Bob_H

Dan, The spacers to go beneath the strut are to correct bump steer on a lowered car only. They will do nothing for the excessive camber,(leaning in at the top of the tire). Just some quick explanation so you know what you are dealing with. First, bump steer is just that, as the wheel hits a bump, and goes up, the wheel turns one way or another because of the relationship between the steering arm and the lower control arm. Idealy, they should be parallel through the entire range of motion. However, Datsun did not locate the lower control arm in the correct location to achieve this. There are two possible solutions for bump steer. The first, and easiest is to install the spacers at the bottom of the strut. When you lower the car,(say 2 inches like you did), you have put the wheels into the bump steer region. Now, when you hit a bump, the effect is much worse, and much more noticable. It is much like you turning your wheel sharply when you hit a bump, but you aren't actually turning anything.... The second fix is to slot the crossmemeber, approx 3/4" up and 3/4" out on each side. This puts the lower control arm in a position where it will stay parallel to the steering tie rod as it goes through its range of motion. So bottom line, that is not a fix for excessive camber. Now, for your camber issue,(top of tires leaning in), as long as you are below 1.5 degrees negative camber for the street, you are fine. If it is more than that,(unlikely), then you should look into some of the options discussed above, slotting the upper strut mount holes, camber plates, etc.. The Z has virtually no change in camber as it goes through its range of motion. You would have to change the relationship between the lower control arm and the upper strut mount to effect a camber change. I found when I put the race suspension on my Z, it looked like I had over 2 degrees of camber,(I ran up to 3.5-4 on my BMW when at the track, so I was familiar with what it looked like). Turned out it was 1.1 when put on the machine. The looks of a lowered Z can be deceptive. It might be worth your money to invest in a simple front end alignment. It is usually ~$30 and will tell you if something is way out of range. I would suggest the bump steer spacers if you lowered it more than an inch or so. It can get hairy hitting bumps when you are lowered that much, it will dart around and be a blast to control.... But no, you don't need camber plates unless you want more camber, and the alignment, as said before, should remain pretty much on even as it is lowered. -Bob

Is it still in the planning stages or have you started moving on it? Just curious. -Bob

David, This is unrelated to this thread. It concerns your signature picture. Esp. in a thread like this, where you have posted 10+ times, it takes forever to download. Think about it, 11 some odd pictures = 250k+ of download just for your sig! When I am not on dial-up, it is not an issue, but when was the last time you tried to download one meg at 26k! It takes forever. Could you please cut down the size of your sig picture to at least 1/4 or less of its current size? I have asked the same of Dan,(badkarmacreepn), as his is the same size. -Bob

For my senior design project, I tested SU's from Z therapy,(with the help of Scott). In the end, for the airflow the motors are capable of, the stock mounting plate,(i.e. the stock filter plate), vs. the aftermarket horns,(I tested TWM horns, and some cast ones), are the same. The stock horns work great and you gain nothing from the fancy aftermarket horns unless you are talking a full blown race motor, such as GT-2. -Bob

-edit- doesn't fit this thread

Remember, David does get to track events in SoCal. And it does work very well for him. I never conteded that, just his claim of why it was better/worked in such a way. Personally, (as it has been said by most of us), the setup is great and I'm sure works quite well. That is what really matters. David, thanks for igniting this firestorm! And thanks for recommending a good setup for the ZX,(which few people have experience setting up) -Bob

Brad, Assuming you stick with your current rims, 235 is the largest you can really run on a 7in rim. Needless to say you will have traction issues. I would suggest getting everything running first, take it to the strip with the existing rims/tires second. Then run it and see what the problems are. Then I would invest in a second set of rear rims that are backspaced to get you up to at least an 8 in, or a 9 or 9.5,(look at Pete P for that spec, basicly coilovers and a certain backspacing). That will allow a bigger tire. For stock fenders, I would run a 9 in rim and run the extra tire,(likely 255 is as big as you can go in the rear w/o hitting the fender, assuming it is rolled). If you go to a 9.5 in rim like Pete, you will have little sidewall for the Drag radial to flex. And BTW, it turns out my motor won't be in till the 17th, so no clutch for you till at least then. And in reality, it will take some time for me to get it out of customs. I will try to get it out before I leave for my parents and Christmas,(the 20th), but if I don't, then you'll be waiting till the 3rd of Jan. -Bob

Uhh, I don't believe it. Point me to figures showing stock springs were ever progressive. If you can, I admit I was wrong. I Understand what you were saying if indeed we were dealing with a progressive spring. However, I am fairly sure that is most certainly not the case. No, no no. The valving does not change. It is valved for one rate from end to end unless you get some super fancy custom changing valve thing which most certainly won't be $50. (no, I am not talking about adjustable shocks) First, looking at David's car, the neutral point has moved 10mm higher, or about 3/4 of an inch. For a 5-6 inch stroke, that is very minor. In my view, the more critical point is compression, not extension. Hitting a bump is more likely to cause damage than extending the shock to the end of its travel upon jumping. So lowering it has a more negative effect on shocks,(meaning hitting the stops). The shock will behave the same in the last 3/4 of a stroke as it did in the middle 2 inches. The only thing possibly changed is the stroke,(meaning where it moves, not how far). And that has little effect if any on the operation of the shock. Its ability to disapate heat based is not affected by the location of the stroke, unless you move everything to the last 1/8 of a stroke. Which we are not doing. You claim stroke, valving and general operation change. None of those will change. The location of the stroke will change, but that's it, and 10mm at that. And until you hit the end of travel,(again, only an issue in extension, and minor at that), nothing changes.

A way to gauge how well it will do is to compare how many 16's they started selling vs the older 15's when they introduced them? Do the 16's outsell the 15's yet? -Bob (not interested in them)

My turn. No, no, no, no, NO! Ok, I feel better. (to noone in particular) Alright, first, experiencing shock failure sooner. Again, no. While the installed pressure is higher, the shock still sees the same effective force each time. The only factor to consider is if you are artificially hitting one end of the travel, i.e. smacking off the stop for rebound,(extended). And Mike, where did the progressive spring come in? I guess I missed that one. I have always been talking about a linear spring as I thought others were.... BTW, Semi trailing arm for the ZX, sort of similar to the E30 BMW's and the M coupe/roadster. Just not as refined. Also called swing axle. -Bob on spelling edit,(see, I suck), some thoughts. First, with only the rear springs changed to the longer springs, you will see one positive benefit, less squat. In all the comparisions, I have been referencing left to right, i.e. turning.

Just as long as we are on the same page. I take the following from your posts: You realize both these comments are incorrect. The car will not recover faster, will not have the same ride height and the spring is not stiffer. That is the basis for contention. I think you understand spring constant and such,(or do now), but my important point is it makes NO difference in the handling in a positive way. It is negative because it raises the ride height. But that is a negligible effect.

Wow, that exploded. Funny that it is Zero-Tolerance week over at CC.com as well,(that is corner-carvers.com...) Anywho. With respect to your RC springs, I think I see where your confusion is coming from. Lets take two identical springs, identical rates, but one is longer. You install them on identical struts or shocks. To compress the shorter spring, "A", to the half way point will require less force than to compress spring "B", the longer one, to the half way point. However, when on the car, they will not reach the halfway point at the same time. The longer spring will require more force,(cornering), to reach that halfway point. The jump is that for a given cornering force,(say 1.0 G), you are imparting twice the force of a static car on your tires/struts,(not accurate, but for illustration only). So the longer spring will compress,(using my 700lb per wheel example), to a point equal to 1400lbs force on the strut. The same for the shorter spring. The only difference is where they end up. The longer spring ends up 10mm,(or in my example, 1 inch), higher. Which you might interpret as better cornering because the outside is not leaning as far on the strut. But by the same token, the inside is 10mm higher. Net effect is still the same lean in a corner, the same force, the same everything except height and Center of gravity,(won't go into roll centers, etc..). So yes, it imparts more "force" for a given compression, but the car is unable to see how far it is compressed and that is a totally independent variable. It only knows xxx amount of lbs force. So calling it a stiffer spring,(your words, not mine), is incorrect. It is only a stiffer assembly. That's it. It makes no difference on handling, taking bumps, nothing. -Bob I can't spell to save my life...I won't admit to how many times I had to re-edit this post, to turn heigher to higher or as to a....I suck.

it is not a wideband. it merely takes the signal from your existing,(assuming you have one), narrow band O2 sensor. The cheapest you can find any wideband setup that you don't have to assemble the circuits is the techedge one listed. By the time you factor in a $110 sensor,(the cheapest I found one), and shipping, it works out to be ~$430. -Bob

Awesome, then I'll see you when I get stationed out there. And just to be clear, a stiffer assembly still has no bearing on how the car rides. It must means it starts physically higher. The reaction to bumps and turns are the same. -Bob

And all of you,(sliver and Mike), should price out what the options are. Mike, that is not a cheap proposition, esp. with your stated goals. You have to at a min. cut the spring perches off, and there are other things associated with the mod. It can be done for less money, but you need to know what you are doing. I would spend your money on the motor, brakes and suspension bushings and diff. I would then spend money on safety equipment such as a roll bar, better seats, belts, etc.. Once you get it running/driving,(key word, running/driving), then worry about the suspension itself. The stock setup is very good, and with proper selection, you can run 16x10's with ZG flares. The ZG flares give you a few inches a side, and you know 7-8 inch rims will fit with stock springs and fenders. You need to be creative, but you can fit 10 inches under flares. -Bob

Huge BS flag! Whoa David. Just a few key phrases that really stand out in my mind before I could even read what you had: and Here comes my standard spiel. You should know better... First, if you NEVER have lost control, you aren't pushing it to its limit. If it takes everything you are throwing at it, you are throwing enough at it. These two things have nothing whatsoever to do with how well it handles. I can take the fastest and most well setup up Z race car,(lets say a GT-2 300zx), which will blow the doors off everything we could muster Z wise I can still lose it. Control, or a percieived sense of control, has nothing to do with the suspension or handling, but rather with the driver and how far they are taking the car. David, you really ought to go to one of the open track events with a group like NASA or similar. You would love it. Yes, they can get expensive, but think about 2 hours or more at full speed on a race track, reaching speeds of over 130 on some tracks. Stay away from the mountain roads, esp. when I am there. Next, the staying with a heavily modified Z on a mountain road. Again, this tells us the reader, Nothing!. You know better than that. I can tell you that 99% of the drivers on the road have no idea how to maximize their car in a turn. And a good driver can whoop their butt in a stock Honda Accord or Dodge Neon. I won't even go into my thoughts on racing on the "mountain runs" and will assume you were not doing something like the Mullholland Morons,(if you were, I don't want to know). "Mountain runs" are a great way to kill people,(well documented). I can go into this into much more detail if you want to push the issue. I suggest not since I am well armed on this one. I am all for a fun mountain run but I want to be clear about my thoughts on any form of "racing" or "pushing it" really hard on a mountain road vs. any other car. Again, not pointing the finger at you, but I feel very strong about this, and want to make my position clear. That being said, you do offer a good setup. However, there is also 225/50/15 tires which would offer a slightly larger contact patch,(assuming at least 7in wide rims). And the Tokico's are a well known, stiffer shock which perform well when used in a performance application. However, when you pointed out the cost of the KYB's, the Tokico's would be more expensive. Just an alternative. These are just to give more choices. Your setup offers a cheaper setup that works as well or better than more expensive options. And the rear strut brace doesn't do much for the car, or rather not nearly as much as a front brace. The front is the weak spot in both the Z's and ZX's. The rear is surrounded by that thing called the body, offering good support for the shock/strut towers. Last, time to go to school with this spring issue. Your little guy in japan is incorrect. John,(jt1), and Mudge are dead on. You even proved their point for them. Let me see if I can explain. First, lets assume a 2800lb car,(maybe conservative). That means each tire in a static situation is supporting 700 lbs. So regardless of the spring, each tire still supports 700lbs. I think we can agree that the car will compress the spring some portion, regardless of which spring you start with,(remember, we are talking about two identical rate springs, one is just longer). Let me put out two figures, made up, but for this illustration. Lets say both springs have a rate of 175lbs/inch. And the NA spring must be compressed 1 inch to fit in the struts fully extended and the Turbo spring must be compressed 2 inches,(because it is 1 inches longer). That means before we even compress the strut, the NA spring is exerting 175lbs on the strut and the Turbo spring is exerting 350lbs on the strut. So the NA spring must travel 3 inches before the car will settle. The Turbo will travel 2 inches before the car is stationary. Net result? Higher ride height. 1 inch is not much and in your case, it would be about 10mm or less than one inch. Next, it is still not a stiffer spring. How stiff a spring is is solely detemined by the spring rate, which is the same in this example. And the effective wheel rate will remain the same as well. The difference is you are starting with a higher point. The neutral point is still, and will always be 700 lbs per tire until you start moving. For a longer spring with the same rate, it just means it starts at a higher point, which also gives you a higher center of gravity...... You still have a 175lb/in rate spring, but its neutral point is 1 inch,(in your case, 10mm), higher. It reacts the same and everything. The difference is you have 1 inch less compression travel, and you are now taking the chance of compressing the spring to the point where the coils touch each other. That is not good at all for handling. Before I dismiss class, let me say that you still suggested a good setup. However, if the turbo spring is indeed the same rate, I would not run it. -Bob

Pete, The figures I quoted were for full stand alone EMS, not piggyback. I do agree with your sentiments though. Piggyback is kinda like a band-aid. If you don't need much accomplished, they are a great cheap way to get it done. But with what a full EMS offers, esp. for the price Perfect Power has for their race systems,(the PRS is their name for their stand alone systems), is hard to beat. -Bob

They are a very new company in the US. look closely at the prices, and you might be much better off with the PRS-4 or PRS-8. About $400 and $900.. -Bob

I think it may be the same. I don't remember the racing pan being $700. Maybe 700 canadian. I remember along the lines of $350-500. Call MA and ask them.

and just to clarify, that is pounds/per inch, not pounds per square inch as in psi. lb/in, not psi. minor detail but important.

Mike, You have already made it clear that you are not going to race this car, and a big maybe that you might attend an open track event,(since they run ~$250+). You are just wasting your money getting coil-overs. The stock setup with a good set of shocks and springs is great and is what our resident hot shoe,(whoops, might give him a complex..), Dan Baldwin runs. He is winning his class without coil-overs or fancy stuff on his car. The Arizona Z springs and the ones Motorsport Auto offer are a good improvement. Shocks? Depends on your intended application. Drag racing? Stay away from the Tokico illumina's as they are too stiff. Read through this forum to get more ideas. Coil-overs cost a bunch and offer no real benefit other than the ability to corner-weight, which you will not ever be doing. You already have a big money eater in the engine, why waste it on coil-overs? -Bob

Mike, Same price regardless of what you need or not. As far as the tranny's? Same between 32 and 33. On the GT-R, they went from a push style clutch to a pull style. Don't know if that applies to the GS-T as well. Read Stony's post on putting a RB into a Z for info on what pan, etc.. Brad and I are having custom pans done. You can modify some pans to make work, but it depends on your car, etc.. I can't answer that. There is no "book" or pat answers we can give you on how to put this motor in your car. Remember, this is brand new for us as well, and each of us has different requirements and hence, different solutions to the various problems. If you decide to do this, it will be 100% custom for you. You might be able to use some of the solutions we use, but likely not very many. Happy hunting. -Bob now you see why I said 3-4k in fabrication costs?

Bernard is the guy both of us bought our motors from. The price for the same setup we have is $6800. Everything included except intercooler and exhaust which are custom anyways. RB26 motor, GS-T RWD tranny, and all assoc. accesories such as power steering, A/C, starter, etc.. -Bob

Spend the money. I'm with John on this one. But if you shop around, you can find it much cheaper. There is something like Zdatsun which has Nissan Motorsports Stuff really cheap. You can also try Bruce Titus group up in WA or OR,(look in Google under nismo stuff). Again, for road racing, spend the money. You don't want to deal with the oil sloshing up in the front of the stock pan. The extra capacity and windage tray are worth it. -Bob (you could always go with a dry sump system... )

$3500 for the block......Don't know if that is good or bad. -Bob