74_5.0L_Z

I made my cage in sections. The main hoop, the bars from the top and sides of the main hoop, and the rear strut bar were a complete subassembly. To make the main hoop subassembly, I tacked everything together inside the car and then removed it for final welding on the bench. A benefit to this was that I could paint the cage and interior before installing it. This picture shows the rollbar after painting but before final welding. The entire assmbly could be removed by tipping it forward and wrapping it out.

something like this? http://www.secureperformanceorder.com/afcostore/getproduct.cfm?CategoryID=3&ClassID=36&SubclassID=150&ProductID=1817 edit:Nevermind, I see that you are still running metric stuff. One thing you should keep in mind is that Nissan ran the hard tube from the caliper to the hard point on the strut for a reason: The ends of flexhose are supposed to be mounted in planes that are parallel to each other. Otherwise the flexhose tries to rotate as the wheel goes up and down relative to the frame. The twisting can cause the barake line to loosen. As added insurance, the ends of the flexhose are mounted in clips to prevent rotation. Edit: double checked the military spec that details the installation of flex hoses (ML0102-306)

With springs, the formula that relates deflection to force is as follows: F=K*x where K is the spring constant (i.e 250 lb / in) x is the deflection in inches from free length The deflection x is measured from the static position (no force applied) As an example, A spring is installed at a corner of the car with a free length of 12 inches, a rate of 250lbs/inch and a loaded spring height of 9 inches. What would be the affect of increasing spring rate to 300 lb/in and decreasing free length? First, determine the change by increasing spring rate: Assume the force at the wheel will be unchanged->F=k1*x1=k2*x2 therefore x2=k1/k2*x1 that is x2 = 250/300*3 = 2.5" The deflection of the springs is now only 2.5" rather than 3". If you were to only change spring rate without changing free length, you would raise the car by ~.5"(neglecting the angle of the strut). Now, if you want to lower the car while using the stiffer springs. Subtract the amount you wanted to lower the car originally plus the additional lift acquired by going to stiffer springs. Using the same set-up, assume that you wanted to drop the car 1.5" from its original ride height. You would need 300lb/in springs with L=12"-(1.5" + .5)" =10" 10 " 300 lb/in springs would lower the car 1.5" as compared to the same car with 12" 250 lb/in springs. All else being equal.

I'm not sure of the exact number, but I know the following: With the stock springs, I believe that you are limited to wheels with a 4" backspace(the stock wheels have 3.875" BS). With coil-overs, I run a 5" backspace (15x8" and 16x8") with a fraction of an inch to spare. With coil-overs and wheels with 5" of backspace, I am able to run 245/45/16 under the stock whell wells. My coilover springs fit inside the stock springs with room to spare. The coilovers are also less than half the weight of the stock springs. Most importantly, coil-overs are cool.

Brian, I have the edelbrock heads, Cobra Intake and Crower 15511 cam with 1.72 roller rocker arms. I installed these pieces somewhat incrementally and here is what I experienced. Stock......................Anything over 5500 was a waste of time. Stock + 1.72 rocker arms, 73mm MAF and 24# injectors............. a little more power but same rpm Add heads, intake, cam.............. pulls hard all the way to the 6250 rev limiter. I feel that the motor could easily pull to 6500 without any problems. I will probably install a chip soon to test that theory. With the 5.0L, the first hurdle to twisting past 5500 is the stock heads, intake, and cam. The stock heads don't flow well enough, and the stock valve springs are too weak to handle 5800 rpms. You now have a great set of heads with good valve springs. Unfortunately, the E-303 cam has a fairly narrow power curve that signs off at about 6000 rpms. You might consider a different cam. Crower and Anderson Ford Motorsports make some good ones. What intake are you running? Aren't you running a carburetor ? With the AFR heads, the right hydraulic roller cam, and the right intake 6500 rpms should be safe. If you really want to rev (above 6500) then install a solid roller cam. Anything more than 6500 though you should use better connecting rods.

Here are the dimensions of the main hoop used in my car: This roll bar fits VERY tight to the pillar (trimming of the interior plastic around the quarter windows is required). I should also mention that the bottom of the hoop is cut a ten degree angle to lean the hoop backwards parallel to the pillar.

I do not use Alsil's crossmember, but I do have a 5.0L installed in my 260Z. Originally I installed the motor using the late model mustang rubber mounts and some steel plates attached to the frame. This worked pretty well, but if I were to rubber mount the engine again, I would build something similar to Alsil's crossmember. Here is a picture of the engine as it was installed on the rubber mounts: As you can see, I had to notch the bracket that holds the latch mechanism (ever so slightly). As stated earlier, the point of closest contact is the tube on top of the throttle body. I have about 1/4" clearance between the stock hood and the tube. Currently, my engine is mounted using a front plate/mid plate configuration. The engine is in the same location as before, but now it is mounted solid. A benefit of the front plate mid plate set-up is that it opens up tons of room under the engine.

How's this for a rear strut bar?

I have the stock 260Z master cylinder (15/16" I believe) with the following brakes: front Outlaw 2800 calipers with (4) 1.75" pistons 11.75 " x 0.81" rotors rear Outlaw 2800 calipers with (4) 1.38" pistons 10.75" x 0.81" rotors Hawk HP plus pads Wilwood proportioning valve I run this set-up with NO booster, and my brakes work very well. The modulation is very good, and the pedal effort is moderate. If you use a large bore master cylinder then you had better run a booster or the pedal effort will be very high. Larger master cylinders require greater the pedal effort but less pedal movement. Smaller master cylinders require less effort but more pedal displacement. Either way the work required is the same W=F*x W is work F is pedal force x is pedal displacement

I have a 1989 5.0L in my 260Z. The motor was completely stock when I originally install it five years ago. In stock form, the motor would rev to the 6250 computer enforced redline, but power pretty much signed off at 5800. Now the motor has Edelbrock aluminum heads, crower 15511 hydraulic roller cam, FMS 1.72 roller rocker arms, Cobra intake on the original stock bottom end. In this configuration, the car pulls very strong all the way to the 6250 rev limiter. In first gear, you rev so fast that it is hard to shift fast enough to stay off the rev limiter. I have put several thousand miles on this motor and bounce off the rev limiter countless times without any problems. The main impediments to revving the 5.0L are the computer (6250 rpms), and the mass of the hydraulic roller lifters. The computer is an easy fix, but the hydraulic roller lifters are a little more difficult. The hydraulic roller lifters are heavy and start to bounce after a certain rpm. I have heard that this occurs around 6500. To a certain degree, this can be controlled by installing better valve springs but if you install too stiff a valve spring on a hydraulic lifter, it will collapse. Some people are exceeding 7500 with the hydraulic roller lifters with the right combination of cam and springs. Anderson Ford Motorsports boasts that their cams and valve train can do this. I have considered installing a chip to raise my rev limit, but have decided to wait until I can build a new bottom end and switch to a solid roller cam. As an aside, my best friend and I run a NHRA Super stock Comet with a 289. That engine with a stock crank, stock rods, stock block (filled mexican 302), solid roller cam and Jesel valve train sees 8200 rpm every pass. There are others in the class that are twisting the 289 well past 9000 rpms.

1974 260Z 1989 5.0L Mustang engine Edelbrock aluminum heads Cobra intake aluminum radiator half cage/ tubular front end/ subframe no carpet, no under coat, no sound deadener 16 x 8 inch centerlines with 245/45/16 HoosierA3S04 tires stock seats, full doors, all glass 16 gallons of fuel Me (190 lbs) 2716 total (53.6% r/46.4% f)

I use the Moroso filler neck without any problems

Thanks, I knew you were the one to ask.

Grumpyvette, I currently have dynomax block hugger headers, dual 2.5" exhaust, 2 two chamber Flowmaster mufflers, and H pipe on my 5.0L powered 260Z. I like the sound and I get a lot of compliments, but I want something a little better than the Block huggers, a little lighter than the flowmasters, and something more unique. My engine is mounted using a front plate / mid-plate set-up, and I have the late model rear sump pan. The engine configuration opens up a ton of space below the motor ahead of the rear sump. The engine currently displaces 302 c.i, but I plan to build a 331 stroker. The heads are Edelbrock Performer RPM, the intake is an Edelbrock Performer RPM with 30# injectors. The cam is a Crower 15511 hydraulic roller with 1.72 roller rockers. I plan to build the new motor with 10.5:1 compression, and want a usable 7000 rpm (I may change the cam to a solid roller). The car is used mostly for autocross and some track days. Here is what I want to do: I want to build some custom 180 degree headers such that the center two tubes from each bank cross under the oil pan and go into the opposite side collector. I plan to have the collectors mounted at an angle behind the front tires such that they exit the from the fender midway between the wheel opening and the door. From the collector exit they will run parallel to the rocker panel(higher than the plane of the floor) and dump outward and down in front of the rear tire. My questions are these: First, what size primary tube would you use (packaging will probably limit my minimum length to 36")? Second, what size collector (length and diameter)? Third, what would be the lightest/smallest muffler that will pass SCCA sound allowance (90dB at 50' I think). Thanks,Dan McGrath

Damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! An SFI scattershield just moved to the top of my priority list.

I used 2.5" x 0.085 wall square mild steel tubing for my subframe. The cage tubing interior to the car is 1.625 x 0.120 wall 4130 steel, the hoop at the firewall is 1.625 x 0.083 4130, and all of the tubing forward of that is 1.625 x 0.065 4130 steel.

If you are talking about symbol that looks like this: --)|-- (only with an arrow through it), then it is an adjustable capacitor. Without the arrow, it is just a capacitor. The one above it is a three position switch

Jolane is correct. You have one too many degrees of freedom in your set-up. What you can do is cut the stock tension compression rods down and keep just the ends that bolts to the control arms. Cut them so that you have about 6" of rod after the bend, and have the 5/8-18 threads turned on the rods. Then of course you will need two new (5/8-18 tube adapters). Bolt the ends in the stock location, and thread them into your tubes.

Thanks for the praises of my work. It means a bunch after all the time and money involved. I use the stock rack and pinion and stock front crossmember(with the LCA mod). The suspension mounting points are the same as stock except for the following: The top of the front strut towers have been moved aft by 3/4" to increase caster. The angle of the strut tower top has been increase from 13.75 degrees to 15 degrees. The T/C rod pivot at the body has been moved upwards 3/4" and out 1/4". The drawing of the main hoop is the exact drawing that mine was made from. It fits VERY, VERY tight. One thing that is not shown on the drawing is the angle cut on the bottom. My bar is installed leaning back 10 degrees, so the bottom of the main hoop has a 10 degree cut to match.