Sleeper78Z

If you are set on a 3.5 liter Nissan, at least get the one from the new Z. IMO, a transversely mounted engine and tranny would be one bear of a job, and made much easier if you used a normally mounted engine.

I have a B&M in mine, but I have a T5. It is very nice - positive stops and about a 4" throw from 2-3.

The ZXs have 3.70s and 3.90s, all of which bolt in, including the axle flanges. 3.36s are very rare, found only in one year/model of the ZX, escapes me which one.

You mentioned the fuel pressure regulator, and yes, it can cause what you are seeing. There is a spring inside that can stick or break, giving full pump pressure to your injectors. You can have it tested by any reputable mechanic, or buy yourself a pressure gauge ($20 for a 0-60 psi from Summit or Jegs) and plumb it into your rubber fuel line after the filter. To check the pressure, start the engine, disconnect and plug the vacuum line to the regulator. The pressure should be about 37-38 psi, and drop to 32 psi when you reconnect the vacuum line.

Find a scrapyard where you can walk around and look at the stuff before it's pulled. I don't know the tranny numbers, but $450 is WAY too much. At a local U-pull-it yard in my area, I paid $70 for my BW T-5 (I pulled it myself). Another yard I frequent normally sells trannys for less than $100, again pulling it yourself. Usually you can get a yard to pull it for you for $50 or so.

Awwww, heck. I thought you were talking about Football, like World Cup. Shoulda said "American Football" :cheeky:

You didn't say what mileage you are getting now, but I'm guessing it's less than 20? My 280 got low 20's with the stock motor. On a long trip, I noticed it dropped to 16-17, so I changed the air filter and my mileage was restored. With the vane type AFM, I haven't heard of anyone getting better than 24 or so with the factory setup unless they've leaned out the AFM so much the car has lost it's power. My '87 ECCS uses the O2 sensor when it's cruising to optimize the mixture, and on a 3 hour trip over the Rocky Mountains averaging over 80mph, I get 27mpg. HTH

I have a question I have never seen addressed regarding engine balancing. If you can make each rod weigh the same, big and small end, and make the pistons all weigh the same how can you consider this balanced? For a boxer motor, you would have equal weights opposite each other, but an inline motor has all this weight countered by the crank counterweights. So in order to balance an inline motor, is it not necessary to match the piston/rod assembly to it's respective counterweights on the crank? Edit: just writing and thinking about this, I suppose if the crank throws are balanced by the counterweights, and your piston/rod assemblies are equal weight, that comprises a balanced rotating assembly? Hmmmm, cool....

It may seem backwards, but, within limits, a lower compression ratio has a greater power potential on boost than a higher compression ratio engine. With the higher compression engine you will have a better throttle response, but a higher tendency towards detonation at full boost. You then must intercool to a greater extent, or back off on your ignition timing. All other things being equal, you make more power with the stock 7.4:1 engine over the 8.8:1 flat-top engine.