pparaska

I researched and fiddled with this problem alot. Maybe this can help a bit too: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/pparaska/drivelinemods.htm

It's on my list of things to do. I need to get the passenger side mirror on first, but that comes after getting the thing running! I'm learning how to tune the Pro-Jection right now - not easy. I may just put the Megasquirt ECU in and be done with it.

Congrats! In August, I will celebrate 22 years with my 73 On the road less than half that time (first due to needing too many repairs for a college student to afford, and then down for the rebuild after driving it a few more years).

That's not a hybridZ question. It'd be fine to post at Zcar.com, or any general car site, as it's a basic trouble shooting issue for a stock configuration.

That's going to be quite the screamer! I had mine flowed on a SF-600. But I have the new 215cc volume intake port version (that don't need offset intake rockers like the 220cc heads). Here are the results: quote tested quote tested lift intake intake diff exhaust exhaust diff 0.100 62.1 64 1.9 43.1 50 6.9 0.200 141.3 142 0.7 112.3 99 -13.3 0.300 207.2 211 3.8 152.0 135 -17 0.400 255.2 264 8.8 173.0 149 -24 0.500 270.5 292 21.5 184.0 157 -27 0.600 278.9 297 18.1 195.5 161 -34.5 0.700 283.3 297 13.7 213.3 164 -49.3 0.800 298 172 198* (* w/pipe on 198) This is with a 4.25" cylinder fixture, that probably unshrouded the intake a bit, and might have caused the exhaust flow air up the fixture to trip on the chamber edge. Note that the intake flow was phenomenal - 292@.500, and 297@.600. The exhaust was done without a pipe on the port, except at .800" lift, where it still only flowed 198cfm with a 6" long 2" diameter pipe held up to the port. (flowed 172 without a pipe at .800") There is a ridge in the chamber all the way around the exhaust valve, making the air step down going from the chamber to the exh port. We are going to knock off that ridge. Also, we are going to put a radius on the top half of the margin of the exhaust valve, to help the flow turn around the edge of the valve. And there's a small ridge in the port, about 1/4 to 1/2" from the seat, leading up to the port floor. That will also be radiused. After all that testing, we will test the head again. Ken at Canfield didn't like hearing about those the exhaust numbers, but noted that they use a 4-1/8" fixture and a pipe bolted to the exhaust port, the latter which can add 20-30 cfm to the flow of the port on the bench. He wants me to get back to him with the new flow numbers once the port and chamber are cleaned up and we test again with a pipe. If that's true, the flow up to .600" would come into the range that the quoted numbers. The shop doesn't have a 4-1/8" bore fixture, so I'm thinking about using the 4" fixture for the next test.

It's now sticky! Grumpyvette, you've outdone yourself this time! Now if I can find a few spare days to sit at the computer and read all of that and digest it!

I'll tell Glen McCoy that those OE Nissan hinges finally were of use to someone! He lent them to me for Mike to copy, then Mike sent them to you. I'd be great if someone could make a nice 2 pc version from a correct 2pc install.

clint, sounds like you're more anal retentive than I am about electrical stuff! Gold ring terminals! and the setup sounds great. I was really referring to the reaction speed of the O2s. Not nearly quick enough to have the ECU prevent a lean condition when rpm is rising at 1000 rpm/0.1second rates, as you alluded to. That's why I said datalogging and starting out rich. I will be asking alot of questions once my EFI is up and running on my pushrod NA V8. Right now the Pro-jection 4D is half-way installed, and the Megasquirt is built. I've NEVER done EFI tuning, so I'll have lots of questions for TimZ, clint, etc.!

Don't feel bad about not building it yourself. I paid someone to build my 406 shortblock (still on the stand). $1600 for a balanced and blueprinted, forged piston shortblock (minus cam and timing set), block supplied by builder, all other parts new. I couldn't touch that, as machining prices around me are high. Those are some fine numbers! Congrats! What are your plans for getting the torque to the ground?

I don't think you'd want to depend on any O2, narrow or WB for high boost turbo apps. I'd be running closed loop, datalogging, and looking at EGT, O2, spark timing, etc., starting rich and sneaking up on leaning it carefully. I'd make sure all the grounds came to a common point, probably on the block, or at least tied with large gage wire to the block. Run as large a gage as you think the power circuit needs on the +ve side. Run a nice big ground to the exhaust pipe near the O2 sensor to the same place you're grounding the ECU to. That way you will stay away from different potentials for several grounds that might cause the O2 reading at the ECU to be off.

Ross, my guess is that you'd need to change the bottles in the dual part of the system. Something that's made to be a resonator. The rear muffler is probably not going to have a huge difference on the resonance, unless its very restrictive. Just a gut feeling... good luck.

One of the reasons Jags That Runs exists is because of the insanely high price of Jag V-12 parts and rebuild costs. Once one of these engines go, rebuilding it is a VERY expensive enterprise. Hence people dropping Chevy V8's into V12 Jags. I tried to buy a neighbor's V12 Jag that had a bad engine. He wanted to get it fixed. It sat there for years. Now he has a Mercedes. The Jag is gone, probably to a junkyard. He wouldn't sell it to me because I told him my plan (V8). Oh well.

Right John. All it does is change the position in the bumpsteer curve that the car sits at and drives through. By lowering the crossmember, it's like lowering the car with shorter springs. What it does is change the stationary, full droop and full bump extents of where the car rides through the bump steer curve. It moves them all to different points along the "stock height" bumpsteer curve, but the curve remains the same. The problem is that as you get away from the static position in the bumpsteer curve, the bumpsteer amount usually increases (more toe change) so that the static to bump portion is now shifted toward the full bump end of the OE curve. In fact, the new full bump position is beyond the OE full bump position. Sample bumpsteer curve: http://www.rallypartsireland.com/TechInfo/GartracescortbumpsteerABrev.pdf

Yep. Trailer lights. I talked to the builder/owner at MSA in 2002. He had spent all his money on other stuff and didn't have decent taillights. So he did that as an inexpensive way out. Some perforated AL, trailer lights, clear sidemaker lights (Honda?) and alot of attention to detail, and he was done.

Here's one I found today: http://www.teknett.com/pwp/drmayf/rods.htm (With a very FoMoCo bent )

Sorry to hear that. Chris hangs with the Mustang crowd. How much you want to bet he might know who now has it - these punks usually blab and then everybody in the group knows who done what.

Those 2002 lights put out so little light they are unsafe.

Mike I hope you're o.k. I bet Donna takes good care of you today But no physical activity, that could be dangerous with a head injury! :flamedevil: I'm sure I've done plenty of stupid things like that - and whacked my head good. But I can't recall it at the moment

Very wild Z that guy in Ontario has! But note: Full fiberglass body except roof, with V12/T56/Vette diff 3200 lbs. 5.3L 11:1 compression, 380+ hp 13.78 1/4 mile ET

Guy, niceguy, Don, you're all right. That's what it says in the JTR manual anyway. Weight balance with a driver only and steering shaft clearance.

And don't forget the original: http://www.tamsoldracecarsite.net/Scarab.html http://www.tamsoldracecarsite.net/ZMHScarabsChaparral.html

Mike, that is a heck of a nice job converting the old garage into a room. With that roof line, it really looks great! I hope to be down soon to see it in person!

I have a hard time believing that the TINY amount of cross section reduction that MIGHT occur from Mandrel bending would be measurable as far as power production. As far as the pie-cut thing goes, I think mandrel bends look better. But if you're talking about performance, if you keep the angle between the adjacent pie cut pieces to less than 15 degrees, the air will never know the difference between the angles. But as you pie cut, the cross section changes at the cut. Again, not enough to matter.

Well, Vizard talks about both. But DCR is in his venacular. I read it several times within a few pages the other night in the book I mentioned. Yes, DCR is the "compression ratio" at TDC for a slow moving mixture. Not an exact indication of the pressure at the time of spark. But that time can vary by 30-some degrees based on your ignition curve. So it wouldn't make any sense to try to figure that into a "compression ratio". Neither would it make sense to try to figure static compression ratio as a function of spark timing. The point that Vizard and others here are making is that the intake valve closing point along with the static compression ratio must work together to have a dynamic compression ratio in a certain range or cranking pressure in a certain range. One is just a statement of the other. Pat Kelley likes to talk about a DCR of 8.2:1 or so for pump gas. Others like to talk about acceptably high cranking pressure. Too low of either and the engine is a dog at lower rpm. ~10:1 SCR or ~8:1 DCR or ~170psi cranking (gage) pressure. They're just rules of thumb for pump gas.