74_5.0L_Z

By "in phase", I mean that the u-joint caps are in the same plane. I clamped the u-joints to a flat surface so that the cups from each u-joint were flat and parallel to assure correct alignment before welding. There will be a little slop because the shaft is slightly smaller than 5/8". To alleviate this, I ground the welded edge of the new u-joint into a smooth radius, and positioned the rod end to butt against the weld. By doing this the shaft is positively centered within the rod end.

I am using a 5/8" to 5/8" smooth bore universal joint from Sweet Mfg. To install the u-joint and support, I cut the original shaft, slid the rod end support over the shaft, and welded the u-joint in place. When you install the u-joint be certain that the new u-joint is phased with the old one or it will bind. Also, be careful not to overheat the u-joint or you'll burn the covers on the bearing caps. Here is a picture showing my installation.

The deep drive shaft tunnel of the Z is very important to the overall rigidity of the car. I would be careful cutting it without some good reinforcement. Why do you want the mufflers under the car? I would think that would cause resonance inside the car. One thing I have considered is mounting a single dual in/dual out muffler in the driveshaft tunnel behind the transmission. In the 280Z, I believe that there is a wide section where the catalytic converter was mounted. Currently, I have dual 2.5" exhaust with (2) two chamber flowmasters mounted in the back on either side. To do this though, I had to get rid of the stock gas tank, and mount a fuel cell centered between the rear frame rails.

There are two reasons for the slow response to your query: First, there are far fewer member with Ford engines in their cars. Second, the 1986 5.0L fuel injection is an animal unto itself. It was the first year for the 5.0L to be fuel injected, and was noted to be problematic. The fuel injection system on the 5.0L was improved in 1987 with the introduction of the EEC-IV computer, and improved again in 1988 with the introduction of the Mass Air version of the EEC-IV. My suggestion would be to dump the 1986 fuel injection and update to the 1988-1993 version. Better yet, get an entire engine with the wiring harness and computer(1989 - 1991 preferably). These packages are plentiful and relatively cheap. THe 1986 engine had inferior heads, intake manifold, pistons with no valve reliefs, and other idiosyncracies that make it less desirable than the later engines. Good luck, Dan McGrath

I have a T5 and 5.0L in my Z and an R200 differential. The T5 has the following gear rations: 1st 3.35 2nd 1.99 3rd 1.33 4th 1.00 5th 0.68 My R200 has a 3.545 to 1 gear ratio. First gear is not very useful on the street. I start out in second gear most of the time. I feel that a 3.36 to 1 rear gear ratio would be more comfortable to drive on the street. Some of the Ford Motorsport T5s come with a 2.95 to 1 first gear ratio. I think this would make first gear more useful; however the ford motorsport T5 also has a 0.63 to 1 fifth gear which makes 5th gear a dog.

I am using the following parts with my T5: Tilton P/N 61-601 Hydraulic throw out bearing Tilton P/N 61-612 Adapter (replaces input bearing support on T5) Tilton P/N 74-875U clutch master cylinder You can get these parts from http://www.colemanracing.com

I'm sorry, but the whole time I was watching the video, I kept expecting to see clowns, elephants, and the freak show acts. Drifting is not racing. I may be old school, but all I could think while watching the video was, "What a bunch of idiots." Sorry, just my opinion. I don't want SCCA sanctioning this stuff. If I want real drifting, I'll watch world rally or World of Outlaws sprint cars.

One thing I consider to be of utmost importance is "overdrive". Without overdrive, you will not enjoy driving this thing on the highway. With a T5 in 5th gear (0.68 to 1), 24.7" tires(245/50/15), and a 3.545 rear gear ratio you will be running 2300 rpm at 70 mph, and 4900 rpm at 150 mph. With a C4 (not including slippage) you will be running 3400 rpm at 70 mph, and 6000 rpm at 124 mph. Whether you get a T5, Tremec, or an automatic with overdrive, get a tranny with overdrive!!!!!!

I work with Rick(Speeder) at Kennedy Space Center. I have a BSME from the University of Florida. I have been working at the space center ever since I graduated in 1998. I work with the Main Propulsion System(MPS) of the space shuttle.

My Tilton HTOB specifies a 0.125 to 0.2 inch clearance to allow for disc wear. I run on the tight side, and haven't had any problems. I have replaced the disc three times, but each time before appreciable wear. My setup is at the highest end of the adjustment range of the threaded sleeve to get the 0.125" clearance. I could thread it down to gain more clearance, but am afraid of exceeding the 0.70" allowable total stroke. My clutch disengages about half-way through the pedal travel. My set-up includes the following parts. Tilton 74-875U master cylinder (.875 diameter) Tilton 61-601 Hydraulic Throw-out Bearing Tilton 61-612 Adapter King Cobra Clutch (5.0L Ford)

As far as running mid-13's, that will be no problem. With the bone stock 5.0L, and t5 in my car I ran 13.70s@ 100. (2850 lbs with driver) With only the addidion of 73mm MAF, 1,72 rollers, and 24# injectors, I ran 13.20s at 103 mph. (2850lbs with driver) With the addition of Edelbrock Performer Heads, Crower Cam, 70mm TB, and Cobra Intake, I have run a best of 12.69 @ 112 mph (with a slipping clutch). The bottom end of this motor is exactly as it came from the junk yard.

I would do the following: Put the 350# spring in the rear, and the 300# in the front. Remove the rear sway bar. Rear sway bars on the Z make them oversteer horribly, and unload the inside rear tire during corner exit.

I have been running an '89 5.0L motor in early 1974 260Z for three years now. The bottom end is completely stock(I haven't even inspected the main bearings). I have put Edelbrock aluminum heads, Crower 15511 Cam, 1.72 roller rockers, Cobra intake, 24# injectors, etc.. I have about 310 HP to the back tires. Now I'm about ready to build a bottom end. I've been considering my choices. 306 long rod 5.40 inch rod 3 inch stroke 1.8 rod ratio 331 stroker 5.40 inch rod 3.25" stroke 1.66 rod ratio 289 (+.030) 5.5 inch rod 2.87" stroke 1.916 rod ratio Which ever way I go, I plan to go with a solid roller set-up so that I can twist it a bit tighter (7500+ rpm). For this reason the 289 looks really good. My best friend has a 289 in his NHRA Super Stock that we routinely twist 8300 rpms (11.15 sec quarter mile times in a 3250 pound car).

When I rebuilt my front chassis(tubular front end), I moved the pivot point up 3/4" and out 1/4", but did not move it fore or aft. I had already moved the pivot of the lower control arms by the same amount, and I noticed that the aluminum delrin bushings were in a bind. I have custom T/C rods with a rod end at the rear. To increase caster, I moved the top of the struts back 3/4".

From what I understand, its is safe to put an EEC-IV computer from an automatic powered vehicle into one with a standard, but not the other way around. I can't recall why this is. I can look it up in the EEC-IV bible: "Ford Fuel Injection & Electronic Engine Control : All Ford/Lincoln-Mercury Cars and Light Trucks 1988 to 1993" http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0837603013/ref=sib_dp_pt/102-8064934-4883336#reader-link I have a 5.0L and T5 in my 1974 5.0L Z, and I am using an A9P processor(automatic) without any troubles. I have tried a processor from a stick car (A9L), and I couldn't tell any difference.

I weighed my doors(hinges, glass, door panels, armrest) on my early 1974 Z while they were off. They weighed 67 lbs each. I would love to have a second set of doors that are just skins, or fiberglass. I could save another hundred pounds off the car. Its an Emod autocross/street car.

My cage is a little different than the others. I built it as a means of reconstructive surgery rather than as a means of supporting existing structure. I already had a completed 5.0L powered 260Z project that I was very happy with until I turned in front of an oncoming pickup. The front of my Z was destroyed, but none of the drivetrain, suspension, or the body behind the firewall was harmed. So, to salvage what I had, I cut the front off my car at the firewall and built a new chassis by fitting a 2.5" square tubing frame, roll cage and tubular front end.

In the current rev of my car, my motor is mounted similar to Terry's(front plate / mid plate. In the previous rev the motor was mounted on Fox body mustang rubber mounts and some custom steel brackets. In both cases, the position of the engine is the same, and a ujoint is required in the steering shaft(no big deal). These images show the current configuration. These image shows the old mounts and the old installation

I have dual 2.5" exhaust with an H-pipe and a pair of two chamber flow masters. I love the way it sounds. In order to get dual exhaust to fit with an exhaust exit on either side of the car, I had to remove the stock tank and install a fuel cell centered between the rear frame rails.

Yeah, I know how you feel. I buried my previous Z serial number RLS30-000481. We were together for eight happy years during which she received numerous transplants in order to keep her alive while I was in school. But alas, she succumbed to cancer shortly after I graduated from college. I'll always remember her but I have moved on. I have another Z that is completely rust free, and I never let her play in the rain.

I have looked at the Ackerman on the Z. The steering rack is slightly(~1/2") closer to the ball joint than the connection of the steering arm on the strut. Having the rack closer to the wheel center than the steering arm pivot increases Ackerman. So, yes, moving the rack back would increase ackerman. I have toyed with the idea of making a crossmember that allows fore and aft adjustment of the rack.

Don't think of it as us being on your back. Think of it as brotherly advise to someone we wish to keep from making the same stupid mistakes that we made. Its not that we don't want you to race. We just want you to be safe when you kick his A$$.

16x8 Centerline Pheonix(style 816) w 5" BS.

That is a good site, but not exactly what I was looking for. I want something that gives dimensions of all the bolt holes in the block in 3 space relative to the centerline of the crank, and the plane of the bellhousing (motor mount holes, bellhousing holes, exhaust flange holes, water pump/timng cover, etc...). I may have to mount an engine on a stand, do some careful measuring, and make my own drawing.

Thanks, You're no good to us dead or in jail. 8) Dan