Modern Motorsports Ltd

If the diff is good shape/tight on all input/outputs and clutches are working then the price is fine. Be sure it's 4/87-12/89 turbo and not from an ivory white SE as they had a unique viscous version that's not bolt in. Nothing custom at all to bolting one in. Web page you saw was likely for the viscous unit above for which custom shafts were put together, or for a rear custom brace to keep the finned LSD cover. Most avoid both and just bolt their posi in using an older standard R200 rear cover sticking with the clutch type. You'll also need the front yoke from an old R200 to swap on the posi as it's front yoke is unique to the 300ZX and incompatible with your diff. Just a large pipe wrench to hold your diff and a breaker bar/snipe and socket will remove it. I just install with similar force (used a torque wrench for other uses in a shop once for 180-200ft-lbs) and have done this on 4 or 5 with no trouble. Replace all the seals at this time as well (side ones anyhow, front if any problems with it). No gasket required on rear/silicone works as well or better and is easier to remove if you ever service it. Toss in one bottle of GM posi additive with your 75W90 synthetic or similar as well. When you first drive it take in slow tight figure 8's to get the fluid in all the discs to prevent burning etc. (FAQ?)

Yeah/what drax said. Just flare it out and double clamp with EFI hose. It's not an area you'll be checking often....be very sure it won't vibrate on anything and if concerned at all shield it/isolate it with a larger hose 'sleeve' or some method.

Nion, I'm looking at doing a CNC run of possibly both strut spacers and camber plates. I priced out camber plates (not castor adjustable/use tc rod if you must/some caster can be built into them as is on my own set) and they'd run ~$200US for complete both sets including all bearings/hardware etc to run on top of 2.5" springs/replacing your top mount. I need ~10 committed buyers to go ahead/hope to post a pic soon.

Fully agreed with BLKMGK. I run the Victor Jr. on my roller 350/700R4 combo. Ran a weiand dual plane before. I love the Victor Jr. and can't detect ANY loss in low end/although I switched from a 327 hydr. tappet to 350 roller with bigger bumpstick but still not radical/ZZ4 cam with edelbrock topend mostly. Plugs don't show anything funny after idling so no odd/lean conditions of concern. Torque is there a plenty right off my 650rpm idle . BLKMGC, check out what you might find used for an EFI intake as that's what happened to me.....I'll yank my 'old' Victor Jr. next week to install my 'new' EFI'd one I picked up. Wish I had a larger set of mic's etc/I'd measure up the EFI locations/injector angles to make DIY efforts easier in locating/installing injector bosses. I disagree that single plane benefits are only for 5500+ motors, any motor getting going beyond a towing low rpm truck motor can use single plane to benefit mid to upper rpm as long as their build/application won't suffer from any reduced bottom. I've seen single planes on trucks with mild motors with no ill effects and don't have the dyno sheets but have been told on many occasion by a dyno addicted builder that single planes are 'over-hyped' for higher rpm's otherwise the true racers wouldnt' buy them as they always feel their goods should be different from the 'normal' street mods.

quote I'd be stoked too That'd be ~+/-$200/pr. by both 'sets' I meant both left and right pair really can't see it exceeding 200/volume could drop it). I was still thinking/talking like with the machinist as theirs a few parts/pieces per side. If you'd like to design something reasonably simple allowing adjustment without modifying the tower I'm all eyes and ears Best option for you might be some adjustable control arms and TC rods or just decide what settings you want and make a fixed set of each as some do. My set is for a 280ZX/510 (same bolt pattern) but same principle applies for Z's, less strut tower room side/side with Z's but still enough I'd imagine as it's seems adequate for others. My complete setup is underneath the strut tower with caster adjusted in the centre (cutout) of the top cap with a bolt per side in slotted grooves threading into the tapped bottom plate with the spring seat and spherical bearing for the strut anchor point. Keeping the full piece under the tower can be safer as some designs mostly go on top of the tower and have little meat under the tower cap to prevent 'blowthru'/ blowing/failing thru the top of the tower under hard compression. Some setups have failed that way/particularly on rally cars

quote no offense taken/OE unaltered EFI on non OE powerplants is as you say. But adjustable EFI allows all you say and more as we're not limited to jet sizes/mechanical spark curves etc etc. MOST efi discussed here is fully adjustable. Roots blowers used to really rock when they were so cheap but lately price increases are really cutting into their old 'common/easy power' image regardless of their efficiency. Ross, soon to be fuel infected

quote: Originally posted by lonehdrider: They used to sell a simple nox kit that was just a rubber cap to put on the vacuum advance port (disconnecting it from the distributor) ad you'd set the static timing 1/2 of what it was originally. I forgot to mention that I think. I yank my vac. advance hose from my dizzy and put the tube on a T bolt for my valve cover in my smog 'tune' Timing in any way just seems bad for me and from my memory on smog tests. Previous shop puts ball bearing in the hose to be stealthy but I don't care about that

agreed/current headers are coated and so will be the new ones

Danno, no one has said your drawing is wrong at all. I asked Jeromio and he hasn't replied yet. I have a hunch he just resized it to print actual size to use as his own template as he was welding/cutting his own stuff. I could see some errors coming in with the number of steps their. It's mainly nailing down that spacing from the outer bolt pair to the lower main pair to make it a bolt on piece skipping the hub removal part that's needed as I mentioned. That's how I understand it anyhow.

If their aren't any marked 'test' sections on any highways near you (they're for odomoter and I assume speedo is linked..) you can just head out with a bud and both do 80mph or whatever speed you wish. Or have one clock off 10 miles and see how close you come to same answer... using gear ratios etc comes close but your tire diameter isn't that precise (maybe it is for these purposes but I'm skeptical), and even marking off pavement and your tire/rolling it for a rotation or two/remarking pavement/measure distance b/t and taking your tire circumference from that will be slightly different as tires change shape somewhat at varying speeds but just driving with a friend side by side is simplest IMO and close enough for our purposes

OK, yeah, just answered a 'q' I put as this thread got split up (pet peeve). So ideal would be a bolt on bracket for late ZX calipers? This drawing does not truly exist yet or does it?? If not the main unknown is the radial spacing b/t the OE hub 2.364" hole pattern (60.0mm) and the ZX caliper pattern of 4.48" (~113.8mm) correct? Both patterns are radiused from the same centre point it appears. I agree that hub removal bracket is a bit of work....for a homebody I'd of guessed using one flat rectangular plate and drilling all holes, then milling one side for hub relief and then milling other (but is their anything behind here??) and finally cutting out the pattern & tapping the final holes would have been simplest.

quote: Originally posted by jeromio: Just to prevent any possible confusion, I didn't create that brake bracket drawing - I'm not exactly sure who did. All I did was resize it (thru trial and error) so that it would print actual size. Jeromio, are you saying the labelled dimensions on it are incorrect? Or you just wanted actual size to help you in building your own? Of the two designs as I understand it one allows the later 82/3 ZX calipers to be used and requires a larger bracket that goes around the rear hub on it's backside. I'm assuming it's this drawing http://www.hybridz.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000585 with late calipers as Ron dictates early with his drawing having a different bolt pattern/spacing. The 2nd design as per http://hometown.aol.com/rolerdynamics/private/brakes.html uses the earlier calipers and is a cheaper design to have made (or so I think/who knows)? Is one easier to install than the other? Could this be easier done from flat plate and an arc cut out of the base to clear the hub (Ron has a central welded 'crosspiece') or is their something else to clear? In other words, if someone is to make these (I just sent them off to a CNC shop for a quote in a day or two) which is preferred? I know later calipers have larger pads by ~25% AIR but my early ones seem quite adequate if that's the easier option. Is the ebrake cable adaptation a no brainer or?? Or is their a 3rd design for which a new/unique bracket would be preferred (200SX calipers etc..something newer/more available good shape in yards as we know new ones are pricy)? thanks As well I'm assuming the maxima brackets are next to impossible to get if you dont' already have them Mike?

Post your before/after numbers and limits you have to meet if you can......sorry it didn't work this time. If you failed the idle test I guess 5psi in Mickey Thompson ET's couldnt' explain that Were you running premium gas? I toss in 1/2 litre methyl hydrate per half tank with highest octane gas (ie. most crap/least gas). Simply put the less 'real gas' in their the less emissions. Although I'm leary of the methyl hydrate's effects I've no known problems from it to date.

quote: Originally posted by scca: 1/4" is more than sufficient... there isnt enough room to make a stamped bracket- it must bend within a small area. either a milled piece or 2 pieces welded to gether would be the easiest i think. the brackets look nice but still gotta remove the stub-- i would like to see a bracket to use the 82 caliper with the availability to use the 240sx caliper as well (with a small add on spacer) then there is choice.. and not using the Fugly 79-81 caliper. and on top the 79 i cant get a 5 lug rotor to fit.. Mike, have you got a drawing of this piece as you'd like to see it made? Or dimensions to alter on an existing drawing like Ron Tylers? I met up with a CNC shop owner today who seemed very receptive and surprisingly cost effective IMO. Maybe our canuck dollar helps a lot over US costs/sure does on engine builders/machinging, I'm not sure but could knock off lots of parts/caster/camber plates etc etc saving money on existing aftermarket offerings in our hour or more long discussion. Not looking to compete with anyone but if the product can be significantly cheaper it'd be great to see more able to use it. It's these pricey high end parts few can justify with such profit built in (baer brake kits/MSA etc) that annoy me. Motorsports is so much fun I'd love to see tons more involved/it'll only benefit the sport greatly. No great number of pieces needed at this place. It's obviously cheaper the 2nd run or so if the 1st isn't so large. 20 pieces seemed like a fine 1st run, if more were spoken for it could obviously be expanded. I gave him Ron Tyler's diagram just as a ballpark concept thinking the upper pair of holes would have the '82 caliper spacing and a different offset. He was going to just do a quick program to estimate machine time so we'd have a good cost idea. It'd be quite simple on the CNC made of one piece (no weld quality questions) and better looking as well. Mike, if the 240sx caliper has slightly different spacing it'd be no extra dough to have a couple holes drilled/tapped to secure small spacers if needed for the 200SX calipers to provide some piece of mind to those DIY's. I watched a helluva directional drilling piece made in just over 3 minutes from scratch which involved a fair number of steps. Impressive equipment Scottie, you mentioned not wanting to organize any group purchase which I understand. I've done it before and appreciate the time/details. As such I have no trouble getting a quote on this end as well if noone else has it nailed down at decent pricing. I'd coordinate the GP no trouble (if done here/I don't want to communicate, coordinate with someone on your end). I'll be having some bits done anyhow and enjoyed the visit PS Mike you mention a rotor to fit 5 lug... this is meant to be bolt on for a 4 lug setup right? using stock ZX stuff, and then 5 lug with the rotors you supply, is that correct? Because one can just drill the early rotors for 5lug if that's a desireable option (like I did for my rear 5lug conversion).

I don't know what's offered for a 'short' shifter but my dad has the ripper and is planning to shorten it a good 2".

quote: Originally posted by Owen: Some guy on zcar.com emailed me pix of his brackets recently. He says theyre for the earlier ZX brakes but the pictures definitely showed an offset bracket, is he right and I'm wrong? ]http://www.zcar.com/forums/read.php?f=1&i=187879&t=187606[/QB] [/url] I don't see any statement you've made to either validate or correct Owen Either bracket drawing I look at has an offset. Ron's has 1/8" if I'm assuming it goes on the right way. Otherwise .5". The other 'surrounding' bracket doesn't spec complete thicknesses dimensions on that drawing posted.

OK, looking into rear disk brakes for my dad's 240z. I looked at your site Mike but wasn't clear if those '81 maxima brackets were available or if you sell a bracket to make ZX stuff bolt on out back, the rest looked fine. If so great, just let me know the cost/welding is not preferred. Any other options? I searched archives but missed finding what I thought Alsil had detailed for an upgrade.

quote: Originally posted by Nigel: Yeah, I'd like to go with an aluminum rad, but by the time I import it into Canada, it will cost me substantialy more than $200. Just to give you an idea, an Autometer Boost gauge that sell for $50 US goes for $125 CAD. Nigel, I'm in Canada as well and quite aware on pricing/importing options/costs. If it's $50US then x1.6 xchange to $80CD and $15CD tops for US post for a simple guage which saves brokerage, with an underwritten receipt your duties would be less than $10CD on top. I assume your $125 would have some 13% or so local taxes on top as well. Using US post and 'lesser' receipts whenever you possibly can (ie. slightly used is best ) will save you lots. As well you're in Ontario and their's going to be a ton of US Z's coming up for your convention/show which is a fine importing opportunity to take advantage of No way they'll be questioned on bringing goods for a swap meet or similar. I once got 60lbs (1 pr airflow research heads/1 single plane intake/2 cams/set of roller rockers and other stuff) from New York to Vancouver free in ~13days but that's a longer story Ross (it's a small world) C PS my 26x19 griffin with larger rows (1.25") and tranny cooler was $400CD total at my door. That was $270US total with upgrades and shipping/brokerage, which made it full wholesale cost....not bragging, just pointing out better deals can often be had with patience and effort [ May 09, 2001: Message edited by: Ross C ]

"its amazing-We all speak English & yet the words chosen between us continues to be misunderstood." Agreed, just b/t you and I, other posters were in sync. "....even if it is only 1-2mm here & there/you've still increased the cross sectional port volume (this is the principle of porting); maiking the turns w/in the ports more efficient." Disagree, porting is far more involved that just enlarging for greater volume, this alone does not make a port more efficient. Maybe you're mixing your terms perhaps. I disagree that this is the 'principle' of porting. Yes it's material removal but not just for enlargening. It's more to do with altering the motion dynamics of the air. "It's this principle that effects an engine's powerband; even if you only port/polish in strategic areas-you are effecting the port volume (increasing airflow/decreasing airflow).." Nope, not as simple as that, simple flow laws don't linearly crossover if you manage to transition from turbulent (rough wall) to smooth wall (possibly laminar). A slightly enlarged port (mine will increase in area lets say ~5%) may flow faster if it's got smooth walls allowing more laminar flow and less turbulent flow, ie. more efficient. "has anyone ever read/heard any documentation of the effects on engine temp as a result of Extrude Honing the intake?" engine temp is what? coolant? as stated in each of my posts it's my incoming air to the cyliners I want to 'heat less' and thus keep it cooler "Wouldnt the underhood intakes temps be countered better if the air was routed/vented out someway.." We always make efforts to minimize underhood temps and certainly more airflow underhood or isolated 'hot air flow' routed away from engine is beneficial. That's one step but in either event the intake is heating from engine contact even though it has some fairly good thermally insulating gaskets b/t it. "If the radiated air is not routed away from the engine bay-it will basically create a "Heat Sink" which only gets worse unless routed out of the engine bay area? Correct/yes-no? Just throwing ideas out here! As I see it; the porting aids airflow and wont really aid lowering temp's; while the spacer plates will aid the lowering of the temp's of the intake." Sure, if radiated air has no exit it'll continue to heat to it's saturation point given boundary conditions. I'd like to hear how you feel the spacer plate aids temp drops and not the polishing?? Spacer plate will isolate my TB somewhat so that surface the air passes is cooler (same as a carb but less dramatic as I'm not keeping fuel cool as well). Polishing reduces heat radiated to the incoming intake air. This air will NOT heat saturate as it's long gone down the bore and out the exhaust a few hundred degrees hotter as the new airsupply is coming in......this supply can absorb as much heat as I allow it to from air intake system/throttle body/intake manifold/intake valve etc (function of two items, their temperature/heat stored and their 'radiation' ability).....the more I inhibit the ability of these components to radiate heat into the incoming air the more I've enhanced efficiency and maintained a cooler temp of my intake air leaving it a happier/higher density etc etc/yadda yadda Ross C yeah, still typing )

Yeah Davyz 'polishing' as per subject. If my posts have been hazy I apologize/I'm trying to maintain this verbosity to clarify it I hope. Kevin, I think perhaps your confusing the cross sectional area of the actual structural portion of the intake as what I want to modify. 'surface area' is just that, surface exposed to the incoming air in the runners....you run your finger over cast aluminum and it's not smooth, just sand it down and you just reduced the surface area.....notice how a crumbly 'drier' cheese gets hard faster as it transpires moisture faster from it's rough surface than smoothy mozza , within a city block 100m long it may rise 25m and fall 25m to finish at same elevation (San Fran). That block has far more surface area to radiate or absorb heat with easily 11% more surface area than a flat one, our aluminum is far more up and down than this ie. A dead flat/level block in a prairie city has less surface area (your pythagoran theorem doesn't apply here/straight line, in San Fran you can pythagorize all day as the sum exceeds the single base plane) and consequently less heat can be absorbed or radiated. My gains are not from removing material on the scale you describe but from smoothing out 1-2mm diameter and smaller casting 'bumps', not smoothing out an entire runner etc by straightening the airpath. Clear as mud? Hope that might have clarified it somewhat. On your topic of head porting a friend just returned some high dollar LT1 heads to Texas from his stroker setup.....only ran it a couple hours....they ported so much at least one wall was paper thin and as soon as it warmed up/pressurized it blew out He was pissed! Had already waited months as IRS (internet racers supply) had led him on and sublet his heads to a shop without passing on the timeline....but I'm babbling now.....just glad I'm polishing and not porting per se!

You most likely have the non power rack'n'pinion. Your drivers side header has to clear the steering rod coming down. See my 'rag joint' and '1-3/4' header post....I'll be selling my current setup which clears....1.5" primaries to Y pipe that clears my 700R4 etc....it's the excess torque of my roller and EFI that have me going to 1-3/4's to maximize my top end as bottom is just fine thanks

Could 'we' do it in an afternoon?? Haven't been out for a drive in a few days

Kevin, reread my posts. You missed my intent, a rough wall for ie. may have a surface area of 15 cm square even though in plan the area is only 10cm square. It is the roughness/undulations of the surface (ie. mountains/hills in microtexture) that increase the hypothetical surface area 50%. Reduce this surface area and heat radiated from this surface is less. Nothing new about my 'idea' and its proven simple thermodynamics by many. If you knew me you'd know I'm not in any way tied to a single company/expression The exact degree of gain is something being looked into but I know it exists nonetheless simply due to the significant gradient b/t our engine bay/intake physical temperature relative to our incoming air temperature so gains are their to be had. Same reason piston tops are coated to keep the heat in the bore pushing the piston rather than translating into the piston itself as wasted heat energy. Porting I've always interpreted as altering the overall contour/shape of something which is not my intent/just my take on 'porting'. No offense on use of 'porting', you tied several cylinder head references in their strongly hence my reply.

No mention of porting here Kevin. Strictly smoothing out the surfaces on my intake. If I have some time I think it'll be quite worthwhile. Heat transferred from intake (stinking hot intake/no matter what design) to the incoming air will be reduced measurably if I can smooth it out decently. It wouldn't take a lot of work to reduce the surface area by 25% or so and if it works out and I get it polished quite well it'll only reduce heat radiated that much more. Free efficiency once done, I do a lot of driving so the efficieny is always something I try to keep in mind. More efficient=> less load=>less fuel req'd or MORE power on throttle. Some AEOTY candidates (anal eng. of the year/a true aware on a list of mine ) are looking at the potential gains. Enjoying my recent GRM issue including the $2001 challenge The labour into the 'tobacco free team' (was dead clown racing) is unreal....he cut his intake in half to port and polish his runners and then rewelded....whew! Lots of neat 'stories' in that challenge article.

I posted this snip from my header post as the steering issue hasn't been addressed. It occurred to me last night that if I drop/lower my motor AFTER the headers are fitted/clear my steering arm that this would bring the header closer and possibly reinterfere with the steering arm. (and I don't have time to do final lowering prior to headers) So maybe splicing my steering arm makes more sense than having headers overly customized.....Does it have to tie to the inner fender...or a mount/tab tied into my xmember horn sandwhiched under motor mount?? ___________________________ Still somewhat undecided on whether the headers should be brought out and around the steering shaft OR if the steering shaft should be sectioned/U jointed/tied to fenderwell so the header can be brought down tight to block. I figure either mod is a one time thing and as I'll want my exhaust closer to my frame rail than oilpan anyhow to clear oil filter (and possible T56 slave later on) that I may as well have headers brought out and down by the rail.....comments/ideers? It's the welding required for the steering mod that has me leary as I can't do that myself and steering 'joint' kits are pricey AIR. Anyone know exactly what parts I'd need and approximate cost? one extra steering shaft with stock Ujoint from a parts car and a sperical tie rod with ID to match OD of rod with tie rod attached to inner fender?? .....thanks in advance for all thoughts and ideers.... PS checked a ZX crossmember yesterday and it has lots of room for me to slot the engine mount 'hole' on the horn as I lower it relative to the crossmember. At least 1.1-1.2" lateral room and it'll still allow me to fit a large bolt underneath and tighten etc.....