Zedyone_kenobi

That is a brilliant idea Jeff!

That is getting drained my friend. With the engine oil and radiator as well. Plan to keep the whole system empty. the only thing I am not sure of is how high off the ground does the car need to be to pull the engine/tranny as a unit.

Here is the same fuel rail used on my car. From the same manufacturer. I had to hook up one of those cheap holley fuel pressure regulators on the passenger firewall. Mine is dead headed, but both ends of the fuel rail are tapped just in case I want to run a return line. I have the rail drilled and tapped for a pressure regulator at the back.

The next chapter in this saga continues, as the engine is on a pallet set to arrive tomorrow! I went to northern tools and picked up a 2 ton hydraulic hoist which has a large reach. I will assemble that tonight after everybody goes to sleep. I think it is time to get the car up on jack stands and start unbolting things. The OEM L24 has been a great engine, does not smoke, and has run strong for 71000 miles. IT will be pulled and stored in a climate controlled storage unit until its services are needed again. I have decided to pull the engine/transmission together. I will remove the radiator and engine accessories first. Then look into getting it boiled out and cleaned. OR just replace it with a new 3 core aluminum one. NOt sure which I will do. I have time to decide I guess. Definitely do not want my new engine running hot.

Fantastic! Just fantastic... I bought that same 6 AN stock you did, (really great price, huh!). Stuff is VERY nice. Also, run some aluminum polish on it and it will shine like sparkling new chrome.

I can totally respect that, and in your defense some of the greatest cars ever were born from thinking waaay out side the box.

We can agree to disagree then LeonV. The fact that the Prototypes were built for an existing race with existing rules puts them in a whole other league than a technology demonstrator built to no rules at all. My point stands. Looks like we will just not see eye to eye on this one. That is okay by me. If everybody agreed on everything it would be a rather boring world.

Well we all have our biases. I have have mine for sure. No getting around that. I would not call my views narrow minded as much as I would call them realistic. Nothing I said was inaccurate. It may not be welcomed, but I am use to that. I do not embrace something different for the sake of being different. And I do not give credit unless it is earned. The DeltaWing did not prove anything to me. Yes, extremely light cars are easier on tires and fuel than cars that weight a lot. This is not news worthy. The only comment I made you can really translate to ANY car is the fact that all race cars are rolling sales pitches. Yes, that is completely true. I am sorry if you think that is narrow mined LeonV. But my biases are my own, cultivated over 39 years on this planet, forged from experiences and life lessons. Not something I can change overnight. I tend to wear down like a rock with water flowing over it. It just takes time. The Deltawing is what it is. A car in search of a place to race. Lapping at LeMans was very clever marketing. Clever enough for somebody to invent a series for it to race in. Time will tell.

I admire you for that. Your willingness to accept new things far exceeds mine. I am more resistant to change for the sake of change. My last comment is this. They built an amazing piece of engineering. Yes. I agree. But I would disagree to calling them solutions. In order for it to be a solution, there must first be a problem. What problems were they addressing (surely not efficiency)? There is nothing wrong with Cars as they are today. They built something out of the box for sure, but without a common metric to weigh it against, its performance is just a data point. Why wouldn't a 500kilo car with 300 HP be fast? They could have put more power or sure, but then the fuel economy they were bragging about would suffer. As far as the weight goes, where else would you put the weight? The weight bias in back was a necessity of the trike design to make it able to corner without picking up a rear wheel in the slightest corner under braking. I think the car has some cool attributes, but lets call it what it is. A rolling sales pitch. I would rather see Nissan take the fight to Audi with a full on LMP1 car, OR, bulid the deltawing to LMP rules and destroy Audi.

I understand the comments guys, well put. But to me green technology and racing do not go hand in hand. Or rather they should not. Green racing cars should be kept to green races. LeMans greatly benefits from improved efficiency, and that could be an advantage, but it is about outright speed and endurance. I understand it was an innovative car, but its efficiency is a meaningless metric when it runs in a class of one. If made to run in a actual class with the same rules as everybody else it would not fare so well. 1300 lbs with fuel is crazy light, and while that is noteworthy, not having to stick to any rules what so ever makes it little more of an exercise in material selection and design. Being fast and outside of the rules is quite a bit easier than being fast and staying within the rules. Trying to improve fuel efficiency of race cars to save gas for the environment is completely emotionally driven, and not at all realistic. Race cars use up a trivial amount of fuel. Further when race series become an exercise on who can get better mileage it starts to become boring. At least in shorter style races it does. At LeMans, fuel efficiency is a very important metric as you all know, but more so is speed. Thus the Audi Juggernaut with its diesels. Audi did not sacrifice speed for efficiency. They worked within the existing rules and made a blisteringly fast and fuel efficient car. The delta wing is a car in search of a race. A car built that right now nobody wants. The only people saying it is the future of racing are the inventors of the Delta wing. Saying people care about it because it is a green car is also a bit of a stretch. Most racing enthusiasts I know really could not care a bit about the fuel efficiency of a race car. They want speed. If the delta wing gets accepted, it will be in a spec race (like you mentioned it was designed for) against other delta wings. It will not be chosen because it is faster. I hate to sound contrary and argumentative, so please do not take it that way. While I can appreciate the work it took to make, what I see is a neat marketing toy vying for acceptance in a world that did not ask for it to begin with from people who are trying to make a lot of money building cars. It the answer to a question nobody was asking. The solution to a problem that did not exist. But, at the end of the day anything can be raced and can be entertaining. Speed is relative. Do people want to watch a bunch of delta wings in a spec race? Well they watch a bunch of miata's, a bunch of Sprint Cup cars, a bunch of Diesel Jettas, so why not. This to me is just another company looking to cash in on the 'green' marketing monster to make a buck.

yeah, but geometrically it is closer to the reliant robin than it is a traditional car (say 911) If made to run equal specs, the handling will indeed suffer.

I fail to see the point of the car. Three wheels configuration has always been unstable. They banned 3 wheeled ATV's for this reason. The Reliant Robin was a miserable failure. Two wheels up front and one in back makes FAR more sense from a stability point of view. They showed the cars under braking and it was not entirely stable. It showed the wiggle and required a bit of steering input to keep it stable. Again, I like innovation, but what is the point of the delta wing. It has the stench of a spec series type of car. LMP1 class is getting to be a bit more of an exhibition race to me. I love the LMP2 and GT classes running. The audi's are crazy impressive. And I respect them. It was interesting to see the differences between the etron and the ultra. I love LeMans. I will always try to watch it, and I still think it is the ultimate test of motorsports. Kudos to all the winners.

I got it and a huge BRE 240Z is on the front cover.. good read. They say the same things that people have been saying, that the 240Z is on the short list of collectable Japanese tin. I think one quote said that gone are the days of a running rust free 240Z for 5000 dollars. Get yours now.

Agree with the rethreader/thread straightener kit. I actually ponied up for a good MATCO one. I chase every nut or bolt from M4 to M10 before I ever reassemble. It makes it so much easier to put together AND it helps ensure proper torque. Great advice as usual Blue!

Well the engine will get here Thursday or Friday of this week! It is on a pallet and I will have them load it into the back of my truck. The only question is, how the hell do I get it out of the back of the truck. I would think an engine hoist would not be able to lift something that high! HAHAAH Oh man, always a problem!

Not sure I will ever put one in there. The heat would make it run non stop. Total energy hog. But during the engine install, I may have to add one. Will be many hot days in the garage

That is quite nifty! I like the innovation there buddy.

Good Luck Jon, I just finished this EXACT project. My advice is clean all the threads thoroughly, and REPLACE the bolts that hold on the ball joints. The torque spec on this is 35 - 45 ft lbs if I read my FSM right. I snapped off two of my bolts. I went out and bought some new zinc plated bolts that were grade 8 or better. Also, do not forget to grease the ball joints and tie rod ends. If you get into any binds please just ask. Also make sure your transverse links are in good shape. One of mine was slightly bent.

Doesn't matter. I am going to transfer the one I have on my current engine over

Thanks Mitchell. I definitely an anxious to see what a healthy L28 can do. No way it will feel anything like my L24 I currently have. The wait during the build has not been bad, but the wait to get it here, will be terrible. OH as far as oil goes, I ordered a case of Valvoline VR1 10w30 conventional oil. the VR1 has high Zinc content. As for flywheel pics, here it is.

wait... hold the phone you have a lift...

Could be it. I was willing to sacrifice some top end for mid range punch. I told Eiji that many times. Peak HP numbers are not what I asked for but for a vintage road rally engine. He said these cams like to be advanced a little. I am thinking madkaw is right. With this setup, I am getting exactly what I asked for. An engine making great mid range power.

I can answer that Eiji mentioned something about the cam alignment pin being slightly off but that he was able to compensate for it

I did some digging through Eiji's email. The cam was originally a .495 lift and 290 duration when it hit. He said the ROSS pistons were slightly different than the P79 pistons, an the .495 lift just barely touched. also the cam was advanced 3 degrees on the cam sprocket (Nismo comp timing gear on cam) which leads some credence to LeonV's advanced statment, but I know as the cam sits in the car, the IN is 105 the EX is 111 lobe separation is 108 Again, I am going to trust Eiji on this one.

madkaw, I did not take any offense at all. You were just giving some very sound advice.