Dan Baldwin

My advice: spend money and effort elsewhere and you will get FAR more power for FAR less money, FAR sooner. Consider that GM has WAY more qualified personnel, prototyping capability, measuring equipment, etc. than you do. Better to maximize CR with what you've got, IMO.

Tires conduct electricity. Which is why you are protected in a car. Lightning has a path to ground. If it didn't, lightning strikes of cars would be fatally destructive events. One of the properties that have to be designed into tires is proper conductivity. Regarding rotaries and torque, the main reason they don't make much is low displacement. 159 lb-ft is tremendous for 1.3 liters! But of course some would argue 2.6 to be a better effective displacement since the each rotor has a "power stroke" for each crank rev. Anyway, Make a 3.5 liter rotary and it'll make a lot more torque. Of course the fuel mileage would be truly abysmal!

I had Jag 2" SUs on my 3.1 for a while. Top end pull was improved somewhat, but I never really had them properly dialled in. IIRC, with the 2"ers it no longer ran out of steam at 6000rpm. The switch from 2"ers to triples was much more significant than going from stock Hitachi SU clones to the 2"ers, but like I said, I never really tuned them properly (i.e., with a dyno).

I don't think anyone has done as much development with the L6 as Sunbelt has, so I'd recommend them. Then again, turbo'd you should be able to make 300rwhp with a stock cylinder head.

RX-8 has a two-rotor. Which is why it's kinda slow in addition to being extremely fuel-thirsty! We don't get/never got a 3-rotor anything.

Haven't actually sat in a G35. One thing I do love about the 350Z is the SEAT. LOVE that thing! To me it is already too high, though, so I'm sure I'd hate the G35's driving position. Too-high seat is one reason I don't have a 4-door E36 M3, that along with too-light steering. FWIW, I think the new Supra is DEAD. At least for the U.S. And I'm sure Mazda's not to eager to launch a new RX-7 what with RX-8s languishing at dealerships. That engine WOULD be the bomb in a sub-2400 lb. sports car. With the 3000 lb. RX-8 (not bad for a 4-door sport coupe), you get 95mph 1/4 mile performance with sub 20mpg mileage. Who's gonna buy THAT? With equal-talent drivers, no way the 350Z will hang with a Corvette. S2000 and Boxster are a different story, but I still like both those cars better. The latest M3 is yet another step in the WRONG direction if you ask me. 3600 lb.? Forget it. Anyhoo, none of those cars give me any worries at the track:)

Consider yourself lucky with your rotary reliability! Let it be kown that the car I had came complete with maintenence records, and I continued with the 3k mile oil changes, coolant flushes, yadda yadda... I did make the mistake of not researching 2nd gen RX reliability. They are KNOWN to have issues with the oil feedline to the rotors. To the point that a lot of owners actually run a mixture of fuel and oil in the gas tank to ensure rotor lubrication! My sources assure me that it is perfectly normal for well-maintained rotarys to expire (apex seal failure) around 100k miles. Also, MOST piston engines will live practically forever with little maintenence beyond ensuring they're not run out of oil or run hot. The Razor would be cool! If it weren't so durned ugly. The Crossfire just looks great (except the chrome windshield surround), way cooler'n the 350Z, I think. Too expensive, yes. But so is the 350Z. I still can't comprehend why anyone wouldn't opt for the G35 coupe instead. What'd be cool would be if we could get the Smart Coupe and/or Roadster. Those things are SWEET! Instead we're getting a Smart SUV (groan).

1st gen Z was replaced in 1979, by the RX-7, no question. Rotary reliability? Still iffy. My 90 convertible blew its apex seals right at 100k miles. Apparently that's the approximate life expectancy. Those who track the 3rd gen 7s just accept that they have to replace the "bottom end" Far cry from the indestructible L6! I love the Crossfire! Way cooler than the 350Z, imo. A good 200 lb. lighter, too. Now if they'd only drop the Hemi into it...

A 4 bbl makes perfect sense sitting atop a V8. On an inline 6 it makes NO sense. First the air has to make an immediate 90 degree turn once it's through the carb, and then it has to feed 6 intake ports evenly. And there's no room for a decent-flowing air filter on top of it either. A very poor choice for performance, IMO.

Go here for some tranny ratio data: http://www.geocities.com/z_design_studio/ COOL, huh? I put an 84 truck tranny (gearset, anyway) in my 240Z mit 3.1 liter monster motor. It has somewhat close 1-4 spacing, like the later ZX boxes, and also has the close 4-5 like the earlier 280Z/early ZX 5-speed. Best of both worlds! I like the later 280ZX 5-speed, but it was killing me at Watkins Glen's long back straight (too tall 5th gear). So I got the truck 'box. IMO, any Z 5-speed is better than the 4-speed.

That's what everybody says, making excuses for the unacceptably (to me) overweight Z. BUT, the Miata weighs 2400 lb., and the MR-2 Spyder weighs 2200 lb. *SURELY* Nissan *COULD* have made a 2600 lb. V6 closed-roof sports car! A 1970 Corvette weighed 3200 lb. What does a 2004 model weigh? 3200 lb.! Despite all the talk about reviving the character of the 240Z, Nissan simply chose to use the 350Z as another way to market their luxury sedan. A 2-seat luxo/sport sedan is NOT what I had in mind. Again, I know it's a very good car (I've driven one), it's just not a Z. It's a ZX.

350Z? I was/am disappointed. Way too heavy and less than attractive IMO. You can spend the same money and get a G35 with the 6-speed and Brembos and have a much better-looking car that is much more utilitarian and only weighs ~150 lb. more. They should've cleaned up Jerry Hirschburg's concept. It was a lot smaller and had very nice proportions, it only needed some work on the headlights and grill opening. The VQ engine in a shortened/lightened Sylvia (240SX) platform would've been perfect! Instead they went with a luxury sedan platform. Durn. Still, the 350Z IS a very good and capable car. But just imagine the performance if it had come in at, say, 2600 lb. instead of 3300! NOBODY (well, maybe Toyota's MR-2 Spyder and Mazda's Miata) selling performance cars in the U.S. today is paying ANY attention to the most important performance parameter, WEIGHT. Which is one reason my track car is 34 years old:) Motorcycle enthusiasts are (believe it or not) far more sophisticated. If a new sportbike is even 5% overweight, it's borderline unacceptable. In cars, apparently adding 1000 lb. is OK! All the mags raved about how the new Z was a return to 240Z values. I gotta call B.S. on that. OK, rant over...

I agree that there is no substitute for cubic inches. But in that case why even BOTHER with the L24? You're talking about a full rebuild, no? My point was that it'd be just as easy and not much more expensive (if any) to drop in an L28. Also, why bother with a v6? A small-block with aluminum heads reportedly weighs about the same as the Nissan inline 6. BTW, is the GM 2.8 an "odd-fire" v6? If so, it's one of the few internal combustion engines I've ever heard that positively turns my stomach! The worst exhaust note EVER! I'm sure you must be talking about the 3.8 or maybe the 4.3 liter v6, no? Still, I don't know why you would choose that over a small-block V8. My recommendation remains: if you're going to do any tweaking on a Nissan OHC inline 6, it may as well be the L28. They're still easy enough to find, and one from the junkyard shouldn't cost you as much as the pistons, anyway. Or you could just buy a running one and cut your effort and costs and get the same hp results you would've gotten tweaking the L24.

Get an L28 block and build on that. It sounds like you're planning on a rebuild anyway, the additional cost of getting an L28 should be very small. If you want hypereutectic pistons, overbore .120 and use KA24E pistons with L20A rods. or use the LD28 crank and L24 rods for 3.1 liters. If you're rebuilding the L24, just give it a .040 (1mm) overbore and use Nissan L24+1mm pistons is my official recommendation. Go here for more info on Z cylinder heads, and bore/stroke combinations for the L28 http://www.zcluboftexas.org/ Click on "about the Z car", then "L28 bore/stroke combinations".

I believe that the L24 can't be overbored as the L28. 3mm isn't a problem with the L28, but isn't recommended for the L24. This is only what I've heard/read, but from very reliable sources. I don't think I'd overbore more than 1mm with the L24 block.

Cars are fun, no? Non-functional vac advance isn't a problem. It only acts to give more advance under very light throttle cruise. At full throttle there's no vacuum. Your advance should be ~34 degrees max, with mechanical advance fully in. I adjusted my SUs (when I had them) exactly once per set. I'm not saying they were perfectly tuned, but the car did run well and I never tinkered with them. Not to say that yours don't need attention. You won't find a simpler carb to tune. Have you checked for air leaks? Spray some WD-40 where the throttle shafts enter the carbs and see if the engine revs up. If so, you should re-bush with oil impregnated bronze or some such. Have you removed and cleaned out the carbs? Might be worth an afternoon's effort. Checked the operation of the needle valves? Checked the carb pistons' motion? I was looking at a 510 once and the guy called it a 5-speed. He was counting reverse! Hood opening apparently requires a LONG screwdriver or prybar to lever the latch open from underneath (I've never had to do it). Best of luck to ya, sorry you're having difficulties. At the ZConvention track day I instructed a guy with a pristine all-stock 240Z, and I was VERY impressed with the performance, though I'm used to tons more power. The low-end torque of the stock 240Z was great, and it pulled fine up to ~5500 or so. Great car, great motor. Though you still won't beat a modern stock 240hp Accord with it, you'll have 1,000,000 times more fun. Then when you want to mod, the sky's the limit for performance.

You are aware that 240Z's with modified SUs have run in the 12s, NA, on pump gas, aren't you? If you're not willing or able to tweak what you've got into shape, bolting on a new set of carbs won't be a very good solution. My carb recommendation for someone with a completely stock engine? '70-'72 SUs. What condition are yours in? Checked for leaks? Steady fuel supply? Piston drop test? There is Corolla-beating performance in the stock setup! How low on compression is the one cylinder? You might consider trying to do a rebuild yourself, or dropping in a sound used 2.8 liter, which could be cheaper than 3x2 carbs, and would offer more real-world performance gain to boot.

Woulda been nice if I'd spelled it correctly! Should be "metallurgically". BTW, I'm running at ~11:1, on 93 octane pump. I think most serious L-series race motors are in the 13 - 14:1 range, so even if you're using race gas I don't think 15:1 would be a good idea. The earlier post on the use of L24 and L20 rods with L28 pistons doesn't account for the the pistons trying to occupy the same space as the cylinder head! If you're building/rebuilding anyway, I think the stroker crank should be STRONGLY considered, if performance is your goal. It's not as expensive as it has a reputation for being, and it makes a killer foundation for all the other mods (cam, carbs, headwork...).

Nate, I'd say you're pretty much on the right track. Regarding .060 (1.5mm) over pistons, I don't think there is such a thing. You do know you *could* invest in a diesel crankshaft and bore out .120 over and use KA24E (240SX/hardbody truck) pistons, with L24 rods, don't you? I've had no real overheating problems with mine over the past 8 years. Now I'm at 255rwhp, and the 260Z 3-row radiator I put in back in '95 is still doing the job even at hot track days. For a stock head, I'm partial to the N42. Makes for a good CR with no shaving required. P90 should be good, too, but will likely require serious shavage (~.080"), shimming of the cam towers, and installation of the earlier (pre-'80?) valves. N47 should also be fine, similar to N42 but has the hated exhaust liners (which may or may not cost a coupla ponies). There are different L28 blocks, the early ones (N42?) and the later F54 block. The earlier blocks are supposedly better metalurgically, and the F54 blocks ('81+?) supposedly are more rigid due to the 1-3 and 4-6 cylinders being siamesed. IMO, for your power goals either should be fine.

Tire performance is more a function of tread compound than size or aspect ratio. Of course the racy compounds will only be available in lower aspect ratios, though. I'm assuming your wheels are 14x6, no? Go to www.tirerack.com, and do a search on 205/60-14s in max performance and ultra-high performance. OK, I just did it for you, and ONE tire shows up. Yokohama AVS ES100. If you don't have to have snow-capability, this is probably the tire to get. You might check Toyo and Falken, but remember that tire BRAND doesn't say much about performance. It's the specific tire within the brand range. i.e., statements like "I put a set of B.S. Goodstones on and they're the best in the universe" really have no meaning.

If you're going to the track, it's best to have the attitude that you're doing it for the fun of it, win or lose. You will enjoy yourself more, which is what it's all about, anyway. Don't let fear of losing keep you from competing.

The head is an N42 (280Z square port). Sunbelt in Atlanta Georgia USA ported the head and did a custom cam setup on it. The cam is designed to work with lighter-than stock valve springs. This alone is supposedly worth 11 lb-ft (IIRC). Dyno results here: http://www.classiczcars.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=6881&password=&sort=7&thecat=500 The torque dip at 4200 was accompanied by a very rich condition, but only right around that rpm. I think you could use either the E88 or the P90, but the P90 will have to be shaved on the order of .080" to get a decent compression ratio.

Nobody's gonna get a Z into the 13s with a stock L6! The motor is far from stock, it's a 3.1 liter with 11:1 CR, ported head with .550"/305deg cam, and 3x2 45mm carbs. Tranny is an '84 truck 5-speed, diff is a 3.70LSD from an 87 300ZX turbo.

I went to the drags (New England Dragway in Epping NH) last Friday night with my buddy/arch-rival from COMSCC (road course time-trialling club). He's got a 260fwhp 2240 lb. Omni GLH-S. On my first ever run down a drag strip, I did a 13.519 @ 106.49! To beat his 14.097 @ 108.77. Needless to say, he was having trouble putting his power down:) My subsequent runs were quite a bit slower, as I was having fuel pressure issues (clogged filter). We lined up four times, and I won the first two and lost runs 3 and 4 (run 3 by .03 sec, and with a quicker ET). My last two runs were right at 100mph, so I think I was fuel-starved. Really pleased with that first run, though!