Ok engine builders of Great Britain you’re on!

[SKiddell]

Yes I did thanks only to be confronted by another....to be sorted tomorrow

 

[grolls]

Grolls, you really like your chestnuts dont you, even the old ones
And for the record.....Nissan motorsport were using throttle bodies in the early 70's on Z's so its hardly modern equipment.

Sorry m8, but absolute bowlucks, Did the 70/80's have dyno and real time fuel/air burn rates,ignition systems, plugs, leads, tyres that are that sticky( bar slicks and inters) consistant fuel quality,Carbon fibre to the weight we have it today,engineering to the tolerances we have today and of course the learning curve we have all had? did we fook. Lets face it if I had the money to burn, the inclination, the practice and the best engineering in the world available to me I could be a conteder for the number 1 spot in the z hall of fame, after all I do seem to remember MF telling me break out times were used so it becomes " not the money but the quality of driver"

Don't get me wrong as I would not wish to take away what you have achieved so far, but the people that set so tuff a record to beat 20 years ago I think should stand in the hall of fame for ever because of what they did through dedication and hard work with what they had to hand and not through tecnoligical advances.

PS, did Dean Botterel have an okey kokey 2000 fuel injection system?

 

[SKiddell]

Grolls, how many times do we have to go around this roundabout? its been discussed to death, what your proposing is absolutely absurd and ridiculous plus it has nothing to do with the title of this thread, its just baiting...., its 03.32 in the morning and I have just come in from doing work on the car ready for next Sundays drag challenge.........whats that you say about

dedication and hard work

I did write a long long post pulling your argument apart (once again) but deleted it because you'll only ramble on about sticky tyres and fuel injection for the umpteenth time (yawn, yawn).....plus I just can't be arsed....so in order to put this fiasco to bed and get on with some good engine discussion please read the statement below

I hearby agree with all Grolls says, he is right I am wrong, I have cheated by using modern technology with no personal effort what so ever and I hereby strip my self of all club records and declare that from now on, ony stock cars with originally fitted tyres and fuel (in original Nissan colours) should be eligable for the hall of fame.


Oh BTW

I do seem to remember MF telling me break out times were used so it becomes " not the money but the quality of driver"

That refers to the "Drag Challenge" and not the "Hall Of Fame".....two very differant set of rules, nether of which you seem to understand.

 

[status]

Was that my car you were talking about Skids,might even make it to the pod one sunday or over north weald when they do it as its nearer,just deciding if im gonner get my head welded

 

[zedhead260]

Did the 70/80's have dyno and real time fuel/air burn rates, ignition systems, plugs, leads, tyres that are that sticky (bar slicks and inters) consistent fuel quality, carbon fibre to the weight we have it today, engineering to the tolerances we have today and of course the learning curve we have all had? Did we fook.

“During the late 1970s the French auto maker Renault introduced the turbocharged engine to Formula One racing. Turbocharging was not a new idea nor was the application of turbocharging new to racing, but Renault showed that turbocharged engines could be fuel efficient, reliable, and produce tremendous amounts of horsepower from very small engine capacities. By the early eighties, all competitors in Formula One racing had switched from conventional engines to turbocharged engines. This influenced the sports prototype designers especially since the F.I.A. had introduced the Group C rules (C for Consumption) for sports prototypes that put a fuel consumption limit of 60 liter's per 100 kilometers of racing. The Group C rules did not set maximum engine capacity, and the majority of engine manufacturers embraced the turbocharger as a way of producing large amounts of reliable horsepower within the fuel limits.
Another innovation that would fundamentally change the way sports prototypes were designed was introduced in 1977 by the Lotus Formula One team. Peter Wright and the Lotus design team introduced for the 1977 season the Lotus 78 “wing car”. The Lotus 78’s sidepods were shaped like upside down wings and made use of the well known aerodynamic effect that the lift of a wing increases with decreasing ground proximity (called the ground effect). This created massive amounts of downforce underneath the car which boosted cornering speeds tremendously. The best thing was that it was with very little drag penalty. A standard wing produces more pounds of drag per pound of downforce (therefore a less efficient lift to drag ratio, L/D) in comparison with a contoured underbody (the underbody / underwing is sometimes also called a ground effect tunnel) run in close proximity to the ground. Not to mention the fact that only a small pressure drop per square inch would yield loads of downforce due to the large area of the underbody that was available. Utilizing the underbody shape of the race car to produce huge amounts of downforce was revolutionary and this idea has been utilized throughout motor sports, especially in the sports prototype racing series.
The 1980s sports prototype racing car utilized all of the innovations race bred in Formula One racing in the late 1970s. High horse power, small capacity, turbocharged engines were status quo. Horse power figures of 750 or more were common, and qualifying boosted horsepower numbers of over 1000 were not unheard of. The use of composite materials, such as carbon fiber and Kevlar, introduced in the early 1980s by Ron Dennis and the McLaren Formula One team, in the construction of the chassis, wings, and body work made the prototype cars lighter and stronger. All these elements, coupled with the continued development of ground effects and aerodynamics increased cornering speeds even further. The typical 1980s sports prototype racing car had a turbocharged, mid-mounted engine, an aluminium honeycomb chassis, carbon fiber and Kevlar body work, and highly developed, high down force aerodynamics.”


Are you talking of the Z Club drag challenge here, or motorsport in general ?

the people that set so tuff a record to beat 20 years ago I think should stand in the hall of fame for ever.

They are in the Hall of Fame (just not in first place) – Steve Adams’ “carb” time will remain for all to see for a long time to come yet.

did Dean Bottriell have an okey kokey 2000 fuel injection system?

No, just a bloody great big turbo and a huge squirt of nitrous oxide – at one point the car even had “Heath Robinson Engineering” written down the side of it.

 

[grolls]

Are you talking of the Z Club drag challenge here, or motorsport in general ?
They are in the Hall of Fame (just not in first place) – Steve Adams’ “carb” time will remain for all to see for a long time to come yet.

No, just a bloody great big turbo and a huge squirt of nitrous oxide – at one point the car even had “Heath Robinson Engineering” written down the side of it.

Sorry my mistake, I did mean Steve Adams as It states "NA" and I was talking engineering for the layman not F1 or other such exotica that was only available to the few. As for swaying off topic, yes slightly sorry again, but the whole topic is about engines and builders and what they produce.

I do however feel that the whole debait reference engine tunning bits etc and what Adams did is 100% relevant as he produced a car that set incredible records that Skiddy himself has only just beaten, some many years later, so what the hell did he do that made that car so fast? I can't find much on it so maybe some kind person can share that info?


As for baiting? Moi? never!

 

[zedhead260]

Steve Adams' car is still about.

A bigger set of carb's and better tyres could see him catching Steve K (and he has a full compliment of steel panels too).

What he did which made that car so fast was to spend an inordinate amount of time perfecting every last detail of its engine build.
"Tales From The Garden Shed" ZCM spring & summer 1995 issue. The article which inspired me to build my own engine.


















...until I realised I'd bitten off more than I could chew, so got DJ to do it for me LOL (but still learnt a lot in the process).

 

[STEVE BURNS]

Those two articles were over 12 years ago and a lot of the newer mebers never saw them, they were good, and maybe would be worth reshowing in the club mag

I know a lot of the older members have already read them but hey how many members have joined since then and it would be new to them


I know that they could buy the back issues if they where available but how many would know that those articles were in there

 

[grolls]

Those two articles were over 12 years ago and a lot of the newer mebers never saw them, they were good, and maybe would be worth reshowing in the club mag
I know a lot of the older members have already read them but hey how many members have joined since then and it would be new to them
I know that they could buy the back issues if they where available but how many would know that those articles were in there

Any chance of posting them on the club side of the Forum?

 

[SKiddell]

Skiddy himself has only just beaten

Grolls LOL I love you man
Steve Adams time 13.77 .......Steve K time 13.31...... thats 0.46 of a second .

At the terminal speeds we are doing thats......NEARLY 5 car lengths.

In drag racing terms .046 of a second is HUGE

This post is only meant to highlight the fact that whilst most people think that a few tenths here and there are meaningless in reality its an eternity.

 

[grolls]

Grolls LOL I love you man
Steve Adams time 13.77 .......Steve K time 13.31...... thats 0.46 of a second .

At the terminal speeds we are doing thats......NEARLY 5 car lengths.

In drag racing terms .046 of a second is HUGE

This post is only meant to highlight the fact that whilst most people think that a few tenths here and there are meaningless in reality its an eternity.

5 car lenths is a lot, but this is the whole point, you run 2.8, injection, and an engine built by a race specialist, light weight every thing, cold air induction etc.
So how does that compare to Adams car on carbs, home built, 2.4 and all steel? I would expect Skiddy car to be in front by a long way.

Does anyone have the full spec on the Adams car?

 

[SKiddell]

and an engine built by a race specialist

What on earth are you on about (again) Dave worked the head but who on earth do you think specified all of the tollerances and designed them in, then built the final engine.....infact its had 4 differant incarnations, the latest is a block from Alan Thomas (oh here we go now, next you'll be claiming its got some magical Shinto spell cast on it).
And just how long do you think it took to get to the point where the record was broken.....nearly a year of development 4 differant engine configurations, 3 exhaust manifolds 3 differant crank dampers, 2 flywheels, various sets of tyres, 3 sets of pistons, 2 gearboxes, 3 diffs, 2 propshafts, blah, blah, blah..and thousands of man hours.

One thing you need to know about injection.....(trying in vain to get back on topic and not sounding like a pissing competition ) Throttle bodies dont make up for a badly designed and tuned engine....in order to work properly TB's need a well set up base just as much as carbs so why on earth you think that TB's give so much of an edge is beyond me. Steve A worked miracles with that engine but equally I spent several hundred hours designing, speccing and building mine (several times over) in my crappy garage, ask Rob Hughes or Matt Bannister who came along on various occasions to help lift it in and out and in again. One big adavantage that both Steve A and I have/had, is that we both have an engineering background which helps massively.

One thing is for sure....dont expect that by bolting on a few carbies or a set of TB's you are going to run 13 seconds cos you wont, the benchmark is set, whether you like it or not.

light weight every thing

And your point is what exactly.....I have probably lost 150Lbs in weight (off the car) but the car is still only about the weight of an early 240Z (1040 kilos) Plus as far as I know weight saving was an option in Steve's day as well.

Adams car on carbs, home built, 2.4 and all steel?

No it wasnt a 2.4, one was a 2.6, and the later engine was a 2.8....I should know, he was kind enough to tell me when we spoke a little while ago.
And as for home built, hopefully I have dealt with that one as well.
And where do you get "all steel" from .

What I have posted (above) has been posted many times...in various threads (carb versus throttle bodies etc) yet you still persist in trying to undermine the recent achievements (no one elses just mine)....I have even PM'd you my full engine spec yet you STILL continue to ignore the facts and fabricate your own..... why.

Now if you want a serious discussion about engines, go ahead.

 

[Ian Patmore]

Skiddell,
Thanks for the praise. I will come and run her down the black stuff, but before I do, I want to "learn" how to drive a zed again with substantailly more power than I did 13 yrs ago (last time car was on road). Also want to run the engine in and get the car fettled.

I am no way belittleing Dave Jarmans stuff, as its plain to see he knows his stuff as regard to your set-up.

All I am saying is that the zed scene from when the zeds came out until the modern day, the number of specialist here compared to the USA is vastly different. And hence there has probably been more development in the USA than here. The reason I went to the States for my head is maybe they look at the flowing of the head differently (inc. cams). The head may perform worse/the same/better than a comparable one built here. I am just trying to diversify and try something different. It would be boring if all the best cylinder heads/engines came from one source, as they could all behave in the same way. Do you get the gist of what I am trying to say?

By the way, I am getting someone to build my engine now, as the more I look at it, to start my engine building career on a performance set-up is a bit beyond me. I should have had some practice on standard lumps.

Cheers
Ian

 

[SeanDezart]

Another question......there are posts here and elsewhere saying how much horses thats being produced, but what about street N/A L series zeds that are producing as near as/equal/or just above 100bhp per litre? I get the impression there are none/very few, why is this? Lack of knowledge to obtain this/ parts /development/cars as this level are not "streetable"/cash/owners preference? Other parts of the world seem to manage this highest point...why not here?

Regards
Ian

I always belived that a N/A SOHC engine is going to be limited in power output. Mine at 3.1 litres is probably around 84bhp per litre, the UK full-blown race engines (not for comfortable road use) were doing about 96 bhp per litre.
But Mr ZHead is right - torque is everything and no-one (IMHO) should get caught up in the 'bhp figure race'. Mine has ample torque for the road - to have 400bhp+ from a 'small' engine I imagine wouldn't be a pleasure to drive.
To see Skylines touching 1000bhp doesn't impress me, to enjoy the drive of one with around 350 would !
If I wanted more bhp (and wasn't picky about keeping an 'L' series) I'd also go for a V8 !

 

[SKiddell]

I am no way belittleing Dave Jarmans stuff, as its plain to see he knows his stuff as regard to your set-up.

Indeed, Dave’s depth of knowledge never cease to amase me but fuel injection has been an adventure for both of us as, neither of us expected the power we are getting......we initial hoped for around 225-230, to this date neither of us are sure exactly how the power is made, in fact Dave still to this day thinks I have got an extra set of pedals fitted ..... me I favour scavenging and think that whilst the cam isnt hugely aggressive on either duration or lift, the exhaust/header/collector is optimised (serendipitously) to pull out all of the burnt gases and help pull in fresh charge on overlap.....easy to get wrong, tricky to get right.

the number of specialist here compared to the USA is vastly different. And hence there has probably been more development in the USA than here

Ian I absolutely agree with you on the American scene.....we have so few cars and so many of those are "precious"
Money is also a big factor, as you well know to build a good engine costs money, sums which many people won’t be willing to spend.

By the way, I am getting someone to build my engine now, as the more I look at it, to start my engine building career on a performance set-up is a bit beyond me. I should have had some practice on standard lumps.

With an engine as critical as yours (big overbore) I thinks that is a wise move, the one reason I am going for a 3.0 litres is that I have little confidence in cylinder integrity at even modest cylinder pressures and seeing as I am a fan of compression I wanted a set up that I "know" will be strong (88mm versus 89mm+)

I am just trying to diversify and try something different

Which is what floats my boat as well, but seeing as you are in a posting mood, here’s a few questions.

What sort of prep work are you/have you done to your crank
What about rod prep
What sort of pistons/rings are you planning to use
Any idea of the cam spec
What sort of compression ratio are you planning for?

I fully understand if you don’t wish to divulge too much….we all keep some things quiet .

It will be interesting to see the nature of your engine and suspect (as Sean posted) that torque will be the predominant characteristic.

 

[grolls]

My Quote "So how does that compare to Adams car on carbs, home built, 2.4 and all steel?"

If you look at the question mark it's beacause it's a question and no i'm not aiming at you as I stated you have done extreemly well and I wouldn't take that away. I see the Adams car on a list as "NA" It would be great to see exactly what he had done to gain that power dont you think?

Again it proves one of the many problems of sharing info we have stored in our minds within this club. You Steve are obviously fully aware of what was done and who by, so rather than sit and rant would it of not been better to respond with the question I first posed?

 

[ZHead]

I see the Adams car on a list as "NA"

Forgive me for being a technical pygmy, but isn't The Melton Pork Pie ALSO N/A ?

Whilst Steve holds the current record and deservedly so for pushing the boundaries, a 3.1 stroker running triple carbs if set up properly should see in excess of 300BHP.

Why not settle the debate by building a 3.1 stroker, get it set up and have a crack at the record ? I can quite easily see how "oldy worldy technology" could reclaim the record ....if.....and only if someone put as much time and effort in as Steve has. It's not just about bolting bits on.

Of course that is what a car club is really about, spirited debate, automotive competition, trying over and over to get the edge.

As soon as a 3.1 took the record I'll bet Steve would be back to the drawing board to try to take it back. That is what this whole hobby thing is about.

Someone go after the record ....... after all, it's easy

 

[zedhead260]

So how does that compare to Adams car on carbs, home built, 2.4 and all steel? I would expect Skiddy car to be in front by a long way.

One thing that has been overlooked so far, is the consistancy of both cars in question.

Adams' car wasn't pulling regular 13.7's, probably wasn't even pulling regular 13's.
Skiddell's car will pull mid-13's all day long.

Now you can see how they compare.

 

[zedhead260]

I can quite easily see how "oldy worldy technology" could reclaim the record

Exactly; and without a hint of carbon fibre in sight.

I'm sure someone out there fancies having a crack at it.

 

[datsun dave]

One thing that has been overlooked so far, is the consistancy of both cars in question.

Adams' car wasn't pulling regular 13.7's, probably wasn't even pulling regular 13's.
Skiddell's car will pull mid-13's all day long.

Now you can see how they compare.

When Steve Adams set that record both me and him were pulling late 13 second quarters all day at the pod (with me 1000 second behind him)
how 10 years flys

was you there ??????