Pop N Wood

"Cheapest" would be to take a torch to the springs making them droop. Second cheapest would be cutting a coil or two off the existing springs. Two of the worst ways to lower a car. Next cheapest would be some "performance" springs that use the stock perches (MSA has them). I think these will lower the car about that much. If you want adjustability, then coil overs are the way to go. But they are far from the "cheapest". Wouldn't removing the stock strut isolators and installing camber plates also lower the car about an inch to an inch and a half?

I put the larger MC in my 70 240. Bolt up deal. The pushrod length was way short, the brake pedal moved without resistance until the last inch of travel. Very simple matter to make the push rod longer so that the pressure started to build within the first inch of pedal travel. Also be careful, the larger MC has the reservoirs reversed from the 240's. Make sure the larger reservoir goes to the front brakes. You need to cross the brake hard lines front to back at the MC. There is enough play in the lines to do this. I think the Arizonia Z car site has info on this.

i.e. radial.

A little rust in the MC and the rubber seals won't seal to the inside of the cylinder. If you hit the brake hard, then the rubber cup expands with some force creating a good seal. But light brake pressure and the MC doesn't catch, or slowly bleeds off pressure internally (thus no external leaks) Having grown up poor, it was not uncommon to have a car that required an occasionaly double pump to stop.

Agreed, very loaded statement. Depends upon one's idea of "better". But there are some very real differences in the head design on the two engines. Check out this thread, and look at Mudge's posts http://www.hybridz.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=19398&highlight=ls1 My comments on "potential" were based on his statements about streetable HP (another loaded term). The LS6 produces 405 very streetable HP in part because the better head design means better flow with less cam. Another thread with some usefull info http://www.hybridz.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=20677&highlight=ls1

Have you looked at Ron Tyler's page concerning driveline vibration? http://www.home.earthlink.net/~rontyler/rontyler.html He is of the strong opinion that a properly balanced aluminum driveshaft is the answer. I am a big fan of laser pointers. It would seem to me that if you were to take an old tranmission yoke and diff yoke, cut them off then firmly attach a laser pointer to each, you would have the perfect tool for aligning the trans and diff. Hook these things up on both ends and place a piece of thin paper (mylar) stretched inside a cardboard frame in front of both laser pointers. By looking at the two laser dots on the mylar page you could measure the offsets very precisely. Just align the trans or diff so the dots are exactly the same distance apart on both pages. Maybe lined graph paper would make this even easier. The smaller the distance between the two points, the smaller the U joint angles. If you measure the distance between the two pieces of paper, then you could easily and very accurately compute the angle as the arctan of the distance between the dots divided by the distance between the pages. Ideally the laser pointer should be perfectly perpendicular to the yoke flange, but it doesn't have to be. Spinning each yoke(s) will cause the beam to rotate about the true axis. Trace the circle on the mylar pages and the point in the center of the circle is the exact centerline of each shaft. This is certainly more accurate than placing an angle finder against the case of a transmission and hoping it is parallel to the output shaft. I have also heard of using a solid driveshaft, but a laser beam is lighter and avoids the issue of the drive shaft not being welded perfectly straight. Maybe someone should manufacture plastic cups matching the output shaft splines on one end and a laser pointer insert on the other. You could probably sell such kits for $25.

You forgot performance potential. Give that one to the LS1 for better flowing heads. You also forgot availablity (from a cost perpsective) of performance parts. Give that one to the LT1 also. Ease of installation: LT1 Ability to be certified as a smog legal swap: LT1 (pre OBDII models) The LT1's are cheaper, but the T56 transmissions for the LS1's cost less. The cost issue will become more of a push as the availability of LT1's continues to diminish and used LS1's get cheaper. I would imagine performance parts will come more in line also. Don't forget working on LS1's requires special tools. Many of the bottom end bolts are use once items requiring a degree tool instead of a torque wrench.

Did you see where Leno joked that california was going balance their budget by increasing the DMV fees..... on his cars.

I have a 2.4L Tacoma engine in my 2WD Tacoma PU. (The 2.7's were in the 4x4's) Nice daily driver, but with no top end it would be hard to consider for a Z. The intake wraps over the engine placing the throttle body directly above the valve cover, so hood clearance might be an issue. Those long intake tubes are definitely tuned for mid RPM torque and not max RPM air flow. I know Toyota makes a supercharger kit for the V6's, but who makes the turbo kit for the 4 cylinders? Do the kits include a new intake to avoid the above?

Or get it powder coated.

My december 1970 240 has the vents in the rear hatch. It is titled as a 71. VIN HLS30 17725. Definitely an E31 head. I think the E31 is cast right into the side of the head, just above the head gasket. Should be easily visible.

I was just out there for a wedding a few weeks back. Beaches, Disneyland, San Diego, sky dive at Lake Elsinore, great Mexican food. Go to Long Beach and hunt down Jessie James. Go to Newport Beach and hunt Ferrari's. Enjoy the traffic. Pretty much the center of SoCal.

Man oh man oh man!!

Just retorque all the bolts. Don'f forget the bolts holding the bar to the back of the diff. With the car in the air you need to lift up on the front of the diff to see the broken mount. Also try retorquing the nut on the top of the strut shaft. If those get loose, they can gouge out the D shaped hole in the strut isolator. Eventually the clunking around will wear through the strut shaft. Ask me how I know.

Look up some old articles on the Calloway Corvettes. The turbo plumbing was extensive. You will essentially have to start over to fit it in a Z. Don't worry about chassis reenforcement. The 225 tires on your Z will give long before the chassis does. I would think you could do better by swapping the engine into the same year vette. Also you said you are "waiting pictures". I would not buy such an engine without seeing it in person first. You need to run a compression check on everything. I would also check the radiator/oil for oil or antifreeze respectively. Make sure there is no block damage from the wreck. Hearing it run would not be a bad idea either.

My brother once put over 100,000 miles on a Vega engine. When he told a group of guys at work this they threatened to beat him up for telling such unbelievable crap. I just got an letter from Toyota concerning oil "gelling" in my minivan engine. Seems like certain Toyota V6's are sludging up and burning out the engine before the first oil change. Do a google search. The Japanese have their moments also. BTW, a lot of these issues are marketing related, not engineering. Engineers do what they can, but it is ultimately a management decision whether something sees production or not.

Cool. The book "How to Hotrod and Race your Datsun" had some pictures of the extensive cage work done on those cars. Do you have more detailed information concerning all the supports? The set up is WAY too much for a street car, but I would love to get all the details. Would give me a better idea of where the Z weak points are.

Why do people feel that unless it is DOHC with 4 valves per cylinder it is low tech/old tech? Production engines fitting that description existed in the 1910's (almost 100 years ago now). Honda is forced to build small displacement engines because of the realities of their markets and Japanese laws. If they want performance, they have to go to such extremes. A lot of that is changing now that Honda's is starting to build more classically American vehicles. These vehicles are using larger displacement V6's. Kinda like GM. There are a lot of different factors that go into engineering. Cost, reliabilty and ease of manufacturing are among the more challanging constraints. In that sense, building an unnecessarily complicated engine is poor engineering. Push rod V8's will exist for the forseable future because it is a great design and gets the job done. I heard the same nonsense about the death of such engines back in the 70's . And F1 engines are Honda's only because they pay for them. Chevy's rulled Cart some years ago, only because they bought the English company that made them. Neither engine had much in common with the Camaro or Accord engines. GM could build small displacement, high reving, whinny, no low RPM torque engines also. But why bother when you can put in a big brute of a V8 and have a more streetable engine?

I have read a lot of very negative posts about the 4 bbl set up. The SU's are sweet, but make sure to get a set with a quality rebuild. The throttle shafts bushings wear out creating a vacuum leak.

This thread has gone around several times. The 240's are preferrable for many reasons, but the 280's have several things going for them. The 240's are lighter and do look better (IMO). However they are also older and rust free versions are much harder to come by. The cars are also gaining some collector's appeal, which makes them even more expensive. The most important thing you can do is get a rust free car. That will be easier with a 280. You can then back fit the 240 bumpers or an aero kit if you wish. You mention you know about the 280's being more rigid "etc etc etc". Check out the recent threads about "chassis reenforcement" and the one claiming 240's are more prone to exhaust fumes. I say the "better choice" is which ever one you can get the better deal on. Just start looking for a Z and don't worry wether it is a 240 or 280.

More PSI means it can stuff more air in the same size tank. This means the compressor won't cycle on and off as often under intermittent use. If you run a tool continuously (like a DA or grinder), then you are right, the CFM rating is what you need to look at. Most high volume tools run at pressures around 90 PSI so that is a good number for comparison. Most air tools list there CFM consumption, so look at some of those to see if the compressor will keep up. What you will find is it takes more horsepower to up the CFM rating. You will need 220V to get any useful numbers. BTW, stay away from the oilless compressors at Sears (if that is what you looked at). Many guys on here have complained about the noise and some claim they wear out quicker.

I kinda like the mounts. Not as cheesy as the JTR bolt on. although I would have cut some pipe rather than using all those washers. Amazing something like that will fit. I kept wanting to see an overhead shot. That big, heavy engine looks awfully high and awfully far forward. With some fat slicks it will do well at the track.

Follow the $$$ Figure out which engine you can get the best deal on and go that way. They would all make a pretty nice ZX.

Better be nice to your mama! If her name is on the title then you can't change that without her signature! You may want to do some sweet talking until she signs it over. Of course, if it is also in your name, then she is in the same position as you. Just go get it. You can't be charged for stealing a car that is licensed to you.

Sorry, seem to have upset you. Wasn't my intention. By “unsupported” I meant not supported by citing some type of reference to back up the claim. IMO, any sentence that begins with "I think" and doesn't end with a reference of some type is “unsupported”. Doesn’t mean you aren’t correct, just means your opinions are as much speculation as mine. The point I am try to make is you guys are going to extremes. I knew a guy who wouldn’t wear steel toed shoes because he was afraid that something would pinch the steel down on his toes cutting them off. Yeah, a definite possibility, but since steel toe boots take something like 50 tons to crush you were going to lose your toes either way. What you are doing by adding a cage is moving the weak link a little farther down the safety chain. There is growing concern among auto manufactures and safety experts regarding ankle and foot injuries from brake pedals. Seems like there is a growing rate of severe injuries in this area. After 100 years of automotive history, why are we just now starting to address this issue? Because the combination of mandatory seat belt use, air bags and increased safety standards means more people with these types of injuries are surviving these wrecks in the first place. Now for the issue of helmets. Oh, thanks for clearing that up for me. Now I see the errors in my logic. I have never seen any statistics regarding helmets in a race car. I do know Dale Earnhardt died of a broken neck and not a cracked skull. Was the helmet a factor? Who knows, probably not. The G forces on his neck were so strong that the added weight of the helmet probably made no difference. I have seen statistics for motorcycle helmets and believe me, the case for mandatory helmet laws is far from clear. Helmets bounce, and the early ones use to come too far down the back of the neck making a nice little wedge to snap the neck. But the biggest worry is that above 35 MPH your other injuries are often serious enough that the only difference a helmet makes is an “open casket vs. closed casket funeral” (to quote a biker friend of mine). Cage manufacturers are just like any other manufacturer, they are afraid to say anything that will get them sued. In fact, the more safety warnings you place on a product, the more chances you have to say “we are not at fault because they weren’t following our directions”. If you believe what some members on this board say, most cages aren’t well engineered to begin with. What cage manufacturers say doesn’t mean much to me either way. To be honest, if I were racing competitively, I would have a car with a full cage, a 5 point harness and I would be wearing a helmet. I would also have a fire suit, fuel cell, extinguisher and full safety crew yada yada yada. But to think that by adding a properly designed cage you are making your car so dangerous that it would be unsafe to drive without a helmet…..