Jump to content
HybridZ

Recommended Posts

I've been doing a lot a research on what to do with my S30 lately, and I came across a very interesting swap. The reason for my search is that I plan on installing a RB26DETT into my Z, and I'm going to need a much stronger rear to handle the power. The easiest mod would be to get a Long Nose R200, and the accompanying adapters to make it work, 280Z companion flange, ect.....

 

There has been some debate on why anyone would ever want to do this. So this is what I've gathered up so far. (This not intended to be a how to in any way. I just saw a lot of scattered info, and I wanted a place to put it all. Hopefully the guys have done this already will chime in, and add to the post.) Because I still have a lot of questions!

 

Why do this swap?

 

You can get a vastly superior rear suspension set-up with a ton of current A/M support. It also allows the easier installation of the newer short nose R200 diff, with stronger half shafts, 5 lug hub and bigger rear disk brakes. And it will be cheaper to do (If I where handy with a welder) than the more common diff swaps.

 

If you do the math on what you would need to spend on the S30 IRS to get it to the point of what you get out of the S13/S14 IRS you will see a big difference.

 

No, you say well lets see:

 

R200 LSD I've seen as high as $800 (used not new or re-man)

280ZX Half Shafts $350 Rebuilt

CV Adapter $225

280Z Companion Flange $150

280Z Stub Axle $700

Adj Control Arms $600

Big rear brakes $900-1200

 

Plus a few other things. So we are looking at about $4000 to get a nice rear set-up.

 

Compare that to the 240SX IRS:

 

S13/S14 IRS $500

Q45 R200 $300

Q45 Hub & brakes $450 (w/new rotors)

Custom Half Shafts $600

Welding skill $0 to the moon

 

OK, so this set-up will run about $2000. That's leaves mw with $2000 more that I can dump into my motor.(Which is the whole reason I'm doing this to begin with)

 

Here is a great post by maichor on his swap. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=96050

 

This is what I've pieced toghether so far on how to do this swap;

 

S13/S14 Sub frame modified by cutting off the front mount, and using the 3/4" hole just behind as the new mounting point for the front.

 

Weld a peice of flat stock on floor just in front of the "tool box", to support the front mount.

 

Welding in a new piece of 3X3 box tubing just behind the stock frame on the S30 where the Mustache Bar mounts. This will be the new mounting point for the rear.

 

Cut some sections of the stock rear sub frame for clearance.

 

Replace the 240sx hubs with the Q45's

 

Replace the 240SX Diff with the Q45's

 

Take some measurements, And have some Half Shafts made.

 

This is a very simplified run down of what you need to do, but as I said I still have a lot of questions on exactly what needs to be done.

 

The problem that I see wuth useing the S14 is that it's 5" wider than the S30, and requires some big flares in the rear.

The S13 is about 3" wider, so mild ZG flares will take care of that.

 

Here is a shot of Montoya's S13 IRS.

 

DSCF3221.JPG

 

 

I'm not sure what the real benefit of useing the S14 over the S13 is? I hope that someone chimes in to answer that for me.

 

Please make any corrections to the info that I have, and to add more detail to it.

 

 

Just a few questions to start with;

 

1)What insulators are you using to mount the new Sub frame to the Chassis?

 

2)Will I have drive shaft problems since the Diff will be mounted in the center, instead of offset by 3/4"?

 

3)Can I bolt on the S30 Shock "Hat" to mount the 240SX Strut to the stock location on the Chassis?

 

4)Why use the S14 over the S13 sub-frame?

 

5)Do you need a spacer in between the rear mount and the frame?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yehh, I was looking through a few of his threads. He did a real nice job on it. His thread seems to be the only one I could find that went into anykind of detail. Of few others have some info.

I was hopeing that we couild get enough input, from members that have done this, so that this could become a real information stop. And hopefully help people like me do a safe swap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several people have talked about doing this. I believe 2 or 3 are currently pursuing it.

 

Do a search. There is even a current thread that talks about an S13 vs. S14 swap. Do a search.

 

IMO it seems like an incredible amount of work for a questionanble gain. I am not sure why people are so infatuated with this particular swap.

 

You layed out your reasons pretty clearly. But a short nose diff has been done in an S30 numerous times. So the same drive train stuff you use with the 240 swap should work without taking the whole subframe. There are numerous rear disk conversion available for the S30 at considerably less than what you list price wise. But then I notice all of your prices on the 280 stuff are on the high side. And it seems pretty unfair to compare the price of a 280 set up with adjustable control arms to a fixed geometry 240 rear.

 

What I would really like to see is some qualitative assesment of the benefits of this swap from someone who is actually running it. Does the SX rear improve or hurt the handling/performance aspects of the S30? Does it change the balance of the car when the new rear is combined with the old front?

 

Maybe a hard assesment to judge fairly. But in my mind that would tell me whether all the work is worth it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe a hard assesment to judge fairly. But in my mind that would tell me whether all the work is worth it or not.

 

I guess there are a couple of things that could be done. An assesment of the geometry between the two (RC, migrations, track changes, etc.) and perhaps what is the difference in weight. If you had a good guess for the CG you could come up with an idea if this would be better or worse and which way to tune.

 

Total hersay but I'm told that the stock setup has a lot of anti-dive built in. So if you don't address that you may find that you know have more power steer effects than a stock Z suspension.

 

Cary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
R200 LSD I've seen as high as $800 (used not new or re-man)

280ZX Half Shafts $350 Rebuilt

CV Adapter $225

280Z Companion Flange $150

280Z Stub Axle $700

Adj Control Arms $600

Big rear brakes $900-1200

 

Just a counter point here. I was able to do this for quite a bit less money.

R200 LSD $325 used

I put a new pinion bearing in and shimmed the LSD at a cost of $75

4.11 gears $150 (works for me, probably not for you, if you could keep the 3.70s then subtract $150

300ZX CV adapter $215

300ZXT CV shafts $135 (disassembled and greased up for $10 in grease)

280 stubs and companion flanges $150

Adjustable control arms - made my own toe adjuster instead $15

JSK brakes - ~$500 for the rear when completed, no longer available...

 

So there is a whole done up rear for less than $1600. A NEW clutch LSD is ~500. Even if you bought an open R200 and retrofitted the LSD you should still be in the $2000 range completed.

 

A lot of what you listed there simply isn't necessary to complete the swap, and some of it would still need to be done with the SX rear suspension if you were to build it to a similar level, like adj. control arms and big brakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bare S13 cradle weighs ~28kg so that is being added, plus the extra weight of the partial subframe which has to be built in to the S30 body for the cradle to bolt to.

 

A fueled up stock S30 with driver tends to be arse heavy as it is, so the above is being added plus the extra weight of the S13/14 suspension and drive components over their S30 equivalents.

 

If extra is being added up front to help balance the weight distribution thats a help. But often these sorts of mods are coupled with lighter and more powerful engine swaps.

 

Anyone who does this sort of modding may want to consider testing out the handling of such a modded S30 away from other traffic. Particularly to see how the rear end grips in corners. Which can be fun anyway :)

 

EDIT- S12 changed to S13 in the first para.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

.................There are numerous rear disk conversion available for the S30 at considerably less than what you list price wise. But then I notice all of your prices on the 280 stuff are on the high side. And it seems pretty unfair to compare the price of a 280 set up with adjustable control arms to a fixed geometry 240 rear.

 

Maybe a hard assesment to judge fairly. But in my mind that would tell me whether all the work is worth it or not.

 

I seem to have taken some heat here for how I priced out the 280 stuff. Most of the prices are from Modern Motorsports. I did a 280ZX rear disk conversion for $500, but that's a 10" disc. If I'm not mistaken the Q45 has a 12" rear disk. Modern Motorsports has a "Big" 13" rear disk set up for $1225. And I thought that the S13/S14 had toe adjustment.

 

I used Modern Modersports because they are a very good company, and there stuff is purpose built.

 

And yes I hope that the members have done this will chime in with there assesment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The price list you got i think can be done wayyy cheaper.. I bought a replacement subframe for my s13 for 80 bucks at a local shop, but it was bare since i bent mine from drifting.. But usually you could probably find one around 200 or so if you check 240sx forums. I picked up a full z32 rear end (mainly suspension arms and the whole brakes) for $100, but that was just luck and i slapped the brakes into my 240sx.

 

Advantage over subframes?? None- mainly just different mounting locations, as s14 is spread further outward if I recall.. J30 subframe will work as well. Id stay away from using a HICAS model s13 rear subframe, I dont think You would be able to make that work (nor would u want it, it wieghts more as well). S15 silvia subframe has its advantages over both, I forget why, but S14 suspension arms are compatible with it and its mounting points are simular to the s13.

 

Running 240sx rear coilovers will have tons of adjustibility, but your going to have to match them up in the front with something exceptionally stiff. 240sx coilovers are probably going to feel alot stiffer on a Z.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont see why not.. however, the rear upper control arms are shaped different between s13 and s14, they are different to allow room for the strut, so I presume the location is slightly different.. But s14 rear upper control arms will work on s13 since it clears (im sure that sounds confusing)

 

phase2motorsports_1877_1194085

This is BattleVersions rear upper control arm, they make 1 type of arm that fits both s13 and s14.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just have to love the A/M support that's available. Another big reason why I'm considering this swap.

 

There has also been some question as to weight gain. Although I havn't weighed these items, I can't imagine there being a big gain in weight (if any). And my uderstanding that most engine swaps bias the weight forward 100-200 Lbs (except 4 bangers like the SR20). But even that has no real effect on the car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

The question that I would like to know is what are you guys going to do about the forward link in the above photo,as where the inner mounting or pivot piont for this arm is, it doesn't clear the standard s30 unibody?

 

I have seen an r32 rear sub frame put into an s30 and that person moved this mounting point down to next to the lower control arm mounting point, but this changes how the wheel acts, as it moves up it aslo moves inward which doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

 

What have you guys done , or what do you think about this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is in response to a post that was apparently removed by the Moderator. It was a bit of a flame on the whole concept of this swap. But this is a forum where we discuss ideas of hybriding the Z. (Hence the name). In the post he said that the S13/S14 IRS was not any better than the S30 IRS. In all of the posts I've read people remark about how well the 240SX handles, I would assume that has something to do with the suspension. (But I could be wrong.)

I had a new S14 for a few months, when I worked for Nissan, as a demo and I thought it handled very well. The only problem was the lack of power from the engine.

 

There was also some question as to the validity of this swap for a stonger diff. I never said that Long nose R200 could not take the power. (The R180 could probably handle it) The reason for this swap IMO is to kill several birds with one stone. Like Diff, Brakes & Suspension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the post he said that the S13/S14 IRS was not any better than the S30 IRS. In all of the posts I've read people remark about how well the 240SX handles' date=' I would assume that has something to do with the suspension. (But I could be wrong.)

I had a new S14 for a few months, when I worked for Nissan, as a demo and I thought it handled very well. The only problem was the lack of power from the engine.[/quote']

 

I think that this is the thing that worries me about such mods. I don't think anybody is saying that there is anything wrong with the 240sx suspension. It works great, as Nissan spent alot of time engineering it into the 240sx. The worrisome part is that nobody seems to know exactly how this relates to it's installation into an S30. There are numerous suspension geometry issues that could really cause problems in such a swap, and I'm getting the feeling that most people don't even know what questions to ask, let alone know how to solve them.

 

I think that it would definitely be possible to make this swap work really well, but if the approach is to just weld in an S13 subframe so that all the parts fit, nothing binds and the car doesn't dog-track (a huge task in and of itself), I think you'll be lucky to just end up with something that just works _as well as_ the stock setup. More likely, you'll end up with something that is noticeably worse, and it won't be easy to fix it.

 

And if you start moving link mounting points around around to make things fit, then God help you... :shock:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The worrisome part is that nobody seems to know exactly how this relates to it's installation into an S30. There are numerous suspension geometry issues that could really cause problems in such a swap' date=' and I'm getting the feeling that most people don't even know what questions to ask, let alone know how to solve them.

[/quote']

 

I would love to hear some input from the guys who have done this already. With the big question being; Was it worth it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 cents here... Tim is absolutely correct in saying if you move any of the mounting points at all you are asking for a world of hurt. There aren't many people here that have the tools available to analyse a multilink suspension to the point that they can be sure the movement isn't hurting the suspension.

 

On the 240sx vs 240z rear suspension issue, having driven a lot of both, I find the 240sx a great deal better in street driving. (yet to drive a 240sx on the track) Better traction, larger sweet spots and the ability to get power down being big advantages. A well designed multi-link setup will hold toe and camber much more consistant through the normal driving ranges than the 240z/chapman strut setup will. 240z's (even in like-new condition) have enough toe change under accelertation on the dyno for it to be visible. Also a well designed multi-link is going to have a more consistant camber curve in most cases. (ie: -ve camber gain is more linear)

 

Just my 2 cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The swap it self doesn't call for any modification of the multi link arms, or their placement. I think that if you can get the sub frame placed on the same Horz. & Longi. plane as on the 240SX you should be able to maintain it's ride charecteristics. I'm no expert in any sence of the imagination on this, but ut sounds about right to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is in response to a post that was apparently removed by the Moderator. It was a bit of a flame on the whole concept of this swap. But this is a forum where we discuss ideas of hybriding the Z. (Hence the name).

 

 

 

That was me that wrote that post. My post was talking bout the Nissan Multi link rear suspension in a very negative light. I deleted on my own as I didn’t feel there was any reason to try and sway peoples opinion on whether or not they should use something that, (in my mind), won’t work any better than what’s in their car already, (from a performance stand point), because if they want it bad enough, they’ll justify the reason why they think it needs to be installed no matter if it helps with any issues that they perceive exists with the existing suspension or not.

Any how, it really isn’t my place to make the comments I originally made. I would be more than happy to give my “opinion” and from what little experience I do have with the Nissan Multi link rear suspensions I’ll post here. I was working at Nissan in Riverside CA, (Quaid Auto Expo), in 1988 when the 240 SX hit the showrooms and was also fortunate enough to go to the unveiling of the new 240 SX, Z-32 and Axxess in Anaheim. The Nissan MID-4 was also on hand. (what a cool looking contraption that was.)

 

I have personally removed 2 complete rear multi links including the cradles from S-13’s. They are heavy, not sure if they are heavier than the Chapman set up of the earl Z but they are heavy. I also own a ’96 Infiniti Q-45 that has this suspension design under the rear. The Q is much softer than the Z-32, S-13, and S-14 and as such goes through quite a bit of travel between bump and droop while driving it aggressively, even with the brand new Tokicos installed. The rear end of the car is all over the place, very unpredictable and at any thing past 8-tenths, the car is scary. Like I said, the Q is SOFTER than the Z-32 and S-13/14 so the Z-32 and S-13/14 cars will have a much more “controlled” feel as the suspension doesn’t go thorough as much motion as the Q. When the multi link moves through its travel, it goes through some pretty aggressively camber, caster ,toe, and roll-center changes. I’m sure someone has mapped it out and that info should be readily available.

 

I personally don’t see the multi link as a vastly superior design.

Ask any performance sports car chassis designer what he/she thinks about Semi Trailing arm in a truly high performance application? Chances are they would much rather choose an alternative design. The Datsun 510 and 280 ZX utilize the Semi Trailing and are fairly competitive on some race courses. These same cars are also so stiff that the semi trialing doesn’t move much so its inherent geometry woes don’t show up. The down side, is on a rough course or rough road, these same cars are taking a back seat to cars with properly set up double A-arm or equivalent suspension designs that don’t have to be that stiff to “hide” its geometry woes. What I’m getting at here is the Nissan Multi link can be made to handle great like the semi trailing arm, but it has to be made REAL stiff so that it doesn’t go through too much wheel travel. Nissan pushed the Multi link as some engineering marvel and that it was designed on the Cray super computers of the time. Sure, having your suspension designed on the Cray super computer is a engineering marvel and gives you a heads up at the bench racing venue, but it doesn’t make the car handle any where near what the modern BMW’s, Vettes, Vipers, S-2000, NSX, etc. These car are world class handling machines and you can bet they don’t utilize a multi link like the Nissan design. These same cars don’t use the Chapman strut either. My point is, if the design doesn’t TRULY improve your cars handling over its existing design, then why install it, unless it is a show car, cause that multi link does look sweet. Think about this for a moment. This suspension was designed in the late ‘80’s, (high tech bells and whistles was the name of the car game back then whether these bells and whistles did anything to make the car faster or not) and this multi link suspension is to go under mass produced cars for Joe Blow. The demographics, the same guys and gals that might consider the Camaro Z-28, Mustang GT, Dodge Stealth, Mitsu Eclipse, Ford Probe, etc. . Compromises need to be made so that Jane Blow will also feel comfortable behind the wheel. This suspension wasn’t designed for the discerning sports cars racer like Mario Andretti. High performance handling was not on top of the list of design goals, that you can be sure. If it were, then we should see more Multilink suspended cars at the top of national level ranks of most racing events. In Solo II on a national level, the Prepared and mod class cars, you wont find the 240 SX or Z-32 running as fast the Prepared or mod class S-30 cars. I’m not saying the rear suspension s is slowing the cars down, but I am saying it isn’t helping them go scary fast either. The Early Z with its Chapman strut, (and this is my opinion), offers LESS compromise from a performance stand point than the Multi link does.

Now if you install stiffer bushings in the Multi link, you will cause the suspension to be in “bind”. Even with the OE Rubber bushings, the suspension has a great deal of rubber friction from the twisting binding motion of the control arms. You try and move the suspension through its travel with the spring/strut removed and OE rubber bushing and you’ll see what I mean. I would bet it takes over 100 lbs to get the suspension from full droop to full bump with OUT the strut/spring combo. This is not good. You want to the suspension to be able to articulate with as little friction as possible so the spring and damper can do their respective jobs without in other influence, say from the bushings. Heim joints might be a different matter all together. The Heim joint might allow the suspension to articulate without binding, but I’m not 100% sure on that.

As for the short nose diff. Well it fits the Multi link cradle so no sense swapping it out. Though I’d stay away from the Viscous versions. They are really no better than the open diffs. I’ve driven quite a few Nissans with the Viscous LSD, my Q included, and it really doesn’t offer much of any appreciable or even noticeable advantage over the open diffs. Save your dollars and purchase the open diff and install a Quaife or NISMO clutch pack center section and that issue is solved.

 

 

 

Now as for reasons why I think that suspension “should” be installed in an early Z car? It looks VERY trick especially with the A/M tubular arms etc. Great for a show car and just to be different. It already has the 5 lug hub and disc brakes. For a race car or high performance street car, I feel the Multi link is a step backward or at best, is no better than what is currently under the car even after made the huge financial investment and after how much time and labor spent modifying the car to accept this really cool suspension?

 

That is my $.02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting and informative post Paul, it prompts a few comments.

 

First, the stock S13 etc rubber bush cradle mounts need to be replaced with either poly or solid substitutes for much improved handling. Second, S13/14's perform very well on the race track, apparently due to an excellent chassis as much as anything else although the suspension seems to play its part. Three, consider the Z32 which uses similar suspension and of course was designed as a high performance car. But I don't know how the Z32 performs in racing, maybe someone else can comment on that.

 

In my limited circuit track experience, once you build in some adjustability the S30's rear suspension performs very well, its the front which is the weak end. Aside from not being able to play around much with Ackermann due to the location of the steering rack, the S30 typically drags the inside of the tyre edge on the inside wheel in a corner. 'Typically' because that seems to be characteristic of strut suspension. Yet very few seem concerned with replacing the front suspension on a S30 for some reason or other.

 

My S30 in the pic is pretty well set up, see how flat its sitting in a high G corner and how flat the rear wheels are sitting, yet note that inside front wheel angleshowphoto.php?photo=3830&cat=500&page=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you're gonna do all that work to put in a different IRS setup why not go withsomething that's double wishbone type? There are many cars to choose from.

 

But the suspension of the S13 has really proven itself. They're some of the best cars for tight & technical courses (ie mountain racing). But it call comes down to money. They're not great out of the box and needs lots of modifications just like anything out there.

 

Personally, I'd be looking at miata suspentions. Dual wishbone on all 4 corners. As long as it's strong enough it would be great. It's probly about as light of a setup you'll find too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×