Jump to content
HybridZ
Ironhead

ANOTHER Datsun Z/LS3/T56 Swap Thread

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, LLave said:

Looking good. It is amazing how quickly you run out of space. 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound bag, that is what I say about my car. Especially in the interior, where I make up much of that 10 pounds...

 

LOL...Yup....I have my seat slammed on the floor....as far back as it can go (until the sloping roof starts to take away the headroom), and my pedals adjusted as close to the firewall as possible.  I mean, after all this, I fit Ok, even with a helmet on....but there is NO spare room.

Edited by Ironhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2019 at 3:10 PM, grannyknot said:

Sweet, and you still have room behind it for one of those small Braille batteries if you want.

 

I do have a Braille, but sadly it doesn't quite fit.  It might have worked if I went with a really small Braille, but I wanted one that would reliably start the car....and it is a bit too large to fit in the space left over.  I planned all along to put the battery in the rear next to the fuel cell anyway.

 

I am probably going to run the wiring harness through the firewall in the area just outboard of the oil tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the oil tank bolted in.  Clearances are tight, particularly between some of the fittings and the rear coil, but I think it is enough unless a motor mount fails or something.

 

rece537.jpg

 

DqxzgoR.jpg

 

FnWjqgY.jpg

 

This is the drain at the bottom of the tank.  Hopefully will make things easy at oil change time:

 

dutivDb.jpg

 

Most of my experience in the past tinkering with engines has been on four cylinder motors, and I am continually surprised how much heavier all this V8 stuff is.  Most of the steel flywheels I looked at weighed in the 35# range, which seems really heavy.  So, I went with a 12# aluminum one.

 

NH6Ef7g.jpg

 

There were so many clutches available for LSX engines, it is kind of mind boggling.  I ended up going with this one from Centerforce, because it had good reviews for the sort of use I have in mind.  Also, because it was orange.  But I think that goes without saying.

 

Here again, this clutch was so damn heavy it made me wonder why I bothered with a lightweight flywheel:

 

xhd5cb9.jpg

 

TBsJnq7.jpg

 

I am getting the transmission ready to go in.  I removed the weird (to me anyway) GM hook-ups for the hydraulic line to the clutch slave, and just used standard AN4 fittings and hose.  I also rigged it up for a remote bleeder valve, so I don't have to crawl under the car and work my fat hands into the trans tunnel to bleed the clutch.  Small bit of work now should make things easier down the road.

 

HmDx0M7.jpg

 

AfXFcak.jpg

 

Only other "development"....I took some measurements and found the shift lever on the T56 is going to be about 4" too far forward to protrude through the stock opening in the trans tunnel.  I don't know why I was assuming this would just line up perfectly (why would it?), but I think I was.  I have no real problem welding up the existing opening and moving it forward, but that is going to put the shift lever very close to the dash, and probably also a bit too far forward ergonomically speaking.

 

So I did a bit of searching and found this:

 

https://www.sikky.com/product/t56-magnum-4-shifter-relocation-kit/

 

I am generally not really a fan of "short shifters", but aside from being a bit overpriced, it seems like this would otherwise solve my issue.  Anybody here used one of these, or heard anything about them?

 

Thanks for looking.

Edited by Ironhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, your shifter seems quite a bit further forward than mine. Are you using a TR6060? I am using a F-Body T56 which I believe has a longer tail section. You can convert tail housings, but the you linked is likely more cost effective. 

I have not personally used the sikky shifter, but they make nice parts and it looks really solid.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The GTO T56 shifter is offset like that by a few inches. Wonder if it would work for you. Here is an example.  https://www.ebay.com/i/123583308582?chn=ps 

 

I have the GTO T56 in my build, its the MN12. I converted it to a F-Body MGW short shifter which required me to change the offset lever, which was part #93 in the Tremec T56 parts schematic. You may just need that offset lever for the GTO, then could use the GTO shifter, which isn't a short throw. I just bolted seats in my car 2 days ago, and realized the MGW shifter is also too far forward, so may go back the GTO shifter.

 

Your build is looking great, btw, and continues to inspire me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that my tranny is the T56 "Super Magnum"....and it uses a six bolt flange for the shifter rather than the four bolt flange on the regular T56...like in the GTO.  I realized this because Sikky sells different shifter kits for the T56 Magnum/Super Magnum than for the standard T56.

 

This is the one for the standard T56:

 

oEPTjsL.jpg

 

This one is for the T56 Magnum:

 

hboSXqc.jpg

 

You can see that they are not interchangable, so I knew the GTO shifter would not work in my case.

 

After pondering this for a while, I wound up just ordering the Sikky shifter.  All the other potential solutions I could come up with were either very complex or marginal from a functional standpoint.

 

Thanks for the input guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks like nice shifter. I'll be interested to hear your thoughts on it. Did you go the 4" back version?

 

As far as "Super" Magnum isn't that just the GM kit badging? I wasn't aware of any upgraded from the factory Magnum - all the Magnums are built to the same strength. 4 choices - wide or narrow ratio set, GM or Ford. I have a wide ratio Ford. I think the GM "Super Magnum" is a narrow ratio GM version. I know some shops REM and Cryo the units, add bronze shift pads, etc. and get better strength/high RPM shifting. I had some inside tracks when I traded/purchased mine and they gave me their specs for the upgraded units. Also, per Tremec tecs directly, the stock Magnum is designed to be pulled from the box, installed and run 700 lb/ft drag runs all day no problem. I'm thinking of opening mine up and give it the cryo (why not, it's pretty inexpensive) and more importantly the REM treatment so it will handle the high RPM shifts better along with the upgraded fork pads. That shifter looks like it would be pretty nice to get the location correct and be faster/more precise than the stock setup.

Edited by jpndave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, I really don't know the significance of the badging.  All I know is that I wanted the GM gearing, ordered it from Summit, and they call it a "Super Magnum".

 

I have the shifter installed now and I was screwing around to see how the shifting felt.  It seems like it shifts nicely, but you can definitely tell this is a beefy tranny with a lot of torque capacity.  It is not a "flick of the wrist" style transmission.  I did get the 4" setback version.

 

I think I might install a longer shift lever though.  As I mentioned, I am not really a fan of "short shifters", and I tend to like a taller lever that is closer to the steering wheel anyway.  I will wait on see how it feels when it's in the car.  I am just trying to finish running the fuel line through the trans tunnel then the tranny is going in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been trying to get the fuel lines finished through the trans tunnel so I can install the transmission.

 

I assumed all along that I would be running a supply and return line from the engine to the fuel cell, just because every fuel injected car I have ever dealt with worked like that.  But I learned that most LSX powered cars have the fuel filter and fuel pressure regulator mounted together at the rear of the car, with only a supply line going to the engine.  This seems like the cleanest, simplest approach, and frankly I don't really understand why other cars generally do not plumb it this way....?

 

So I was looking for someplace around the rear differential to mount the FPR, and thought why even run a return line that long?  So I mounted the FPR right on top of the fuel cell, with perhaps a 10" long return line.  Then one supply line will go from the fuel cell enclosure through the floor of the car and up to the engine through the trans tunnel.

 

I cannot think of any reason why this won't work....but if anyone here can please speak up.

 

YDqQ0ya.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason older cars don't do it is because of heat. A return system maintains a lower fuel temperature at the injectors. The heat that gets sent back to the fuel tank, though, and causes more fuel evaporation. To adhere to modern admissions standards, OEMs have chosen to deal with the extra heat in the injected fuel rather than the extra evaporation. 

 

Your setup looks good to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EF Ian said:

Would there be a performance benefit from changing it to a return style setup due to possibly cooler fuel? 

 

I thought about that.  It's certainly possible.  Whether it would be a significant/measurable benefit is another question.  I figure the fuel is probably fairly warm with either option.  It still has to make its way to the engine through a fuel line generally directly above the exhaust.  I have to believe that a braided hose with a teflon or rubber liner would transmit much less heat to the fuel than the standard hard steel fuel line would.  The only other reasonable option would be to run the fuel line through the interior of the car, which I don't want to do.

 

It seems like when the fuel is atomized as it squirts out the injector, it would almost instantly take on the temperature of the incoming air....or close to it.  The injected fuel volume is so small compared to the air volume.  But there is no doubt that warm fuel would make a warmer intake charge than cold fuel would.

 

I think I am just going to opt for the simplest setup though.

 

 

Edited by Ironhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might want to reference the instructions for whatever FPR you are using.

 

I know aeormotive recommends that the FPR go on the return 

http://aeromotiveinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/131-0109-0revH.pdf

 

I was going to run a returnless Corvette fitler/regulator combo, but after thinking it over, I decided to run dedicated feed and return hard lines all the way. This seems the be the most robust in terms of being scale-able to future horsepower growth.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it is specific to the FPR....these aftermarket FPRs are all the same.  Just a rubber or teflon diaphram and a spring.  If it is adjustable, a screw to adjust the spring tension.  That's it...

 

I spent some time reading various internet debates about FPR before or after the fuel rails.  Some of them highlight the levels of idiocy that can be found on the internet, others almost echoed discussions of religion.  Pretty entertaining...

 

Having said that, the largest consensus was that FPR after the fuel rails was "best", but they never said exactly why.  Just like the Aeromotive link....it says "after" is "optimal" but it doesn't say why.  It also says that mounting it before the fuel rails would work.  Well, if it will work, why are they clearly discouraging it?  Everyone who had actually tried mounting the FPR before the rails said that it worked fine.  So I don't know what to think.

 

The only difference I can imagine it making would be fuel temperature.  But even that is not cut and dried.  With a returnless setup, the fuel would spend more time in the rails near the engine (I think).  But with the return setup, the fuel would make two long trips to the engine and back in fuel pipes directly over the exhaust.  With the setup I am pondering currently, the FPR and return line are in a "cool" location. 

 

So I don't know what I am going to do.

 

Just like with the brakes, I am leaning toward skipping the hard lines and just using flexible braided hose the whole way.  I hate working with hard lines, I find the flared ends more prone to leak than hose fittings, and the only real advantage I see to them is a bit less cost and bulk.  Actually I am not even sure hard lines cost less, because I always screw up so much of the tubing during the bending process and have to trash it....LOL

 

Thanks for the imput, greatly appreciated.

Edited by Ironhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before the fuel rail is called "dead heading".  The fuel rail is a branch off of the pressurized side but the end of the "branch", the rail, is closed.  Pressure is built up and maintained but the fuel can only get out through the injectors (edit - wrong)Fuel pressure in the rail can't be released quickly for varying manifold vacuum.  That's bad.  After the rail is more normal, "bypass" style, where the FPR acts as a pressure relief valve, letting fuel out of the rail after set pressure is reached.

 

The aftermarket FPR's all tend to leak down very quickly, losing pressure.  Most of their marketing is about when the engine is running.  But for a daily driver, the wait for pressure to build and the engine to start is generally annoying.  If you can use a factory FPR, designed to last hundreds of thousands of miles, with quick starting convenience, you'll probably be happier.  No cool anodized aluminum colors or shiny metal though.

 

Looks like you've already been on Aeromotive's page.  Their explanations are marketing baloney.  "Best possible flow and pressure control...don't compromise this standard to force the regulator to seal when the engine is off."  It's just a cheap design.  BS.

 

Don't fall for the hype.  Find a factory regulator for one of today's high horsepower engines and use it.

 

https://www.aeromotiveinc.com/tech-help/faqs/faq-efi-regulators/

 

"6.) I’ve installed my new Aeromotive bypass regulator.  Fuel pressure seems to adjust fine and holds great when the engine is running, but when I shut the engine off, pressure drops quickly to zero.  Shouldn’t the pressure hold like it did with a stock regulator?
No, Aeromotive EFI bypass regulators may not seal perfectly when the pump is off.  They are engineered for the highest possible performance when the engine is running.  OEM regulators must hold pressure for 30-minutes after shut-down to pass EPA emissions standards.  At Aeromotive we know our customers priority is to have the best possible flow and pressure control when the engine is running and we don’t compromise this standard to force the regulator to seal when the engine is off. "

Edited by NewZed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a track car with a very buzzy four cylinder engine.  I can tell you that I tried Aeromotive FPRs (2) on that engine.  The vibration killed them both, very, very quickly...like within 5K miles, and I started to get completely erratic pressure.

 

Switched to a Bosch Motorsport FPR....trouble free ever since.

 

One thing that is really annoying to me about all the aftermarket FPRs....they are all adjustable.  The only reasons I can think of for an adjustable FPR:  1.  Your injectors are near max duty cycle and simply upping the fuel pressure is quicker and easier and cheaper than buying bigger injectors.  2.  It is much cheaper for the manufacturer to sell one "adjustable" FPR than market different models with different pressures.

 

I have found that fixed pressure FPRs hold a steady pressure much better than the adjustable ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, NewZed said:

 

Yeah, that's the setup I have on my BMW.  With it you can use nearly any fixed pressure Bosch FPR.  I am looking at Audi FPRs, because they use a Bosch 4.0 Bar which is about 58 PSI, should be perfect for LS3.

 

The only hassle with that Bosch Motorsport stuff is that you generally have to order it from the UK.  For some reason no one in the USA seems to stock any of it.

Edited by Ironhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of information here that's not entirely accurate. A lot of opinions which is great too.

 

The stock late model systems aren't exactly "dead-headed" at least as far as the pump is concerned. There is a return style regulator in the pickup box with the pump that returns off the extra pressure (above 58 psi theoretically) back into the sump the same as Ironheads setup (and mine below) just at a different point in these applications. Later models regulate pressure with PWM which is past what most of us are dealing with at this point. The direct inject engines are just lifting fuel to the high pressure pump so it's not really critical anymore with them as long as the supply is there - pressure that is.

 

The vacuum port does vary the pressure, not sure what that would do to the engine program, I guess if you tune for it there could  be an advantage. The big advantage comes with a boosted applications since you need the pressure differential for the injectors to spray properly and if you have say 20psi of boost then the injectors are really only spraying 38psi of difference. Hope that makes sense.

 

The linked Aeromotive doesn't go on the return line, it creates the return by bleeding off pressure above the set point. I looks very similar to the one I have, much more money.

 

Most of these will bleed off pressure to some degree, hence the pre-prime of the pump. It's a good habit to get into of key on - pause then start. I'm in the habit anyway from driving a diesel truck or my backhoe, etc. You want to give the glow plugs there a chance to do their job. Let the fuel pump prime the lines.

 

This photo isn't the best of the regulator and I'll post up a different one if I can find it. Mine is a Russell as that is what I got the best deal on in a decent quality unit. Oil filled pressure gauge directly on the front so you can see exactly what's going on when running. I suppose the heat issue could be an advantage. I like that I can see and adjust pressure if necessary readily. I also like and feel that one big advantage is that the regulated pressure is as close to the demand as possible. It also shortens up the amount of line that is necessary for a burst in demand. You have ~90 psi ahead of the regulator or the capability to have that and then the excess bleeds off to leave the 58 psi. If you stab the throttle, the regulator at the manifolds stops dumping fuel  immediately and the supply goes to the engine rather than taking 10 feet of line to get there. I have -8 to the engine and -6 return.

 

Filter.thumb.jpg.622b057061af0067b7d727596a1ea9fd.jpg

 

I suspect that the in tank regulator has more to do with packaging and $ savings than with performance. I'm sure you can make it work fine but I'm more comfortable with where it's at on this application. I flared the SS fuel rail with an AN nut an backer with the regulator attached directly to the fuel rails. The early LS1 and truck versions actually bleed off at the fuel rail so even later than what I have set here.

 

If you want the absolute best regulation, set it up at the back of those pretty fuel rails on your engine Ironhead. Full pressure in and bleed off the return at the back. Probably won't matter that much, but if your look for "best" there it is.

Edited by jpndave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Bosch setup is pretty cool BTW.

 

Oh, and my vote is for hard lines on the brakes, even braided lines will give a bit and the firmer the pedal the better. I'm not sure what bender and flare tool you have but some work much better than others. Judging by the quality of the rest of the build, you'll do fine. Nice work on all this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jpndave said:

That Bosch setup is pretty cool BTW.

 

Oh, and my vote is for hard lines on the brakes, even braided lines will give a bit and the firmer the pedal the better. I'm not sure what bender and flare tool you have but some work much better than others. Judging by the quality of the rest of the build, you'll do fine. Nice work on all this!

 

Brakes are already plumbed....without hard lines.  Honestly what sold me on that decision....I saw photos of one of the recent cars used in the German DTM series.  These are arguably the most advanced and technically sophisticated racing cars on the planet (rules are much less restrictive than F1).  This DTM car's brakes were 100% plumbed with braided teflon hose.  So I figured if there was a performance penalty, it must be minor....

 

But this has been a great source of insight about FPR plumbing.  I am pretty much convinced it is worth the slight increase in complexity and plumbing to put the FPR close to the fuel rails, so that is my current plan.

 

I know from my past experience that what Newzed says is dead on:  If you can find a way to implement them, OEM style FPRs are much more effective than all the assorted aftermarket ones, which are pretty much all the same.  I had to return a car I owned in the past to a "closer to stock" setup in order to pass smog here in California.  I had been using an aftermarket FPR, and was just living with fluctuating fuel pressure.  Well, to pass smog, I returned to the stock FPR.  It held the pressure dead on, right where it was supposed to be.  Go figure......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ironhead said:

 

Brakes are already plumbed....without hard lines.  Honestly what sold me on that decision....I saw photos of one of the recent cars used in the German DTM series.  These are arguably the most advanced and technically sophisticated racing cars on the planet (rules are much less restrictive than F1).  This DTM car's brakes were 100% plumbed with braided teflon hose.  So I figured if there was a performance penalty, it must be minor....

It would be minor. Interesting on the DTM cars, I'll have to look at those. I'm interested to see how it works out for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Ironhead said:

Some of them highlight the levels of idiocy that can be found on the internet, others almost echoed discussions of religion.  Pretty entertaining...

 

 

You're wrong! Noobie! Classic. Usually coming from people who have not built anything. 

 

I always enjoy the discussion on HybridZ. 

 

Another route to consider is OEM modules. I got the chance to speak with Rick's Tanks for a while at SEMA a couple years ago. They are big on using the ZL1/CTSV modules. They have an awful lot of good tech built right into them. Swirl jets to increase pickup, a reservoir to protect against starvation, a fuel pressure regulator, level sensor,  they support big power and you can get a replacement at a dealer. They also have after market setups that can support 2000hp, should you decide your destiny is to go out in a blaze of glory. 

 

I am not sure what your exact tank configuration is but, they have a weld in option and a bolt in. Might be worth talking to them. 

https://rickstanks.com/product/weld-in/

 

Also, Vapor Works utilizes these modules with high tech PWM controllers. Speed control for your fuel pump. They utilize a fuel pressure sensor down stream and control pump flow. 

https://www.vaporworx.com/documentation/fuel-modules/

https://www.vaporworx.com/documentation/how-do-pwm-returnless-fuel-systems-work/

 

Big power module

https://www.deatschwerks.com/5th-gen-camaro-dw400-pump-module

 

 

Regarding your plumbing, I don't think you will have any issue plumbing it up with hose. Any of the good quality fuel injection tubing will be fine. Heck they plumb new cars up with that nylon stuff and they are fine. The trick is going to be routing your lines away from heat and moving parts. 10 pounds... 5 pound bag. 

 

 

 

Edited by LLave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My fuel pump is a done deal.  The cell has an integral trap door reservoir and the ubiquitous Bosch 044 pump.  I don't know the specs exactly, but I know that pump will handle far more power than I will ever have in this car.  Honestly my intent is to leave the LS3 stock....LOL....I know, I know, famous last words.  But I have done my share of messing with modified engines, and wanting a break from that is one of the main reasons I went LS3 in the first place.  The problem with highly modified engines....yeah they go fast....but they need good gas....and the biggest problem for me is that no matter how much time you put into it, you can never get a perfect tune.  I don't mean at WOT....that's easy....I mean part throttle and idle and all that.

 

My current plan:  I borrowed the Bosch FPR adapter off my BMW for fit up.  I am going to "Y" the AN8 fuel supply line from the cell into two AN6 lines, one going into each fuel rail.  The FPR adapter will mount to one of the heads and will be plumbed between the two fuel rails.  It will use a Bosch 078133534C 4 Bar (58 PSI) FPR for an Audi S8 (and numerous other Audis).  Then an AN6 return line back to the fuel cell.  This might be a bit of overkill, but at least I know I won't have to re-do it all down the road.

 

Thanks again to all for the input.  Very helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...