New World Datsuns...

DRIVEN wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2019 5:35 am Looks good to me. Interesting info about EGTs.

The EGT temps were an eye opener to me, I put the EGT gauge in my non-turbocharged 521 kingcab because I wanted to know how hot they ran without the turbo as the turbocharged 720 ran stinking hot all the time, this was before I figured everything out, after driving it for a while I concluded that I had likely came as close as one could to blowing up the 521 kingcab diesel engine when I drove it to LA right after getting the truck on the road, I had that engine floored for over a half hour going up the grapevine pass just north of LA, by the time I got to the top the engine was running real weird, I could see the smoke coming out of the tail pipe at night and it had no power, once it cooled down it felt normal again, the coolant temps were just to the red also, I was so lucky I didn't blow that engine up that night, I didn't have an EGT gauge back then so I have no idea how high they were, but if I were to guess it would not surprise me if they had climbed to 2000 degrees, whatever it was it was I am positive it was just below the melting point of aluminum pistons, I still do not know why this engine has not blown a headgasket yet with what I have put it thru in the past.
From what I have read climbing above 1400 degrees is real bad, it is not that it will melt something, it is when will it melt something, but I have read where others have drew the line at 1600 degrees in the larger domestic engines, I don't know what to think anymore, so I keep the diesel engines I have below 1400 degrees, the 521 kingcab engine never climbs that high much anymore, only when it is above 90 degrees outside and I am climbing a long uphill grade at 70+mph, but that was before I put the larger Volvo radiator in it, the water temps run much cooler now, I suspect that the radiator has very little effect on the EGT temps though, but I didn't have coolant temp issues before putting the turbocharger on it, well unless I was floored for over a half hour, but I suspect a lot of vehicles would have issues being floored for over a half hour, especially using a 1600cc radiator to cool a 2500cc engine.

I didn't do much today, my wrist is hurting bad, I suspect it's arthritis, but I put the EGT probe bung in.



I don't know if that is the right place to put it, but the tube holding the turbocharger is thinner and it would make getting to the bolts harder and make it possible to break the probe if I slipped, so I centered it on the turbo mount tube.

Well I am tired of the noise and vibration in this 720 since putting them mobile home leafs on the truck, I have been trying to use angled shims to fix this issue, someone said to put the thick end towards the rear(lowering the nose/pinion flange of the axle), well it is not working, I think I am going to pull it apart again and try putting the thick end of the shim towards the front now.
The thick end of the shim is towards the back on my lowered 520(720 chassis) and it works great, but it is not working on this 720.

OK, I switched the angled wedges around so the thick end is to the front and I drove it, keep in mind that the carrier is raised almost 2 inches, it was slightly smoother while speeding up but still had vibration between 25mph and 35mph, but not terrible, so I put it back up in the air and put the carrier back to the stock position on the cross member, now picking up speed and slowing down it seems alright, but if I go a steady 40 to 50mph it vibrates something terrible and once it starts it will not stop until I slow way down or go really fast.
This evening just before I quit working on it I adjusted the the carrier rubber piece at a better angle but didn't test drive it, I will do that tomorrow, if not better I will raise the carrier again and test drive it, if not better then I will remove these leafs and put a set of 720 4X4 leafs I have on the truck.
One thing I noticed when I put these mobile home leafs on this truck was that actually had the centering holes maybe a half inch farther back than the stock 720 leafs which pulled the yoke in the transmission out that half inch, now I have had other vehicles that had the yoke pulled out a little without issues but they were one piece drive lines, my 521s have a slip yoke drive line while the 720 doesn't, but I wonder if this could be the issue.
I just remembered I have a 521 slip yoke rear drive line that might be around the same length as the stock 720 drive line that maybe I could use to let the yoke slide all the way back into the transmission, it's only about a half inch difference, I will look at that tomorrow before replacing the leafs.
I am going to figure this shit out eventually, the last test drive was making some weird squeaking noises which I didn't like, something didn't like the new position, I also checked the "U" joints and could not find anything that was loose.

Ahhh, new information. Having the yoke backed too far out of the transmission could certainly be causing that. As for your angles, you really should check them with an angle gauge like the one I posted a couple pages back. It's less than $5 and would remove a lot of guessing. Once the angles are dialed you can move on to other possibilities, if you still have a vibration.

It really didn't seem that important to even mention before because it's only a half inch, it didn't even deform the carrier rubber piece.
Also how does one adjust or even measure 3 different angles when one cannot even get in there, I have 3 U joints which all have an angle, the one at the yoke in the transmission, the one at the carrier, and the one at the pinion flange.
I will get a photo of the yoke in a while when I measure the rear drive line piece.

This article gets into angle measurements about 2/3 down. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hotrod ... -tech/amp/

Basically, they say you should set the forward shaft level with the transmission, essentially making it en extension of the mainshaft. Then set your rear driveline and pinion angles to equal out to a zero sum.

OK, I got under there with a 90/45 degree angle thing that normally is used to draw lines on wood/metal to make straight cuts, I had the rear 2 angles really close and it was as bad as ever.
Right now the front piece is in the stock position again, I will get under there and get a photo of the yoke when I measure the rear drive line piece.

So I got under the truck this morning and looked around, took a photo of the yoke, measured the rear drive line piece and then measured my extended 521 drive line piece from the 521 work truck chassis, it was around 3 inches too short.
I checked the drive line angles again and they were way off, but I had had the axle tilted the other way also without positive results.
Here is the yoke in the transmission.

To me this doesn't look bad, it was only a half inch difference at the leaf mount holes between the 2 leafs.
So I looked at it some more, pulled and pushed on the yoke to see if it had any play, none, so I gave up and put the 720 4wd leafs in the truck and the issue went away, it appears that even though it was only a half inch difference at the leafs, it likely was an inch difference at the yoke, here is the yoke with the 720 4wd leafs installed.

There are no shims or blocks dropping this axle, and the rear bumper is at least an inch lower with these 4wd leafs, but the mobile home leafs had also lowered the truck, so the 4wd leafs actually likely lowered the back of this truck at least 3 inches if not 4 inches from the height it was with the stock 720 leafs.
Fact is I think I need taller tires in the rear now, but I have so much money into these tires I am keeping them on this truck for a while.

So, angles are the same and vibration is gone?

DRIVEN wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:27 pm So, angles are the same and vibration is gone?

The angles are the same as when I first put the mobile home leaf springs on and it vibrated on that trip to pay my water bill at the water bureau place, it has vibrated since, obviously because the yoke got pulled out if the transmission too far, at least it is obvious now.

I did connect the inter-cooler into the system this afternoon after I got the vibration thing figured out, everyone knows about how I was saying earlier that the turbo was clocked wrong and how the waste gate was at a weird angle and how I fixed it by drilling a hole in the middle of the bracket, I had to do that to get the outlet of the turbo discharge connected to the piping going to the intake, well when I piped in the inter-cooler today I had to undue what I had done as it was clocked perfect for the inter-cooler, before I didn't think there was the room to do it, but I made it work, it's tight but I got it all connected and took it for a test drive.





The truck runs better than it ever has now on the 5 mile test drive I took it on, plenty of boost and quieter then has ever been, I gave it some pedal and got just over 70mph briefly(little tires) at around 8psi, and it never reached 1000 degrees(EGTs),and I seen 15psi a couple times getting on it, it was great, best it has ever been, but the 521 kingcab diesel is still better.

That's awesome! Looks good under the hood. Well laid out considering the amount of room to work with.

Thanks, this one is starting to look like the engine compartment in the 521 kingcab now, no room to even work on it anymore, if the starter or alternator go bad I have to remove everything to get to them, but at least I can change the oil filter on this one without removing a bunch of stuff.

I was cleaning up the back patio and got an idea.
Does this look goofy or is it just me?







This is what it looked like before from a distance.





Am I so used to the rear wheels being 3 inches inside the rear fender wells that now it looks strange to me, here is what it looks like now, I filled it up with 6 gallons of fuel and it still doesn't rub, I can't fill it all the way up as it leaks if I do.



The only issue if it is an issue is it takes 3 sets of lug nuts to hold these rear wheels on now, the spacer, the inside wheel, then the outside wheel, I drove it and no new vibrations, here is what it looks like in the back, it is made for this, but not these rims.



I kinda wish they were 1 inch less wide, but this is what I have, these 4 spacers I have came with 13 dually rims, the problem is that they are custom rims and the USPS lost one of them for me and they were not interested in finding it for me, I kept asking and asking and they just wanted me to go away, so I have 5 rims instead of the 6 rims I need for a complete set to cover all 4 corners, but maybe I can get some kind of use out of the parts.
The back wheels are pushed out 4 inches farther than they were on each side, that is 8 inches total wider stance, I should have taken a before photo but I didn't, it just looks so strange to me.

Hellaflush!

It sure looks like those spacers would put a lot of load on the bearing, or does that rear end have floating axles?

It's not a floating axle like on my work truck, it's just a stock H190 axle.
I am using the spacers as they were designed to be used, being it is a dually setup I have no idea what the stresses are with 2 wheels on the ground, I originally had a 2 plus a little inch spacer/adapter with true Nissan dually wheels mounted to the adapters, but I didn't trust that setup to haul any weight, I put these aftermarket dually wheels on the truck so I could haul a load to Canby, these spacers get the outer wheels out farther than they have ever been since I have owned the truck, but I don't think the way it is made for any weight either.
If it was one wheel sticking way out there I believe that would be bad, but since it has 2 wheels on each side I don't know.
I worry more about the inside lug nuts getting loose, as that happened on my other setup once and I didn't even know it till I slowed down to a crawl, then it vibrated, but at freeway speeds it was smooth, I couldn't even tell it was loose till I lifted the truck off the ground.
Dually wheels with adapters make it hard to deal with to even tighten an adapter, I don't carry the proper tools to change a dually flat, I don't even carry a dually wheel to change a flat, I just look for a tire shop.

I'm concerned about the bearing load as well. I like the way it looks though.

I guess I look at it differently, I don't see the bearing as an issue as much as the axle, the farther one puts the wheel out past the bearing the more stress on the end of the axle, there is no more weight on the bearing, if I had a spacer that stretched it out 3 feet on each side there still would not be anymore weight on the bearings, but the end of the axles would have tremendous sideways pressures exerted on them.
Put another way it is easy to bend a 1/2 inch shaft that is 6 feet long with one end solidly in the ground if you grab the top and pull, but if you grab it 6 inches off the ground you are not going to bend it easily with your hands/arms.
Same idea as a 6 inch piece of rebar sticking out of a cement wall, you can hang on it, stand on it and your not going to bend it, but if you stick a 3 foot piece of pipe over the end of it your going to easily bend it.
The actual H190 axles are huge, but the flange on the end of them is a different story, I have run 2 1/8th inch adapters/spacers on this truck with Nissan dually rims mounted to them for close to 10 years now without issues, I towed home the 520 from Bend OR behind it when I bought it(that is the day one of the adapters came loose/lugnuts came loose on one side), I have towed several other vehicles home also, but I have never used it to haul any kind of heavy load/weight and I never will with adapters on it, but I did haul a very heavy load with these aftermarket rims(without adapters) to Canby when I was a Vendor last year.
I will drive it around this way for a while locally.
By the way, these adapters were made for the front end also, 2 dually rims in the back, and one dually rim in the front on each side, all the adapters also all had another one inch spacer that I deleted, so they were made to be a 5 inch spacer.

That is not necessarily true. While the fact there is no more weight is correct, it is the leverage on the bearing that is the issue. If you take your example of the rod in the ground, what is the force on the ground when you pull that rod from the top? What about from 6”? While there is bending forces on the axle, that is somewhat mitigated by being supported by the wheels. In your situation most of that force is being absorbed by the bearing as the axle, as a solid chunk of metal, is much stronger than the comparatively small bearing surfaces. By no means am I saying there is an imminent danger there, especially as there are no heavy loads being imposed, just that it is a concern. As an example in a different context, back when I was still turning wrenches for a living, there was a fad for the kids to put large negative offset wheels on their FWD Hondas. I did a lot of front wheel bearings back then.