Jump to content
HybridZ

RTz

Administrators
  • Posts

    2941
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Posts posted by RTz

  1. The bimmer was meant to be a luxury daily driver, the z was intended to tear up the track, from what I've read anyway about the development of the z.

     

    Sort of. The E30 BMW, specifically the M3 (same chassis) is the most successful touring car in all of history. Properly sorted, they are demons on the track.

  2. I haven't looked, but I imagine one of those would be much easier to come by in a pick-n-pull than a t-56, and around here a tranny from one of those yards is less than $50 if you have a core, regardless of type.

     

     

    If you can get a WC T5 for $50 I'll pay you for your time to get me one...

     

    ...and a non-WC is worth a hill of beans in this application.

  3. hey ron, what's that look like with the hood closed?

     

    Uh... terrible... The holes in the hood have been cut temporary... for about 2 years now. A body guy I am not. The owner anticipates having nice louvers added to the hood.

     

    The intercoolers were mounted in that position mostly out of desperation. Figuring cooling could be an issue, I didn't want to locate them upstream of the radiator, preheating the air.

     

    In all fairness, Steve Pepka did a lot of the 'brightwork' in preperation for a photoshoot (car made it into Mark Warners "Street Turbocharging" by HP Books)

  4. I think I want to build some kind of 510 I saw a wrecked one today and got thinking I really like the styling of em would make a wicked rally car and I want to make it into some sort of crazy v6 powered thing.. Im thinkin about using the 4.3 chev I have a 2wd 5spd blazer with the 4.3 as a donor...

     

    Someguy,

     

    It just so happens I'm going to sell my 510. Email if you want specifics... rontyler@hughes.net

     

    It also happens that I installed the Twin-Turbo V6 (VG30DETT) in Dave Lums 510... most overpowered car (for the chassis) I've ever driven :-)

  5. I'm not sure it's going to be a 383, I haven't heard from Owen yet on how much he wants for his stuff. For now I'm operating under the premise that it will be a built to stock spec 350 with 6-7 psi intercooled boost.

     

    Still pretty questionable my friend.

     

    What hp/torque would you estimate to be the garaunteed failure point of a t-5? Is there some other junkyard available 5 speed that would work better? I've got an open R200 on the car already.

     

    Obviously, a lot depends on how you drive, tires, LSD, etc. There are people here that can answer that question with more authority than I. I think I'd start getting nervous with much over 375 ft/lbs assuming reasonable bite. Keep in mind future goals... You may not have sticky tires and an LSD NOW but its on your long term list right?

  6. It just so happens you can't share a car in Woodburn, or maybe any drag strip since that was the and only time I've ever been on a drag strip.

     

    Weird about the 'co-driver'... my wife drove my car that day. Must have slipped between the cracks.

     

    And Michael didn't break a halfshaft, he dropped my R200 onto the ground when the rear diff strap pulled apart.

     

    I had departed just before the 'disaster'. In Pauls defense, I heard it as a half-shaft failure as well. Maybe I got that from Paul or vice-versa?

     

    I think Paul's car was about the fastest car there other than a couple of real drag cars (supercharged rotary truck, something else, and a fool on a snowmobile).

     

    Funny... I remember the Fool :-) If I remember it correctly, he was running 10.5's?

     

    Agreed, Paul had the fastest street-legal car there.

     

     

    There are also a number of stories related to the Medford track, Kelvin's garage, and a number of areas in between but those have been sworn to secrecy.

     

    :D

  7. That looks like it would be a total bitch to work on at all though. One of the main reasons I like the L6 so much is because of how much extra room is in the engine bay and how accessible everything is.

     

    Granted, but its potentially not as bad as it looks, depending on how the firewall is finished out. A hydraulic head is 'necessary', as well.

  8. That engine is set far in. Going for the mid engine huh . lol

    Did you totally reconstruct the firewall on the inside?. Got any more pic's of that..

     

    That car was never finished... got 'traded in' for this...

     

    M3.jpg

     

    I still have the chassis, though. Been kicking around the idea of resurrecting it.

     

    Needs significant structural work as the cowl became very flimsy. You can flex the windshield quite easily.

     

    Drivetrain moved 14"...

     

    EngineBack.jpg

  9. The Japanese problably figured if you don't need headlights you most likely don't need the use of an interior light.

     

    Don't know about that one Mike... Every morning I approach my car, its dark, my headlights are off (hopefully)... but it sure is nice to see the interior light when I open the door :-)

  10. I agree that the bump stop is now closer to the strut tube, but without a lot of experience here, I must ask, does it even matter.

     

    Jolane,

     

    Yet another way to say all this... If you lower a stock car with springs only, you will use up some of the quoted 3" of travel. If you lower the car 2" then you would have only 1" leftover before the top of the strut tube hits the bumpstop. You can put any damper in the world inside that tube and it will never change that. The most direct way to add more bump travel is to install a shorter damper and shorten the tube accordingly. If you shorten it 1" then, practically speaking, you'll gain 1" of bump travel (setting aside motion ratios for the moment). So now, in this scenario, you have two inches. The T3 gland nut does not address this in ANY way. I don't even see the point of it. If you lower a Z and you expect good handling the strut needs to be shortened. There are a couple of other ways to increase bump travel but they are a bit of a tangent.

  11. it it because you realized the entire shock/strut assembly would have to rotate for it to change the angle?!

     

    Actually, I just imagined a one piece A-arm with its inner mounts parallel with the longitudinal axis of the car. Pivot the A-arm up and down... no need for its 'leg' angles to change right? Now, spin the whole A-arm assembly in a horizontal plane (so its rear mount is far outboard). Pivot the arm again... stilll no bind. It now just travels an arc that would promote caster change... BUT the angles between the legs don't change.

×
×
  • Create New...