Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Chickenman last won the day on February 25 2016

Chickenman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

194 Excellent


About Chickenman

  • Rank
    Registered User


  • Map Location
    Metro Vancouver, BC


  • Gender
  • Interests
    1978 Federal 280Z

My Z Cars

  • Zcars Owned

Recent Profile Visitors

2,484 profile views
  1. Runs rich, wont rev past 2-3k

    Hmmm... you know the Thermo Time switch and the engine CTS split into bullet connectors about 12" from the sensors. You can get the bullet connectors plugged in wrong. Then the Thermo Time switch is hooked into the CLT sensor pins on the ECU. Car will run Pig Rich . Edit: Oooops... already been covered. You may want to Triple check that. Posts #46 thru #48. Tricked me up on once my 1976 280Z and car ran Pig Rich. BTW, picture in Post #48 is from my 1976 Federal model 280Z... after I sorted out the crossed Bullet connectors.
  2. Brake upgrade

    ^ That's some nice info about CarboTech. Thanks for sharing. I'm, running Z32 calipers up front and have a spare set of used pads. May send the backing plates off to CarboTech to get some Track pads made. How much does this usually cost?
  3. Water pump comparison

    If you subscribe to engineering magazines like Racecar Engineering and Race Engine Tech, they often have articles on Cooling system design. Circle Track Racing also has very good articles. The testing has already been done. You just have to find the articles. BTW... the stamped steel designs always fall to the bottom of the tests. It's not a real surprise is it? Look how complex Compressor wheels are on a Turbo. W/Pumps are the exact same thing. Only thye move a Liquid, not air. Same principles apply though. W/Pump design gets very, very critical. It is surprising how the smallest detail can affect pump efficiency. All of your Top Racing w/pimps use CNC designed impellers and Volutes these days. Equal flow, block pressure and Anti Cavitation are all areas that must be addressed. Impellor to Volute clearances are very critical. The lack of the back plate of those Stamped " Paddle wheels " greatly affects their efficiency. http://www.hotrod.com/articles/ctrp-0404-water-pump/
  4. What is this?

    Doctor gave me one of these the last time I had a Medical.. If your aim isn't straight.....
  5. I now have a Crane HI-6S MultiSpark inductive box combined with the MSD Blaster 2 coil. Spark output is much better. However, I will be switching the MSD Blaster coil to a Crane LX91 E-core. That is the recommended coil for the Crane HI-6S and is a much better match spec wise. Spark output with the LX91 coil should be much higher. than with the MSD coil I also have a Crane Fireball CDI box with a PS92 Race coil. That will REALLY fry your wienies in a hurry. It's over kill on my 10.3 CR NA engine. The HI-6s inductive box is more that strong enough. I may sell the CDI setup to one of my Turbo buddies. It would be perfect for a High Boost Turbo application.
  6. The plug you want is NGK BPR6ES. Do NOT get BPR6ES-11 . The 11 actually stand for 1.1mm , which is a pre-gap of .041". In NGK numbering, no suffice on the end ( Like 11 ) designates a standard gap of .031". The 1.1 mm plugs should not be gapped down to .030". It puts a weird angle of the side electrode and causes faster wear on the side electrode tip. You always want resistor plugs on any Modern car. Less EMI and they will foul less than non-resistor plugs. Lastly, the MSD Blaster 2 coil is not a great choice for a non-CDI ignition. Without getting too technical, it just isn't a good match in electrical specifications to your Unilite or any early Generation electronic ignition boxs. It is designed to be used with CDI boxes or high powered Modern Inductive boxes. Inductive ignitions are very sensitive to the coil used. They require a higher Primary resistance than a CDI coil and a different turns ratio. I had an MSD Blaster 2 coil on my 1976 280Z for a while. And the stock Nissan 280Z coil actually put out a better spark. Why? Because it was a better match to the factory ignition box.
  7. MIke W. With inductive electronic ignitions, the ignition Module has a HUGE influence on how strong the spark energy is. Early trignition boxes like the 1975 and 1976 models flowed very little current. In the order of 2 Amps maximum. That's no better than a stock points system. Spark plug gap on the 1975 and 1976 models is factory recommended .030" to .032". In 1977 and 1978 models, the Trignition box was updated and is much more powerful. With those model years the recommended gap is .042" The Unilite is an early generation model and also does not have much Spark energy. So you need to run a smaller gap. Add in an exteranl MSD or other CDI box, and the picture is entirely different.
  8. rotella t4 oil

    The domestic scene was flooded with this problem in the mid-2000's. SBC's and BBC's were particularly prone to the Cam eating issue. That is because they have a smaller lifter diameter than Ford's and Dodge engines. It affected Muscle Cars and Hot Rods with GM motors the worst In Nascar racing, the Dodge engines had a real advantage when they first started using restrictor plate engines in the 80's. Dodge had the largest diameter lifters of the three engine Manufacturers, and it was a huge advantage for Dodge for a while. Ford had the second largests lifter and GM was just screwed ( Nascar engines wee production based and based on stock dimensions ) Restrictor plate engines required Camshaft profiles that had really fast acceleration ramps to maximise the Lift area under the valve. GM was at a disadvantage because of their smaller lifter diameter. It increased side loadings on the Lifter and overall pressure on the Cam lobe. There were a few years in the early to mid 90's when GM SB2 engines were popping right left and center because of the Lifter design, and even the best Racing oils ( Full synthetic ) at that time couldn't keep up with the massive Valve accelerations they were using. Of course Nascar is very restrictive, so GM was stuck ( for a few years ) with their bad design. It was around this time that Joe Gibbs Racing started developing their own purpose built oils for the Nascar GM engines. Valvetrain failures decreased on the JGR engines and they dominated for a while. In later years GM came out with some re-designed engines. In 2007 they introduced the RO7. Nascar rules had relaxed a bit bye then and they were allowed to build essentially " Purpose built Race engines" . The Ro7 was a major redesign of the original SBC, which was still based on the original 1955 dimensions. All that got re-designed with the RO7. One thing they did immediately was address limitations in the Valve train and larger diameter lifters were incorporated. Some interesting reading on the RO7. http://www.machinedesign.com/automotive/chevy-s-r07-racing-engine-chip-old-small-block BTW... when Toyota was allowed to build a V8 for Nascar ( they didn't have a suitable production V8 ) they took full advantage and designed a clean sheet design that had GM and Ford sh**ting bricks. Toyota was so far ahead in design, that GM figured it would take them 5 years of work just to catch up. The engine block cooling passages used a foundry design that GM couldn't hope to replicate without a complete re-design of their foundries. They just didn't have the technology Some of the Industrial espionage going on behind closed doors is very interesting. Such as when JGR suddenly switched to Toyota engines in 2007, after being a long time GM supported Team. GM was pissed. But apparently JGR had seen the design specs of the new GM RO7 and the new Toyota engines and realised that GM was fracked big time. And about a year later... a Toyota Nascar engine mysteriously went missing while being transported back to TRD ( Toyota Racing Development ) . It's all rather Hush Hush... but apparently said Toyota engine was " accidentally " delivered to a GM Lab.... ( Not kidding its' all out in the open now.... but a huge scandal at the time ). But I digress... because it's 2:30 AM and I tend to Ramble on when I suffer from insomnia....
  9. rotella t4 oil

    Sulphur would probably eat the soft metals in the rod and main bearings. But pretty sure that Diff oil has a pretty high level of Phosphates in it as well. Phosphates are typically found in high pressure lubricants. The Ford Gl-5 stuff stinks of Sulphur. But it's a good diff lube.
  10. rotella t4 oil

    I recently switched to Motul 8100 Excess 10w-40 on my Audi Turbo. Engine has 256,000 KM ( on original Turbo, block and head ) ,. It's been boostin 15 to 20 psi since the 125,000 KM mark. It was starting to use a little oil with the Rotella T6 5w-40, so I switched to a 10w-40. The Motul is definitely on the thicker end range of a 10w-40, for cold pour point. I'll have to see if oil consumption decreases with the thicker blend oil.
  11. rotella t4 oil

    Excellent technical article from Joe Gibbs oil that explains the whole ZDDP controversy, Modern oils vs Older oils and choices of oils for different engines. RacingOil101.pdf
  12. rotella t4 oil

    Usually Imports have much lighter Valve train components than domestic cars. And less lift. The new oils are adequate ( barely ) on stock Valve Trains. They are inadequate with higher pressure Valve Trains. Domestics are effected more than Imports. Heavier components, higher valve lift and stronger valve springs. A modern 4 valve Import engine has very little little valve lift compared to a Domestic 2 valve engine. L-series aren't immune to the issue. Especially if you raise spring pressure or even alter the Cam profile with stock springs. More aggressive acceleration ramps also expose the weakness of low ZDDP oils. We are fortunate that Datsun had REALLY good metallurgy back when they built this Valvetrain. But out engines are not immune. Lots of horror stories of flattened cam lobes on L-4's and L-6's, primarily with stronger valve springs, higher lift and duration cams and Energy Star oils. OEM Nissan cams affected as well. Not just the POS CWC cores. Note: Stock engines will probably be just be fine on these new oils. In fact the oil manufactures have pointed this out in their test Data. The new oils will work fine on Modern Flat Tappet, Bucket or Finger follower valve trains. It's what they DON't tell you that is important. These tests are done ONLy on stock engines. And only on specific types of engines. Modified HP engines or Vintage engines are not their concern at all. And they certainly don't test high performance engines such as the old BBC 427's, Boss 302's, or any 70's Muscle car engines. And modified engines or engines used for Track Days? You're living on borrowed time with modern SM/SN Energy Star motor oils with reduced ZDDP. Turbos' also pound the snot out of oil. High Temperature Shear Protection ( HTSP ) is something that you have to be very aware of in Turbo engines. Shell Rotella T6 ( Full synthetic ) excels in that area, which is why it's very popular with the Turbo enthusiasts and Bike enthusiasts. It's classified as an Heavy Duty Engine Oil ( HDEO ) primarily for use in Diesel engines, but acceptable for use in older vehicles ( Pre-2006 because of the EPA regulations ) Unfortunately the Rotella T6 Full Synthetic comes in limited weights. ( At least in Canada ) . The 5w-40 is a bit too thin for the older engines like an L-series, particularly as they age. and the bearing clearances open up. ( It's the cold pour point, the " 5w " that is the issue ) . A good Ester 10w-40 with higher levels of ZDDP is ideal for our motors. Both Turbo and non-Turbo. Depending on ambient temps of course. Most of us don't drive our Z cars in the dead of winter. Motul, Amsoil, Redline, Joe Gibbs racing all make excellent full Ester 10w-40 Synthetic oils. The Joe Gibbs ( Driven ) oils are a new mPAO formula which is superior to PAO synthetics.
  13. rotella t4 oil

    The ZDDP kills Catalytic converters is just another example of " Internet misinformation " or " Partial information ". Catalytic converters are a consumable product. Just like Brake pads or Clutches. Thye have a finite Lifespan. Alway have... alway will have. ZDDP does not " Kill " Catalytic converters. Cars have had Catalytic converters since the Mid 1970's and the oils back then had a hell of a lot more ZDDP in them back then. They lasted fine back then and still do. The only reason for the reduction in ZDDP in Motor oils is because the EPA upped the testing standard for Catalytics from 100,000 miles to 150,000 miles in the mid 2000's. Now one of the main materials of a Catalytic converter is Platinum. Platinum is freakin' expensive. Almost equal to the cost of Gold per once. Now ZDDP does slowly, very slowly degrade the performance of the Platinum Catalyst. But it takes a super long time and Manufacturers used just enough Platinum to last 100,000 miles and still pass the EPA test. But when the EPA decided to raise the test standards to 150,000 miles . No problem, the engineers could meet that standard. They just had to use more Platinum in the Honeycomb Matrix. So this was just an engineering problem.... and then the " Bean Counters " got involve. They didn't want to fork out more money for added Platinum. And studies had shown that if you reduced the amount of ZDDP in the oils, then you could meet the new tougher EPA test with the same Catalytic converters and amounts of Platinum in them. Note: ZDDP's main function is to reduce metal to metal contact in extreme load situations. It is a VERY effective extreme pressure agent. The interface between a flat tappet lifter and camsahft, or sliding finger follower style Valvetrain is the highest load pressure point in an engine. Since all of the BIg 3 manufactures had been using Roller Lifter or Roller follower Valve Trains since the late 80's to early 90's, this sounded like a great idea to the Bean Counters. Make an oil with less ZDDP and problem solved. The oil makers were on board with this as they could save a couple of pennies in additive amounts of ZDDP in each bottle of oil. Only 1 company objected. GM. They did not agree with the amount of ZDDP reduction that the oil companies and EPA had proposed. They were worried about, older engines... that still used Flat Tappet Cams. Like those in GM SBC.BBC,, and Pontiac and Buick engines still being used buy Vintage car owners, hot rodders and Racers. And also in older trucks, generators and agriculture for pumping stations etc They actually proposed a les strict Oil standard in ZDDP reduction , that would be compatible with older flat tappet Cams ( and finger followers ) and could meet the the new 150,000 mile Catalytic tests.... with only a slight increase in Platinum amount required, compared to the Current SG/SH oils. But this proposal was shot down by the EPA and other manufacturers. Vintage cars, old vehicles and Lord forbid " Racers ???? F**k them. Let them all buy new Jelly Bean cars. They're all a bunch of degenerate heathens. And this in the mid-2000's, you started seeing the " Great Camshaft Meltdown " with horror stories of Hot Rods and High Performance engines grinding their Camshafts into mush. Problem was exacerbated with High Lift cams and stiffer Valve springs. But fear not. The Oil companies came back with a solution. They would introduce new " Specialty Oils " , that did not have to the new Energy Star ( SM/SN API rating ) . So they basically introduced an old formula oil, then slapped some fancy stickers on it and called it " Hot Rod " oils. And of course they charged double the money, because this was " Special Oil "...... and they had the Hot Rodders, Muscle Car and Vintage enthusiasts by the balls. PT Barnum would have been proud... So in short... if you have a pre 2006 car, older higher Zinc oils won't " Kill " your Catalytic converter. At least not very quickly. If you have a later model car and are concerned about maintaining the Emissions warranty for 150,000 miles ... then you may want to use a new Energy Star rated SM/SN oil. Of course if you do ANY modifications to the valve train. All bets are off. Oh, and if you have a new car with Direct Fuel Injection? Good Luck. Better find out how the High Pressure Injection Pump ( Up to 1,660 PSI ) is made. The bosch systems ( Audi/VW. BMW, Mercedes Porsche and others ) use a Bucket lifter in the High Pressure pump. Guess what... they are wearing out in as little as 20,000 miles. Even with numerous recalls on DI Injection pumps and " Diamond Like Coatings " being spayed on the buckets,. All because the new oils are SH*TE. It's a HUGE industry problem. Especially in Europe on the Autobahns. Higher speeds, higher engine temps, oil thins out.... buh bye $2,000 to $3,000 dollar injection pump. Some of the Japanese manufactures were smarter. They used Roller Tipped actuators to operate the High Pressure pump. No issues with reduced ZDDP. FWIW. BTW, all of this information is available in SAE White Papers and Technical articles like Engine Tech and Race Car engineering. Also covered on dedicated sites such as " Bob Is The Oil Guy ", Despite the rather strange name, BITOG is one of THE best sites for accurate lubrication information. Where actual Chemical, Mechanical and Petroleum engineers contribute regularly. an Laboratory Testing results are abundant. Well worth a visit and a long read. https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  14. rotella t4 oil

    540rat?? .... bwaaa Haaa Haaaa. Good one.
  15. Temp Gauge Warning Idiot Lamp

    Our MCI Tour Buses had a 100 DB " Sonalert " for low air pressure. That will get your attention fast. Often used on Race cars. Mallory's " Specialty Sounds : " Piezo series has 15 various sounds, so you can have individual alarms for level of severity or function. All the way from Bird Chirps and Warbles to Police Sirens. http://www.mallory-sonalert.com/AVBySeries.aspx