Bob_H Posted February 28, 2022 Share Posted February 28, 2022 So I searched the old posts and don't see it - so please link if I missed a post. I love the Datsunworks twin cam project - here is a brand new casting for the L6, taking what I've seen as optimum combustion chamber design. Anyone have more info/thoughts? They apparently just opened it to "domestic" orders, i.e. in Japan. Just linking for now - not smart enough to know how to show an instagram photo or video. https://www.instagram.com/l6headproject/ https://www.instagram.com/p/CaXGgydJvGC/ https://www.instagram.com/p/CXjElwulaMZ/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rturbo 930 Posted February 28, 2022 Share Posted February 28, 2022 Yeah I've been following that. Pretty impressive project, it's basically the ultimate N42 head. And it'll only cost you about $5500 to $6800 depending which of the three types you go for. Unrealistic for most of us unfortunately, but for those looking for big power, might be worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AydinZ71 Posted February 28, 2022 Share Posted February 28, 2022 Ken. AKA hayate_hien.jp on IG. Been following his progress for the past two years. Really amazing work, and thrilled to have someone doing some neat custom (but period correct) engineering. I can’t read Japanese so really don’t know any of the details. Unlikely I will be able to afford one, but I’m a huge admirer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuffyMahoney Posted February 28, 2022 Share Posted February 28, 2022 The casting quality and the effort that went to this head is just amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calZ Posted March 1, 2022 Share Posted March 1, 2022 14 hours ago, rturbo 930 said: Yeah I've been following that. Pretty impressive project, it's basically the ultimate N42 head. And it'll only cost you about $5500 to $6800 depending which of the three types you go for. Unrealistic for most of us unfortunately, but for those looking for big power, might be worth it. Just for the casting, right? Rockers, valves, etc will add up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rturbo 930 Posted March 1, 2022 Share Posted March 1, 2022 8 hours ago, calZ said: Just for the casting, right? Rockers, valves, etc will add up They're offering it in three types, A, B, and C. From what I can gather from the PDF, A comes bare, B and C come with a choice of valve guides and valve seats. http://www.pams-japan.com/30cafe/project.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuffyMahoney Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 (edited) Ken is a great guy. I am stoked for his project. Question Cylinders 3/4 also seems to have the same shape and size as other cylinders. Why? Answer: This is to make the exhaust flow velocity uniform in all cylinders. In addition, a new water jacket is installed between the EX3 / 4 ports, which tend to accumulate heat, to make the head temperature between cylinders uniform. This is done to ensure the consistent exhaust flow velocity in all cylinders. In addition, a new water jacket is installed between EX 3 and 4 ports, which tend to accumulate heat, to make the head temperature between cylinders steady. Edited March 2, 2022 by DuffyMahoney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calZ Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 I saw the snippet about 3/4 when reading about the head yesterday. Do you know if he did anything specific to alleviate the 5/6 problem? Is his plan for that just the internal changes being enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuffyMahoney Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 15 minutes ago, calZ said: I saw the snippet about 3/4 when reading about the head yesterday. Do you know if he did anything specific to alleviate the 5/6 problem? Is his plan for that just the internal changes being enough? I don't know his english is pretty hit or miss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted May 10, 2022 Share Posted May 10, 2022 (edited) Guys, this is not a "5/6 Problem"! You're trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear and blaming the OEM for incompetent and uninformed aftermarket engineering when increasing performance! Look at the Nissan L6 FIA Group 4 Head, the LY Head, and the S20 Head - all Nissan "HIGH SPECIFIC OUTPUT" heads and you will find they have a SIGNIFICANTLY different way of handling water flow through the head, and all of them handle it almost identically! And unfortunately without an external water manifold to remove the "flow knife" action of cylinders closer to the water pump obstructing flow back along the exhaust side to the front of the head to take it off to the radiator. The solution to this is simple: take water off the top of the cylinder to an external manifold which can be designed like an exhaust header with subsequent cylinders creating a pulling effect on the downstream cylinder to promote flow out of the head. The knowledge of this "issue" has been known over 50 years! It was decided at Nissan that there were high specific output heads which addressed the issue, and cheap to make production heads for the millions of vehicles they planned on selling with the head in it. It's not "addressed" because most people aren't making over 220hp (which is where Nissan started using those heads...) and because people think a $5,000 bare head is somehow 'unrealistic' for purchase. And $35,000 for a bare vintage FIA Group 4 or LY head is absolutely out of the question. Note the aftermarket heads use the "take it off each cylinder" model, either integrated, or external. Edited May 10, 2022 by Tony D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted May 10, 2022 Share Posted May 10, 2022 Now, you want to discuss an SOHC head that SHOULD have been reproduced? For $6K? FIA Group 4 Six Cylinder SIGN ME UP NOW! For the money given the JMC current offering? I'd buy a Datsunworks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Posted May 10, 2022 Share Posted May 10, 2022 1 hour ago, Tony D said: For the money given the JMC current offering? I'd buy a Datsunworks. That's because you are biased Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted May 10, 2022 Share Posted May 10, 2022 No, really it's logical. The head is altered and likely is just as illegal to run in any sanctioned events as the DW head. If I'm plunking down $10 Large + for a head to be done up... I'm not getting one limited to maybe 250 cfm. On a good day. With huge lift and all the buggery that entails. Truthfully the DOHC would be easier and is the logically-minded next step in the engine evolution. Now, if they reproduced the FIA L6 Head.... THEN we might have some competition. The L6 FIA head already HAD 'equal exhaust ports' but then people would whine about their existing headers not fitting, or that they couldn't buy and fit $149.95 Thunderbird Headers on it and had to pay money for custom speed parts... The "Rent, Baby Milk and Daipers Crowd" as John Coffey used to say! And besides, the Datsunworks head is a brilliant adaptation of modern port theory and combustion chamber design mated with modern production techniques that make previously impossible things possible at an affordable price! Whomever thought up that whole scheme and put it into production is absolutely Enstein-ly Brilliant! True L-Godz! All should supplicate themselves at their feet and pay homage... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuffyMahoney Posted May 10, 2022 Share Posted May 10, 2022 He is claiming he wants to remake the FIA head. Time will tell, he seems to have deep pockets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calZ Posted May 11, 2022 Share Posted May 11, 2022 I wasn't blaming Nissan for anything. They designed their engine for a purpose, and it did that well. But who is buying a 3rd party head and isn't expecting to push the power to a point that they're bumping up against the cooling limits of the original design? In that context, it is a "problem". If you plan on running stock power levels where the cooling system performs just fine, why would you spend $10k+ on a brand new head casting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 On 5/11/2022 at 11:00 AM, calZ said: I wasn't blaming Nissan for anything. They designed their engine for a purpose, and it did that well. But who is buying a 3rd party head and isn't expecting to push the power to a point that they're bumping up against the cooling limits of the original design? In that context, it is a "problem". If you plan on running stock power levels where the cooling system performs just fine, why would you spend $10k+ on a brand new head casting? As I said, this is mischaracterization of poor engineering on the builder's side, and anybody reproducing it with the intent of using it for 'high performance usage'. The characterization of the stock head having "a problem" is incorrect. The characterization of the JMC having the same identical problem WOULD be a 'design flaw' as the issue is known, as is the solution! The L-Head as was on the cars stock was not intended for more than around 220bhp, and even then they blanked internal bypasses and ran 2bar radiator caps. They ran those heads in production car categories. Where the rules permitted, they ran the LY head, or FIA head which was intended for sustained 220bhp+ production. It's like the breakpoint for applying the R200 in a chassis compared with the R180. It's curious Subaru who also uses the Fuji produced differential seems to follow the exact same application for intended horsepower and torque that Datsun/Nissan did back 45 years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calZ Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 2 hours ago, Tony D said: As I said, this is mischaracterization of poor engineering on the builder's side, and anybody reproducing it with the intent of using it for 'high performance usage'. The characterization of the stock head having "a problem" is incorrect. The characterization of the JMC having the same identical problem WOULD be a 'design flaw' as the issue is known, as is the solution! The L-Head as was on the cars stock was not intended for more than around 220bhp, and even then they blanked internal bypasses and ran 2bar radiator caps. They ran those heads in production car categories. Where the rules permitted, they ran the LY head, or FIA head which was intended for sustained 220bhp+ production. It's like the breakpoint for applying the R200 in a chassis compared with the R180. It's curious Subaru who also uses the Fuji produced differential seems to follow the exact same application for intended horsepower and torque that Datsun/Nissan did back 45 years ago. Isn't that exactly what I just said? The head was designed well for what it was intended to do. It is a "problem" created by using something outside of its intended purpose. I didn't call it a flaw, or a mistake, just a problem to solve when you're using a design for something it wasn't meant to do. You're getting hung up on the word problem and assuming I meant it was Nissan's problem. It's a challenge/hurdle/consideration/difficulty that you must take into account when building a high performance engine. The traction of a stock 240Z is not a problem at all, but if you try to run 9s in the 1/4 with one, traction becomes a problem. It's the same thing. We've probably threadjacked enough with our contest in pedantry, so I'll stop now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.