Administrators BRAAP Posted December 11, 2008 Author Administrators Share Posted December 11, 2008 What about a vg33et? maybe bore it out to 3.5L and put a holset on it with 25lb's of boost, that should put you somewhere around 300WHP while still being usable on the street. Holy Shnikeys! 25lbs of boost on a VG33ET displacing 3.5 liters?!?! That should be upwards of 400+ WHP, which would be way cool! Thanks for the idea, but I'm wanting to start out with a little more displacement, at least 4.5L and I am pretty set on having an engine with a couple more cylinders. Then, if and when I decide to add boost down the road, a mere 8-12 lbs of boost will deliver in the neighborhood of 500HP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted December 11, 2008 Author Administrators Share Posted December 11, 2008 Why not put the M112 on the VH? Mm Hmmm... I lohck-it ah-laht... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 Well, then, if you REALLY want to put the V8 in..... god I don;t believe I'm gonna say this, because I REALLY WANT to see the GigantorZ32.. Set it up for the smallblock. You WILL build the flat plane motor eventually. You Will. And then its just a pick and a plant away from going into the Fair Lady. put da chebbie in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoov100 Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 Do i see a F1 motor in your future? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z1 zonly Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 I see several ways to go about this, all equally badass. 1) Like Daeron said, semi-stock SBC for now and do the flat plane crank long term. 2) Semi-stock VH swap on the Z32 immediately. Do a 'quick-and-dirty' flat plane crank proof of concept on an SBC in another Z car. Then do one for a VH and go all-out, ultimately swapping it in the Z32. 3) M112 on the VH, yumm... 4) If you succumb to mediocrity and don't do anything nuts, I say VH. It's so refined! You could always plumb a turbo in... BTW, there's so much techno babble in the flat plane crank thread that I'll just post this here. THIS is the sound you NEED!!!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BghVb2fM8dY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted December 13, 2008 Author Administrators Share Posted December 13, 2008 Stabbed the 5.3 LM7 into the engine bay of the Z-32 V-8 mock up mule. Short story is that it fits just a terribly as a traditional SBC! Even tried it with a T-56 bell housing on the block, couldn't get it in the car with the bell housing attached! 1) 5.3 motor mounts lined perfectly up with the Z-32 mount pads on the cross member, puts the bell housing approx 1” off the firewall. 2) Engine is sitting on the oil pan, on the rack and pinion. 3) Engine needs to drop down approx 2-3” from this elevation, meaning a cut out in the mid section of the pan to drop the engine. 4) Sump is currently 2” below the cross member, which means the sump would need to be shortened approx 4”! 5) The F-body sump runs too far forward and would need to be cut way back, ending up like the truck pan once it was modified, shallow and not much sump left. 6 one, half dozen the other I guess. 6) The GTO front sump pan might work, again after being modified to allow the engine to sit lower, and if the cross member was left alone, would move the engine forward approx 6-7 inches! If the cross member was modified such as another member did for his Z-32, the engine would only need to be moved forward approx 4-5 inches, (I think he did it to clear the front sump of the SR20, but ended up going Turbo LT1 instead and kept the modified cross member). At any rate, The damper would be close to flush with the front core support. Radiator mounting location will take some savvy strategery, and then having the engine that far forward?... 7) With the bell housing mating surface flush with the firewall, the T-56 shifter will need a 2” dog leg to come out in the OE location. In its current position as pictured, it will need approx a 3” dog leg. In using the front sump pan, it will need?... and end up with more of an up and down motion rather than fore and aft. Unless some form of extended remote shifter can be fabricated like the Z-32 uses currently? 8) Dropping the cross member to gain some clearance and set the engine at the correct elevation looks ideal on the surface, but doing so also affects the front suspension geometry, especially when wanting to drop the cross member 2”! Would stir up all kinds of geometry issues… Friggin rack and pinion is too darn high and too far rearward in the engine bay making the Z-32 not so Hybrid friendly… ARRGHHH… Having now stabbed an L-26, a traditional SBC, and now a Gen III 5.3 in the engine bay of a Z-32, for those willing to gut out under the dash, possibly loosing some of the OE climate control ducting, etc, cutting the firewall is hands down the best alternative from many perspectives. This stubborn Zed Head is dead set on NOT cutting the firewall, even if that means installing the brides-maid instead of the Bride!.... Up next, the VH45DE, and will revisit the traditional SBC mock up, weather permitting. We are supposed be getting a big storm over the next few days... Top view; DEEP sump of the truck pan; Driver side pan perspective; Passenger side pan perspective; Again; Trans perspective; Bell housing wont fit at this elevation!; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted December 13, 2008 Author Administrators Share Posted December 13, 2008 I spent a few more minutes studying this truck oil pan and what regions of the pan I need to modify for this fit. Here is what I came up with. Area in green needs to be removed, Magenta is just reference boundary points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators RTz Posted December 13, 2008 Administrators Share Posted December 13, 2008 Wouldn't this create an oil 'trap'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheelman Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 What about using a dry sump system? Wheelman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 Hey, bridesmaid was always good enough for me!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted December 14, 2008 Author Administrators Share Posted December 14, 2008 Hey, bridesmaid was always good enough for me!!!! :lmao: Wouldn't this create an oil 'trap'? Ron, Good point. I see two things here; 1) The front of the sump could remain flat eliminating that trap. 2) Add a separate drain plug to that forward “trap†section, just as the SBF oil pans pictured below. (Looks like the SBF might be an easier bolt in for a Z-32?...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tube80z Posted December 14, 2008 Share Posted December 14, 2008 Dropping the cross member to gain some clearance and set the engine at the correct elevation looks ideal on the surface, but doing so also affects the front suspension geometry, especially when wanting to drop the cross member 2â€! Would stir up all kinds of geometry issues… Friggin rack and pinion is too darn high and too far rearward in the engine bay making the Z-32 not so Hybrid friendly… So just thinking out loud. It looks like you need a new crossmember and a lot of oil pan work. For moving the rack would it be possible to make adapters to move the tie rods, so the rack was lower and further forward? Generally you can move a rear steer rack forward with little problem other than increasing ackerman. But I have no experience with a Z32 so I'd believe that about as much as I'd believe the Vh45 is 100 lbs lighter Another option (one that I'm looking at for something else) is a roadsteresque solution. Front steer rack with rockers that connect to the current tie-rods. Other than that I'm tapped out. I looked and the inside of one of these cars once and I can see why you don't want to work on the firewall and the tunnel. Cary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted December 14, 2008 Share Posted December 14, 2008 Another option (one that I'm looking at for something else) is a roadsteresque solution. Front steer rack with rockers that connect to the current tie-rods. Cary I was also thinking of suggesting this, but couldn't find a way to word it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators RTz Posted December 14, 2008 Administrators Share Posted December 14, 2008 How 'bout stepper motors on the front wheels... steer by wire, baby! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tube80z Posted December 14, 2008 Share Posted December 14, 2008 How 'bout stepper motors on the front wheels... steer by wire, baby! That's not too far from the toyota and honda power steering systems. Been looking at that possibly for the race car. Just need to know how to change the feel. Cary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted December 15, 2008 Author Administrators Share Posted December 15, 2008 So just thinking out loud. It looks like you need a new crossmember and a lot of oil pan work. For moving the rack would it be possible to make adapters to move the tie rods, so the rack was lower and further forward? Generally you can move a rear steer rack forward with little problem other than increasing ackerman. But I have no experience with a Z32 so I'd believe that about as much as I'd believe the Vh45 is 100 lbs lighter Another option (one that I'm looking at for something else) is a roadsteresque solution. Front steer rack with rockers that connect to the current tie-rods. Other than that I'm tapped out. I looked and the inside of one of these cars once and I can see why you don't want to work on the firewall and the tunnel. Cary Thanks for the input Cary. Gives me some things to think about. I would like to plot out the front suspension geometry and then possibly look at possibly dropping the cross member/rack 1†and see if that will have much of a negative influence. Sorry, no further updates on the VH fitment yet. Probably wont happen till some time after this coming weekend. Weather is little colder than I prefer to work in right now, plus a few other projects that need immediate attention are taking my time as I didn’t adequately prepare for the cold snap we are under. Temps hovering around 23 deg. Fahrenheit w/5-15 mph gusts. ... and the Z-32 mockup mule is outside!… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 For some reason, as I was waiting for the thread to load just now, I started hearing a voice call, "Ricola" style..... "Tuuuuuube Fraaaaaaame....." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted December 16, 2008 Author Administrators Share Posted December 16, 2008 For some reason, as I was waiting for the thread to load just now, I started hearing a voice call, "Ricola" style..... "Tuuuuuube Fraaaaaaame....." Yes… yes… YES!!! Except… This is supposed to be a street car, as nice and pleasant as it was when it came off the showroom floor and the conversion is to be as much of a “bolt-in” as possible, quick and easy, preferably no cutting, in particular, no cutting of the bloody firewall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoov100 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 if you go tube front xmember i know a guy down under that sells fully adjustable heim joint steering systems for the z32 if your interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted January 1, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted January 1, 2009 Latest update. Weather! I’m sure most of you have seen or heard about the snow/freezing rain the Pacific Northwest was blasted with, so not really much of any progress other than removing the LM7 from the engine bay so my father could eye ball it. I am very VERY much leaning towards the LSx. The LSx is such an incredibly wonderfully designed power-plant. One of the easiest to maintain/disassemble power plants I have had the pleasure to turn wrench on. Its architecture, from an engineering perspective, is pure genius! The simplistic approach to its design lending itself to easy maintenance, incredible performance, etc. I’m not ruling out the VH45DE as an option, but after removing it form the Q-ship, stripping it down, etc, it is a very VERY complex power-plant and especially compared to the LSx, maintenance and parts accessibility was not very high up on the design criteria and its aftermarket support is not as diverse. For what a set of after-market camshafts will cost for the VH45DE, I could purchase a used 6L LQ4 engine AND an aftermarket camshaft for it! The LSx is so much more plentiful than the VH45DE, considerably more aftermarket support, and if I can get one installed as essentially a bolt in without having to cut the firewall, I think there is a market for a basic LS-x Z-32 Hybrid kit. The VH45DE has the all-Nissan-V-8 WOW factor going for it, can fit with modifying the cross member and an adapter plate for the Z-32 5 speed, (no shifter, speedo or driveline issues to deal with) but will still need a custom intake to fit under the stock hood. 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.