74_5.0L_Z

I have Mike Gibson's Stage II (4 lug)brake set-up on the front of my car (since 2001) and a custom set-up on the rear using Outlaw 2800 series calipers and 1985 maxima front rotors. I have been very pleased with this brake set-up. Mike is a fellow HybridZ member and a very good guy to deal with. I personally recommend going with the Hawk HP-plus pads rather than the HPS pads. They make a little more dust, but have a lot more stopping power.

I tried the HB237-HPS pads and didn't like them very much for either street or autocross. I switched to the HB237-HP-plus and LOVE them.

First, because the engine is from 1987, it uses a speed density ECM. What this means is that the computer decides how long to pulse the injectors based on Manifold pressure, Throttle position and RPMs. If you have vacuum leaks (especially if the vacuum leak is in the hose leading to the MAP sensor), then the computer will be confused and the engine will not run correctly. This problem should not prevent it from running altogether, but would cause idling problems. Have you pulled codes from the computer? That is usually a good place to start. If you are unfamiliar with Ford fuel injection, then I suggest that you get Charles Probst's book on the EEC-IV engine management system used by ford. It is a very informative book, and provides a lot of insight into the operation and troubleshooting of these fuel injection systems. The only item that I have had fail on my car is the TFI module in the factory distributor. These modules are known to eventually succumb to the heat under the hood. I looked into replacing it with a stock piece, but in the end I opted to upgrade to the MSD billet distributor that cames with new electronics installed. http://store.summitracing.com/default.asp?target=/egnsearch.asp&N=400122

I used the Chris Alston chassisworks front plate and a chassis engineering's steel mid-plate to mount my 5.0L and T5. They also have plates for the cleveland (P/N 6032). https://www.cachassisworks.com/images/6032at.jpg I believe you would use the same mid-plate as I do. P/N 3699 from chassis engineering. http://www.chassisengineering.com/viewcatalog.html

Cary, Coming from you, I consider that high praise indeed. Considering that I used pictures of the Tube80Z construction as inspiration. Dan

Some of the issues that I had to overcome in the construction of my chassis are the same as ones that you will encounter with add-on reinforcement. First, the z car is very narrow, and space within the passenger compartment is at a premium. In order to not crowd the driver more than absolutely necessary, it is mandatory that the main hoop is constructed to fit as tightly as possible to the B-pillar and roof. This foundation allows all attachments to the main hoop to be place as far away from the driver as possible. For a street car, the door bars cannot penetrate in to the door (much), and if they are being relied upon to provide fore and aft stiffness, they should be straight and triangulated. Second, the cowl area limits the height at which tubes can penetrate the firewall. In my design, I wanted to not modify the cowl and I also wanted to have the load path of the tubing go from the front strut tower, through the door bars and to the attach point of the main hoop. In order to achieve this, my door bar starts at the bottom of the main hoop and proceeds at a shallow angle to the highest point of the firewall allowed by the cowl. There, it penetrates the firewall and joins a cluster of tubes that proceed to the frame and strut tower. The shallow angle of the lower door bar forces the intersection point of the two door bars forward and down. Keeping the intersection point of the door bars low and forward has the benefit of making it fairly easy to get in and out of the car. In the following image you can see where the door bars penetrate the firewall and join the tringulated tubing thatsupports the front strut tower and frame. Here you can also see that the tubing has to be place as far ouboard as possible to clear the clutch master cylinder.

Yes, the bar going between the rear strut towers is welded to them. These are the only pictures I could find of the front inside of the car. Here is a picture of the interior after it was reassembled. The tubes of the door bars penetrate the floor, and are welded to the cluster in front of the firewall, and attached to the front of the rocker panel with a gusset.

This was my solution to the whole chassis reinforcement issue:

Thanks, Would you mind clarifying the last sentence? What kind of bad things?

I've been thinking of this topic for several weeks. The people on this forum always seem to read my mind. I began thinking in terms of doing the rear suspension to increase the amount of backspace available in the rear wheel wells. I drew up some ideas, and decided to analyze the suspension I currently had before making modifications. What I came up with is that the front needs alot more help than the rear. The front suspension gains about 0.75 degrees of negative camber per inch of bump, gains positive camber in a deminishing non-linear fashion as the wheel rebounds past the point where the LCA is level, and has a really high KPI (~13.5 degrees) The rear suspension gains about 1.7 degrees of negative camber per inch of bump, and is linear over the entire stroke of the damper. I decided that I will modify the front suspension rather than the rear. I may do the rear later after I have improved the front. What I am trying to decide is how much KPI to design around. I can run a longer upper control arm by using a smaller KPI (5 to 8 degrees), and I feel that a longer UCA is better because the roll center will move around less. I am also trying to decide how tall to make the upright. I am currently leaning towards going with the tallest upright height that will allow the ball joint to fit inside the wheel.

http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=75442&highlight=Dynomax

Have you checked out the new XP class in SCCA. This looks like a perfect fit for our Hybridz cars in national level autoX.

I just measured, and my driver's side cylinder head is 1.125 inch from the fire wall. My firewall is unmodified, but you will have to remove the ears from the stock transmission mounts on the body.

I have a 1989 5.0L in my 260Z, and I have been driving it for over five years. The 1989 uses the rear sump type pan. In order to squeeze the engine in to the stock chassis, I had to do a couple of things: First, I moved the oil plug for the front sump from the front corner to the bottom. This gave me ~1/2" additional clearance, and made it possible to remove the drain plug from the front sump. Second, I put a 3/16" plate between the front crossmember and the frame. This created some more clearance. Third, I slightly notched the driver's side of the hood latch to clear the curve of the EFI intake. Fourth (this is important), I installed the engine at a 2.5 degree angle. This required me to adjust the angle of the differential to match. I raised the rear of the differential by removing the washers above the mustache bar. Since the original installation, I have wrecked the car and replaced the front end with a tubular chassis, but the engine is still in the same location (though now mounted using a front plate/mid-plate set-up). Here are some pictures that show the relationship of the harmonic balancer / pan to the steering rack/crossmember.

Just be careful that you have sufficient clearance between the frame and T/C rod after you relocate it. I redid my T/C rods before sectioning my struts, and had no problems for over a year of driving/ autocrossing. I then lowered my car and sectioned the struts. Unfortunately, I did not recheck all my clearances and my tubular T/C rod hit the corner of a plate that I had welded to the bottom of my frame rails(remnants of my old motor mounts). The result was that the dented T/C rod buckled and broke under hard braking on a very tight course. The following picture shows the results of a trip through the mangroves at the Bay Bottom Crawl. The left front fender, hood, and air dam were destroyed. The left side mirror, Quarter emblem, radio antenna, and rear side marker were ripped off the car (and are still somewhere in the mangroves), and left the driver's door with pressure dings. If you look on the ground in front of the car, you can see the failed T/C tube. I have nearly finished repairs (SubtleZ body kit), and have reworked my T/C rods for added clearance. I'll post pictures when I get some.

My 1974 260Z doors weighed 67 lbs each with all the hardware (glass, hinges, door panel, arm rest). I plan to get a second set that will be shells only.

Does this count? I have just a little over 300 hp at the wheels, and have 53.6 percent of the weight on the rear tires with me in the car. The tops of strut tower were moved backwards 3/4" to increase caster. The center of the distributor cap is still behind the center of the strut towers. The back of the driver's side cylinder head is less than one inch from the firewall. The harmonic balancer is just above the steering rack.

What type of distributor/ignition do you have? I have had similar problems to yours when using an old optically fired ignition. The problem was caused when the rotor tip was not properly aligned with the contacts in the distributor cap. At idle it would run fine, then as the engine was placed under a load (and the distributor advanced) the engine would run terribly. You can get into this scenario with crank fired ignitions and other types of ignition that use a distribitor. The way to diagnose this is to rotate the engine by hand with the key ON (ignition energized but not the starter), the distributor cap off, and find where the ignition fires. Mark that point on the distributor housing, and verify that the center of the desired cylinder's electrode on the cap is properly aligned with the leading edge of the rotor tip. If the trailing edge of the rotor is at (or slightly past) the edge of the electrode, then you will have problems when then distributor advances. On small diameter caps, the advancing distributor can cause the distributor to fire the wrong cylinder. Have you checked your timing at 3500 rpms? Is it stable?

When I built my replacement frame rails, I moved my T/C pivot up 3/4" and out 1/4" to mimic the relocation of the LCA pivot point. I replaced the entire front frame with 2.5" square tubing per the original frame dimensions (except the T/C pivot point. I made my clevises from 2" x 3" x 3/16" rectangular tubing. I scribed the outline on one side and located the holes, and had my buddy at the machine shop cut them out. The part that overhangs the inboard side of the frame rails is gusseted from above. I made a fixture to locate the clevises for welding. My reasoning was the same as yours: I didn't want to design an anti-anti-dive front suspension:)