Tricky-Ricky

Placebo effect! you wont reduce the plenum temp but using any paint finish, even an isolating gasket wont make much difference, because the plenum sits above the V of the engine so receives a lot of radiated heat. In any case the heat wont make a big difference as once the engine is running at anything over idle then the boundary layer effect takes over and heat is not transmitted from the almost static layer of air next to the plenum wall to the moving air .

I didn't get a CEL on mine. And a pre-owned part wasn't expensive. Considering there is a reasonable way to test (i.e get the car warm) then no need to buy parts unnecessarily. As its a part that fails when warm its not so easy to test, and as it costs only a little more than the price of getting a mechanic to take the old one of and test it in the first place, its still a good candidate for a punt IMO. As you say the parts apparently only show a problem/failure when warm, surly there should be a way to test with comprehensive test equipment, or failing that a scope, would replacing the sensors with unknown SH items be cheaper than say an hours worth of comprehensive tests? Unfortunately other problems can also show up when the engine has warmed up, not just cam and crank sensors, so suggesting a throttle pedal/plate reset would help eliminate this as a problem and is pretty simple to carry out, without having to pay for diagnostics, a simple money saving strategy in my books.

Cam or crank position sensors usually throw a CEL, but not always, the garage should with decent diagnostics be able to pinpoint any problems with either of these, but just chucking replacement's at it could prove expensive, it might also be worth doing a throttle pedal/plate reset and see if that helps.

Although for me a well tuned V8 is king, I have to say I am rather partial to a nice 2JZGTE... I am also rather fond of my old Supra...turn up the sound! sorry crap video and sound is out of sink.

I was actually commenting on AMTs post saying that Infiniti don't make good manual gearboxes....so if Infiniti don't nor do Nissan! Infiniti was Nissan originally in the US, in the same way that Acura was Honda and Lexus was Toyota, mainly due to at the time the US wouldn't accept Japanese imports well, but now there are both Nissan and Infiniti, just like the other brands, but they still share most parts. Actually all Infiniti parts where manufactured by Nissan Japan and assembled in the US, its only recently that they have shifted engine and component production to the US, Europe and China as well, but everything Infiniti was designed from Japan, so the engines and gear boxes you see in the 350Z, 370Z and the G35 and G37 are the same.

Err Infiniti is just Nissan in the US.

The S14 uses a McPherson strut on the front, so this will definitely NOT fit, the rear also uses a completely different mounting to the Z.

Sorry for the thread hijack.....but

Speed restriction is programed into the ECU and is communicated from speed sensor to speedo and ECU via CAN bus so the restriction either has to be modified by reprogramming ECU or fitting a CAN based de limiter into the CAN bus circuit, its not a simple case of cutting a wire or fitting a cheap delimiter, the CAN based delimiters are over £150, so probably cheaper to wait and have a remap.

Not a chance. And I'm a big g35 fan The G37 looks too similar to the Hyundai genesis coupe for my taste.

Still think the G35 is a better looking car.

The thing I find most sad is the fact that a website exists just to take the **** out of peoples pride and joy, the fact that some of these people need some serious education in style is besides the point....

Lets face it with most serious performance cars and bikes its pretty easy to reach those sorts of speeds very quickly with just a quick squirt of the throttle, as said its not speed as such, just a case of speed in the wrong place/circumstance thats the major problem.

I suffered similar on my 350GT and ended up modifying the breathing system, however since the idle control is throttle plate based it might be worth doing a throttle plate reset/relearn.

You shouldn't need VHT paint for plenum, its get hot but not that hot, just a degrease and a good clean should do it.

The principal is the same, he has just taken it further and has the machinery to make everything required, I saw the first version, he has obviously refined it and made the whole thing more complicated, which figures as he obviously wants to make some money, so nobody is going to pay big money for the simple option that can be achieved DIY. I am sure the design is good but I was quite happy with the results I got from mine for the work involved, I too have an engineering background, just not the tools these days.

If the RMJ clutch pedal is the same as this..http://www.350z-uk.com/topic/50287-how-to-adjust-clutch-pedal/page__st__40#entry1163127.I did it years ago the big problem IMO with the Z and G clutch assembly is that the designers got the fulcrum point wrong, so the result is that the pedal will always be heavy, it could be alleviated buy using different combinations of master and slave cylinders, however as you have already found out, the selection is VERY critical. The only other option bar the pedal is to extend the clutch actuator arm so its longer and the slave has less work to do and there is more range of movement, in some ways I wish I had also tried this route as it would be less of a pain to do IMO. As for your worrying about MC rod misalignment...don't as the MC rod actually has a ball at the end and is designed to cope with a fair bit of misalignment, in fact my mod and the RMJ setup relies on this also.

Are you intending to use your car on the strip? if not I would avoid it like the plague, relying on ignition cut for shifting on anything but a race car is asking for trouble, the first time you flat @*!# and it doesn't cut, or worse still cuts in during the shift is going to cost you a gear box rebuild.

I suspect what what your noticing is the quite pronounced difference between the original MC/SC combination, which gives a very short engagement /disengagement period,(lack of feel) a lot of people complain about the std setup because of this, the side effect is that its also very stiff. The MC/SC combo you have fitted is obviously designed to prolong this action, with the intent on giving it more feel, as I said before this is down to the differential in the size of the MC in relation to the SC, I think there is probably very little you can do other than try and adjust the beginning and end point of the process by adjusting the MC rod, but the actual point between the is not adjustable.

That's very nice fella, unfortunately I don't think I would have the patience to wait for all the parts to arrive.

Now I get your point! so long travel before proper disengagement, despite the fact its moving the master cylinder from 1/2"-1" onward, its now sounding like there is either air in the system, or the master cylinder or slave cylinder is either to small or too big, now as you mention that this particular combination has been used by others, it seems most likely to me that there is air in the system. One further thought, there is a damper on some models, between the MC and SC, and I wonder if this is having more effect (if fitted) than it would with the std MC/SC combination.

Are you still in Essex?

You can if you want, but by what you describe its definitely down to the rod being longer, therefor it couldn't be adjusted effectively due to the fact that it would bind on the pedal before there was enough adjustment to make much difference, IF there is not enough free play between the resting point of the pedal and the point at which it starts to disengage you risk clutch slip, so you could end up damaging your nice new clutch plate due to slip...the choice is yours. The clutch/start switch does act as a pedal stop so you may be able to gain a few MM by adjusting this in the short term.

Sounds like its just badly adjusted, in order to get the engagement/disengagement point lower you will need to adjust the rod so as more of it protrudes through the clevis, so I suspect if the rod is longer than std, you will need to cut this shorter, that is obviously the reason for it bad adjustment, whoever fitted it did not know it was longer and had to adjust the pedal rod to get clearance not to bind.

Basically if you over adjust the master cylinder rod at the clevis pin so there is no free play before the clutch pedal is depressed you can risk the clutch slipping at high load because some of the clutch spring pressure is negated by the adjustment. Conversely if you over do it the other way IE too much free play before the clutch disengages the MC rod could bind on the clevis, but this would also cause the clutch to feel heavy and possibly not disengage properly. But these are extremes and with a bit of common sense most people Wong get it that wrong. As I mentioned the main reason is to get the adjustment within a window that allows the pedal to function properly and feel reasonably easy, the spring is meant to help with this providing that the general adjustment is within the window I mentioned, however, IMO the spring wouldn't be needed if they had the fulcrum design correct. If you adjust the MC rod so that there is from between 1.5 to 1/2" of free play depending on personal taste, you wont go far wrong, and the switches will still work, although I would advocate by passing the start switch, as this is not good for the crankshaft thrust bearings on cold start. Edit, if to me it actually looks like the clevis itself is shorter than stock rather than the MC rod being longer, if you run into problems you could always re fit the stock clevis if the threads are the same.