Longest trip in your Datsun? How'd it go?

[DHale_510]

I rode with Matt around Sears Point for about twenty minutes one time. Seemed like 6000 rpm and 90mph the whole time. I felt no lifting and no fear then either. No overhead planes to worry about there ....

Dennis

[Socalman]

2 hours ago, Stoffregen Motorsports said:

Flat out at redline.

 

It's almost 500 miles from the bay area to San Diego and I made it one time in just over five hours. That's over 90mph average. There was a low cloud cover or high fog ceiling, whichever way you want to look at it, which meant that the entire way I could see in front and behind about 1/4 mile, but no planes could spot me, so I hit the skinny pedal the entire way.

😂😂😂

[Logical1]

I used to take a TIRED 71' 510 wagon with a L18 from North of Seattle to San Diego and back once a year to visit a friend and hit JCCS on my way back north, I always carried tools and fluids but never really had any problems besides the rattling windows! Musta made that trip half a dozen times. When she finally needed a new clutch I found that the previous owner had used a WOODEN block as a spacer for the transmission mount! I wont point fingers but they are a member here and you know who you are! 😉

I unfortunately only have trucks these days because of their utility and how much a PL510 costs 😭 I took a huge gamble and decided to move way up in the mountains of Arizona a couple years ago. I paid for a service to haul my shitty little travel trailer down with all my clothes and various house goods in it as I knew my 720 couldn't haul it. I then packed my truck with every tool & spare part I had including transmissions, transfer cases, heads, and a very large collection of tools. I never hit the scales but she had to be over max payload. I was very nervous as this was my livelihood and the engine in the 720 wasn't fresh by any stretch of the imagination! I left in the beginning of December and the trip took me three days. The truck did great for the most part, in elevation she wasn't flying up the passes but still held at least 50. On level ground I could hit 85-90 easily. From south Idaho to salt lake was the scariest part with the narrow highways and horrible weather. Then the last climb up to 7000'+ was a little tough for her with the full load but she got me there and since I have driven her from my place in the mountains down to the valley several times with no problems. 

[datzenmike]

Thinner air as you go up. I think you loose 3% power for every 1,000 feet of elevation. So roughly 20% power loss at 7,000 '

[Logical1]

9 minutes ago, datzenmike said:

Thinner air as you go up. I think you loose 3% power for every 1,000 feet of elevation. So roughly 20% power loss at 7,000 '

Thank you, I was curious about the equation. It is curious as I drive her around the mountains (with no payload) and she still seems very peppy with no re-jetting of the weber. When I get a chance to go back home maybe I will actually re-jet her as I have the jets just hanging out on my parts shelf. I hadn't wanted to re-jet her because I was making trips down to the valley to see my father and didn't want her to run lean in low elevation. I am hoping to pick-up something 90's, cheap, and fuel injected to make the trips to the valley after this though and just leave the truck on the mountain!

[thisismatt]

16 hours ago, Socalman said:

What speed and RPM are we talking about on these trips? I find it interesting. 

Like 4k rpm in the 521, trying not to die on the freeway

[Socalman]

43 minutes ago, thisismatt said:

Like 4k rpm in the 521, trying not to die on the freeway

That’s me. lol. 4200 at 75mph, can’t even really see out the mirrors from vibrations. 

[datzenmike]

48 minutes ago, Logical1 said:

Thank you, I was curious about the equation. It is curious as I drive her around the mountains (with no payload) and she still seems very peppy with no re-jetting of the weber. When I get a chance to go back home maybe I will actually re-jet her as I have the jets just hanging out on my parts shelf. I hadn't wanted to re-jet her because I was making trips down to the valley to see my father and didn't want her to run lean in low elevation. I am hoping to pick-up something 90's, cheap, and fuel injected to make the trips to the valley after this though and just leave the truck on the mountain!

 

It will run richer and richer as you go upward. If it should actually run better that at lower elevations you might actually be running lean.

[Logical1]

18 minutes ago, datzenmike said:

It will run richer and richer as you go upward. If it should actually run better that at lower elevations you might actually be running lean.

 

I understand. What I was saying is that I will Jet it for 7000' after I get a FI vehicle and just leave it on the mountain so I don't have to re-jet it when I go to the valley. I imagine the jetting for 7000' feet would be VERY lean at near sea level!

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

4 hours ago, Socalman said:

😂😂😂

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

3 hours ago, datzenmike said:

Thinner air as you go up. I think you loose 3% power for every 1,000 feet of elevation. So roughly 20% power loss at 7,000 '

Is that 3% aggregate or 3% each 1000 rpm from baseline?

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

6 hours ago, DHale_510 said:

I rode with Matt around Sears Point for about twenty minutes one time. Seemed like 6000 rpm and 90mph the whole time. I felt no lifting and no fear then either. No overhead planes to worry about there ....

Dennis

Those were the days, huh Dennis?!?!

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

6 hours ago, DHale_510 said:

I rode with Matt around Sears Point for about twenty minutes one time. Seemed like 6000 rpm and 90mph the whole time. I felt no lifting and no fear then either. No overhead planes to worry about there ....

Dennis

Did I ever tell you about the time I outran a CHP over hwy 17 from Santa Cruz in that same 510?

[RLJ]

Had to putti’s up after seeing the Blues Brothers reference. 
This is the car a Blues Brothers cover band uses to get to gigs in Vermont. Class act!

[IZRL]

7 hours ago, Logical1 said:

Thank you, I was curious about the equation. It is curious as I drive her around the mountains (with no payload) and she still seems very peppy with no re-jetting of the weber. When I get a chance to go back home maybe I will actually re-jet her as I have the jets just hanging out on my parts shelf. I hadn't wanted to re-jet her because I was making trips down to the valley to see my father and didn't want her to run lean in low elevation. I am hoping to pick-up something 90's, cheap, and fuel injected to make the trips to the valley after this though and just leave the truck on the mountain!

 

If you can find a low mileage 94-97 Honda Accord I'd recommend it. I own one and it's been good to me. Easy to work on and reliable. Replace timing belt along with all parts that are removed while doing a timing belt change (I replace all parts with OEM parts, at least those that are still available) and keep up with regular maintenance. And you should be good to go.

 

If you want to see what 90s cars are better, just keep a look out for 90's cars next time you go out. Keep a count of how many 90s hondas, toyotas, nissans, and American cars you see on the road. I bet you see 8 hondas to maybe 1 toyota/nissan. American 90s cars are unicorns now, you don't see them for a reason.

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

16 hours ago, RLJ said:

Had to putti’s up after seeing the Blues Brothers reference. 
This is the car a Blues Brothers cover band uses to get to gigs in Vermont. Class act!

I wonder if any of the other movie cars survived.

 

[datzenmike]

19 hours ago, Logical1 said:

 

I understand. What I was saying is that I will Jet it for 7000' after I get a FI vehicle and just leave it on the mountain so I don't have to re-jet it when I go to the valley. I imagine the jetting for 7000' feet would be VERY lean at near sea level!

 

Yes! That will improve your gas mileage.

[datzenmike]

17 hours ago, Stoffregen Motorsports said:

Is that 3% aggregate or 3% each 1000 rpm from baseline?

 I think it was 3%. And every 1,000 foot, so 21% loss or 1/5 drop in power from sea level to 7,000 foot. Now if you originally were at 2,500 foot the total would be far less.

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

I've heard that too. It's the reason turbocharging was invented. For use in airplanes.

[datzenmike]

23 minutes ago, Stoffregen Motorsports said:

I wonder if any of the other movie cars survived.

 

 

We had several movies made locally and they are always scrapped. There were 2 or 3 old Barettas used in a chase sequence in a local wrecking yard all made up to look the same. One even had a sun roof painted over. The VINs and door tags were sawn off so they could never be used again. Too much liability unless only used for a back drop, then they would just rent them from owners. A BC guy had his Datsun in The Man In The High Castle. There were a lot of old JDM tin in that series.

[datzenmike]

8 minutes ago, Stoffregen Motorsports said:

I've heard that too. It's the reason turbocharging was invented. For use in airplanes.

 

By 18,000 feet basically an aircraft is at half their sea level power. I think nitrous was also experimented with for quick bursts. Also higher displacement and higher compression. For this a very small carburetor was used to prevent complete filling of the cylinders and preventing pinging at WOT take offs and climb. At above 15,000 where there is less air, an auxiliary much larger carburetor was opened and power remained virtually the same. It works after a fashion but at least power does not reduce. 

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

4 hours ago, datzenmike said:

 

By 18,000 feet basically an aircraft is at half their sea level power. I think nitrous was also experimented with for quick bursts. Also higher displacement and higher compression. For this a very small carburetor was used to prevent complete filling of the cylinders and preventing pinging at WOT take offs and climb. At above 15,000 where there is less air, an auxiliary much larger carburetor was opened and power remained virtually the same. It works after a fashion but at least power does not reduce.