 8.7:1, but it'll have to do. I don't think I'll need much ethanol to reduce ping until I get up to about 10PSI on the stock turbo. By that point I should be pushing nearly 225hp to the wheels (if not a little more maybe), which is plenty for me.

32-24-32 w/nice face

As TimZ noted, E85 is 85% ethanol, technically. They add gasoline to pure ethanol to make it a poison (so it's not consumable alcohol) and THEN add 15% gasoline. From what I've read it comes out to about 17-18% gasoline. But I'm thinking That might be exacly what I'll do. Add some extra injectors and use ethanol under boost. I still might consider the maxima head on flat top pistons, as I'm sure I can avoid knock on gasoline under light loads, and then slowly ramp up the ethanol injection before boost kicks in. But why ethanol over methanol? Price. The two fuels are very similar, but ethanol is a little kinder to fuel systems, but it's well under $4 a gallon. Cheaper than any race fuel, and octane rating is around 100. We should be HAPPY if ethanol takes over from a performance stand point. I was watching a video with jay leno interviewing a performance engine builder, and they've had naturally aspirated ethanol engines running up to 18:1 compression. Imagine even 16:1 in a production car! I think that's the likely outcome if ethanol takes over eventually. Yea, I know 35mpg is optimistic. But I think I'll be able to get close. Whats the point of a goal if it's easy? It needs to border that line of sane and insane. I don't think 35mpg is that far out there, but farther than most get. I currently drive about 65mph on the freeway and I've been very good about not getting on the throttle in almost all situations. I can easily get on the freeway and up to 65mph without going near boost. I plan to remove any uncessary weight, and I'll be making an aluminum dash. My weight goal is around 2400 even. So she needs to loose about 80 pounds. But I'll also be adding metal for aerodynamics. I'll be blocking off a lot of the front end, and be adding things like headlight covers and vortex generators. I might need to get a fiberglass hood to reach my weight goals. A lexan hatch would be a bit extreme, but I could live with it on the street if it came to it. Something I'd like for an experienced person to educate me on, is how the slower burning characteristics are going to affect things like timing, cam timing, cam phase, etc. Also, ethanol burns slower, but we're talking about compressing it more. With ethanol at 16:1 compression burn faster than gasoline at 10:1?

Funny you mention nitrous... A lot of the cracked blocks I've seen on the net have been nitrous motors, or rev'ed too high. I've seen guys pushing well over 500hp on stock internals though. The key is to make the power via quality heads, and keep the RPMs low.

Don't speak such heracy. Many of us are praying to the hollywood gods that heath get an oscar. Speaking of wich, has a dead guy ever recieved an oscar? Oh, and for those that didn't hear, batman made 155mil opening weekend. It beat the record held by spiderman 3 by 4 million, 2 of which were IMAX sales records. Now let's see if it can keep up the steam long enough to even come close to titanic's record. I'm doing my part. Going to see it wednesday on Imax, and I organized a good size group to go.

Hey... What can I say? I think you're onto something. For those that don't know, I was talking to woldson recently about running ethanol on a L28ET. His interest in it sparked an already growing interest of mine for ethanol. I have to admit though, I'm still kinda doubting if I'll go ethanol on my engine because I simply might not be able to get the compression I want on a budget. 9:1 simply won't be high enough to really take advantage of the fuel I think.

The only thing I can think of that would make it completely impossible is lack of skill among you and your friends, or lack of money in order to buy the needed tools or parts. Main contact points to look out for: 1) Steering linkage. Solution = Custom/Modified headers 2) Oil pan->cross member. Solution = Modified oil pan/Dry sump or Custom X-member. 3) Frame Rails, Might have contact issues with some acessories or manifolds. Solution = Modified brackets, and custom exhaust manifolds. Those should be the main hurdles you could encounter. If you know someone with the skill, idealy you can tube frame the front of the car. That will give you maximum clearence to get the engine as low and far back as possible. That's a bit over the top for most people's wallet though.

I didn't even know what toluene was and had to look it up. Thanks for that rabbit trail. What type of ratios were you using in this methane/toluene mix?

Thanks for the input grumpyvette. I knew about the corrosion aspects of alcohol, and was planning on staying around a E85 mix for that reason. And of course switching out what ever parts of the fuel system need to be (rubber obviously). The moisture absorbtion shuoldn't be too big of a deal. I don't really ever have a tank that lasts more than a week. Fine points to bring up that I'd skipped over.

Matrix Christian Bale or Michael Keaton as batman?

Well, it seems to be pretty consistant that the lower compression engines can still make good power with more ethanol... but you're burning a lot more due to the richer stoich and best power ratios. I'm thinking that if you want the maximum efficiency (mileage) AND best power, higher compression will be a must for the ethanol biased mixtures. I'd like to know what kind of gas milage difference you're seeing in your camry, considering that many people see their mileage severely drop. My conclusion on this is that the ECU isn't advancing the timing enough to take advantage of the extra fuel. Something I'd read online that seemed kinda sketchy to me, that was a quote from a book no less, said that between the main fuel options out there right now there was less than a 2% difference in power yield. I'm really curious as to what the author really ment or was trying to prove. Maybe that three engines of similar technology, opimized for their fuel, only so a 2% or less difference in power for a given volume of fuel. Sounds kinda.... hogwash like a lot of the stuff out there. Oh, by the way... those are some SERIOUSLY impressive numbers for 250cc.

Ok, so I've been reading, reading, and still reading about ethanol fuel blends and I like what I read. It's extremely hard to find good information out there through all the BS, but when you find some good info it makes ethanol look good for reasons most people aren't talking about. What do we here care about? Horsepower. Yup, that's right. That's all I care to talk about. I don't want to discuss price or politics. Lets check those bags at the door. 1st myth to address. Ethanol doesn't make as much power. Though ethanol has nearly 30% less energy per any given volume than petrolium based gasoline, it's extremely high octane naturally. If you're comparing ethanol to regular 91 octane gas then ethanol easily has just as much power potential, it just needs much higher compression to take advantage of it. Ok, now if people ask I can link the article, but the information is all over the net. Ford is working on dual fuel turbocharged engine. Test bed is a 4 cylinder turbocharged to "2.0-2.5 times atmospheric" levels. It uses regular port injections with petrolium based gasoline (regular gas for us americans) and direct injection ethanol when under high load conditions. Here's the shock.... They're expecting to run 12:1+ compression, more likely around the 13:1 range. That's HIGH!!! They say ethanol usage will be minimal for the power gains, and the ethanol on their test bed is doing an extremely good job of cooling the charge temps, and that only small quanteties are needed to cool the charge enough to prevent knock. Now, most of the information I've seen indicated that safe compressions for ethanol are in the 12:1-14:1 range, and that's assuming we're talking naturally aspirated. Ford is running those levels on a turbocharged vehicle still running gas on light load conditions. So who here has tested the compression limits of ethanol? Given this information I'd imagine that a well designed high quench head could bring ethanol well beyond 14:1, maybe even into diesel realm. I'm not experienced in this regard, so maybe some race vets like tony D can chime in. Now, onto why I'm bringing all this up. I was going to pull my L28ET I have sitting in my project 280ZX, sell off the chassis and put the engine into my daily driver after getting MSll running on it. But I realized that ethanol bleands are getting more severe here in california, and I can only expect it to get worse until they start offering various levels of blends (maybe instead of various octanes? or maybe say octane but really mean blend?). My best bet would be to raise the compression of the motor while it's out. So I can get a flat top piston engine and mate the two. Those engines are everywhere around here and cheap. But that doesn't bring up my compression a ton. 8.82:1... That's not very high at all. Realistically I could run 9:1 on most of todays gasoline and not even worry about knock as long as my tune is good on that rating. Realize I'm not looking for insane HP levels. I doubt I'll ever push 300hp to the wheels, 250 at most. This is a daily driver that I want to have some guts, and my goal is to see 35mpg consistantly on tanks I'm not racing on. So what compression should people like us shoot for at various blends? Say we're running a 10% blend, that should in theory be 10% of the difference between maximum compressions we could expect to run. 91 octane - 9:1 Ethanol - 12:1 (guesses for a L28ET) So 10% of the difference would be .3 If we're considering the E85 mix that might be making it's way to stations in the near future (especially here in CA) that's a difference of 2.55 So I think I'm right in saying that on current gas I'd want to be around 9.3:1 and for E85 I'd want to be around 11.5:1 If anyone sees flaws in my logic, correct me. That's why I'm posting this. And according to what I've seen, I should be able to make the same power with extremely similar mileage effiency. But who wants to make a 9.3:1 compression engine only to have to build a new one once E85 comes out... What I'm considering is building a 11+:1 compression engine and going one of two roads. 1. Run a second injection setup like a methanol injection setup, only using ethanol. This way I can just run as much ethanol as I need to keep out of engine knock. 2. Mix ethanol into each tank. I'm sure I can find ethanol retailers until E85 makes it to most pumps. Am I alone in thinking about this switch to ethanol? Though I like many doubt it could supply our entire nation, I still see it as a worthwhile fuel as it's not too expensive and might... MIGHT not be as subject to price flux. I think for people like me trying to get a turbocharged motor that can still get good effiency off boost it might be a very good option to look into. So what else does everyone know about performance with ethanol?

Depends on the cream pie... I think it's safer to say donut. Xbox 360 or PS3?

Oh man, two of my 5 favorite cars. Umm, geez. I'm going to say the Daytona just because it was 100% designed by Pete Brock who I recently had the honor of meeting and talking to briefly. He went on to slaughter Shelby with a datsun that was much less "race intended" as the toyota cars Shelby was working with (and stole contract for, as Pete had a contract signed long before Shelby contacted toyota). So the common link between the Daytona and the Z gets the Daytona my vote today. Big Mac or Wopper?

Review: (no spoilers, I promise!) First off, it lives up to any hype I've heard or read. My expectations where high, and I was glad of that, but the movie went way beyond my expectations. I've seen a couple reviews complaining about things like it being too monotone action wise, and it's just too rushed of a movie with not enough dynamic flow. Though I can see where they're comming from I don't agree at all. The movie has your attention captured the entire time. It keeps the thinkers thinking and the rest of the people in awe of what they're seeing. Never once did I stop and think about my tiredness, sore butt from the hard seats, or my blatter about to burst from the mountaint dew I downed before the movie with my taco bell big box. The movie left me hungry for more, and I'd have glady sat through another 2+ hour movie right there and then, and just drove straight to work from the theater. Yes, I thought it was that good. I'm now like a dog that's had human food for the first time. I'm wondering what else Christopher Nolan can do. Oh, and I don't think I've ever seen any performance so deserving of an oscar as Ledger's Joker. He's better than people have been letting on I think. This is a performance that shows the dedication you see in actors like Jim Carry, or Johnny Depp, but with a refinement I've never seen before. He makes you forget who it really is under the paint, and that this guy really does exist. I'm going to be thrilled to go see it again.

Wakeboard Gold Bond or not?

Dark Night I've give you a review tomorrow. Rolling Stones or Led Zeppelin

Good point duowing. The 280ZX ECU will kick out of closed look at above 2500RPM I believe. At least that's where it is on my 83' turbo ECU. I can tell because of how much vacuum I need in order to maintain a given speed on the freeway. 2400RPMs takes much more air than 2600, due to the leaner mixture in closed loop. There's also some other factors. The knock sensor. There's a cut off point that the ECU stops listening to it. So if it's got a bad connection maybe it's going off causing timing cut backs at the lower RPM range.

So who's going to go see it tonight, or later this weekend? I've got tickets for two at 12:01am at a local century theaters. I wanted to see it in IMAX, but they're already sold out for 3 days straight around here. This is going to be one looooong day at work. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaIR9dAZRR0