74_5.0L_Z

Also, +2.9 would be about what I would expect for a stock 240Z.

Are you sure that the negative caster numbers are real? If they were, the car would be almost undriveable. A quick way to check is to jack up the car and remove the wheel. If the strut top is behind the lower ball joint, then you have positive caster. This is what 6 degrees of positive caster looks like:

Jon, I just disassembled my inner CV on the passenger side and mangled the circlip. Do you (or anyone else) know of a good source for the circlip?

I don't think any of these cars ever sat perfectly level, so if it is not grossly tilted then I wouldn't worry about. However, springs do sag with age and the rubber strut isolators do separate. So, if the springs and isolators are in good shape then the only real option for leveling (other than coil-overs) is to use spacers between the isolators and the body. Again, its is more important that car is level with you in it than without you in it. If you have stock spring rates then the ride height will change significantly with you versus without you.

Those number look much better than I originally thought from your hand written picture in the first post. I thought that the front camber was -.8 on the left and +2.0 on the right. So, you really don't have that bad of numbers for the front camber (for a street car). You should however try to fix the caster. If the T/C bushing are worn, then replace them. You can increase the caster with adjustable T/C rods, but don't get carried away. With stock control arms without a spherical bearing at the cross member connection, you will bind the control arm movement if you try to add too much caster. You could however get both sides equal and get about 4 degrees of caster. Were these number taken with you in the car? Have you verified that the car sits level? I always sit in the car while measuring the alignment. If you are in the car (left hand drive I assume) then the left front camber will become more negative. If you don't verify that the car sits level before performing the alignment, then you are applying a band-aid where surgery may be required.

Yes, you can install a 240Z rack in a 280Z. You just have to use the 240Z bushings. I have the standard length steering arms, but have looked into using the quick steering arms. With the 280Z rack, I felt the steering was too slow for autocross. So, I installed the 240Z rack and I am happy with the responsiveness of the steering. The steering effort did increase, but I do not find it difficult even with 10 inch slicks (at least while the car is moving). I do not try and turn the wheel with the car sitting still. It is my opinion that if you want to have faster steering than the 240Z rack with the standard arms and also have big sticky tires, then you will need power steering.

Would you please measure the rack gain? To do so, perform the following: 1. Start with rack all the way against one of the end stops. 2. Turn pinion exactly one turn. 3. Measure amount of rack shaft exposed (between end stop and end of housing). For reference, the stock 240Z would move 1.81 inches per revolution of the pinion gear, and the stock 280Z rack would move 1.59 inches per revolution of the pinion gear. So, the 240Z rack is faster but requires more effort to turn. I would love to see how this rack compares. Thanks.

Did the alignment shop give values for SAI and included angle? If your SAI is very different left to right then you may have a bent strut or body damage that is making it difficult to achieve equal camber left to right.

I have to agree with Jon on this one. Those alignment numbers need some help.. Jon made a good suggestion regarding loosening the bolts holding the cross member and shifting it to try and equalize the camber in the front. You could even slot the holes in the cross member further to give more adjustment. You could also make or purchase adjustable T/C rods to make caster adjustable. Either way, I don't think you will be happy with the handling with the current alignment. Mine is a highly modified track car, but here are my current alignment settings: Front: L R Camber: -2.0 -2.0 Caster: 5.9 5.9 Toe: - 1/16" -1/16' Rear: Camber: -1.5 -1.5 Toe: +1/16 +1/16 All readings were taken with me in the car.

32955 1 Large short sleeve in Lapis

PM me with an email address and phone number. I have a lot of what you are looking for, and I have a suspension tool that I have developed for analyzing suspension modifications. I don't mind sharing, but I will have to explain how to use it. Dan

Sorry to hear about the Z. I am glad that you are around to tell us about the wreck.

Jon, Are these the part number that you ordered? http://store.drpperformance.com/bearing-spacer-legends-front-adjustable-steel/

Jon Mortensen has tried these. I haven't heard any feedback as to their effectiveness. I have also been considering trying them. http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/63492-suspension-tech-motion-ratio-unsprung-weight/?p=1141694

Pictures and plots of your data would be helpful.

Nullbound, I received the cover today. It was exactly as described. It was a pleasure doing business with you. Thanks.

Nullbound, You have PayPal funds. Thanks. Thanks to the others who chimed in, but I didn't want an R32 cover. Thanks for responding though.

Ryan, I am interested. You've got mail.

I'm still looking so please let me know.

That might be just what I am looking for. Do you have any pictures? How much are you asking?

Still looking. I am using the car for track days and need the cooling and extra fluid capacity.

If one failed, I would replace them all (maybe consider upgrading to ARP). For something like wheel studs you want confidence that they won't fail.

I am looking for a finned-cover for a long nose R200 with CLSD.

Hey Cameron, I just started the SCCA PDX events and I am still having fun, but as you said eventually I will want to take it to the next level, and the NASA HPDE program definitely looks like the way to go. For now however, I am learning how to drive the car at other than autocross speeds. For the last 12 or so years, the only time I drove the car was at autocross events. The autocrossing was fun, but I only really used second gear, and the courses almost always forced late apex turning. At the PDX events, I am using all the gears. I have discovered that I have a lot to learn about down-shifting. I also have to break the autocross habit of pinching turns and start letting the car track out. So, for now I am running the SCCA PDX events and learning, but I intend to add NASA HPDE / Time Trials starting next year.

When corner balancing a car by adjusting the coil-over spring perches, you cannot change the left to right or front to rear weight distribution. You can only change the diagonals. During this round of corner balancing my car it took me three tries to get the car where I wanted it. Here is the procedure and results: 1. Disconnect sway bars. 2. Set tire pressures. 3. Verify steering is straight ahead. 4. Measure ride height at four corners (I measure at LCA attach points) 5. Settle car and roll onto scales. Take measurements of car with no driver. 6. Get in car and take measurements with driver in car. Here are the results from my first weigh before adjustments: No Driver: LF 616 RF 581 LR 595 RR 632 With Driver: LF 675 RF 581 LR 679 RR 682 The diagonals were a mess. No Driver (LF + RR)/Total = (616+632)/2424 = 51.4% (LR+ RF)/Total = 48.6% With Driver (LF + RR)/Total = (675 + 682) / 2617 = 51.9% (LR + RF)/Total = 48.1% I needed to take weight off the (LF + RR) diagonal and give it to the (LR + RF) diagonal. There are two way to do this. First, I can raise spring collars on the light diagonal, or second I can lower spring collars on the heavy diagonal. I opted for little of both. For the first adjustment, I lowered the RR spring collar 3/4 turn. I then resettled the car and rolled it back onto the scales to measure the changes. No Driver: LF 601 RF 595 LR 608 RR 618 Diagonal Percentages: (LF + RR)/Total = (601+618)/2424 = 50.3% (LR+ RF)/Total = 49.7% With Driver: LF 662 RF 593 LR 689 RR 672 Diagonal Percentages: (LF + RR)/Total = (662+672)/2617 = 51.0% (LR+ RF)/Total = 49.0% The diagonal got much better but still needed work. I needed to take more weight off the (LF + RR) diagonal and give it to the (LR + RF) diagonal. For the second adjustment, I raised the RF spring collar 1/2 turn. Again, I resettled the car and rolled it back onto the scales to measure the changes. No Driver: LF 593 RF 605 LR 617 RR 610 Diagonal Percentages: (LF + RR)/Total = (593+610)/2424 = 49.6% (LR+ RF)/Total = 50.4% With Driver: LF 653 RF 604 LR 700 RR 662 Diagonal Percentages: (LF + RR)/Total = (653+662)/2617 = 50.2% (LR+ RF)/Total = 49.8% I was happy with the diagonals at this point. One thing that should be noted is that the left to right and front to rear percentages did not change during this process. When I started, the percentages were as follows: Without Driver : Front percentage: (LF + RF)/Total = (616+581)/2424 = 49.4 percent Left Side percentage: (LF + LR)/ Total = (616 + 595)/2424 = 49.96 percent With Driver : Front percentage: (LF + RF)/Total = (675+581)/2617 = 48.1 percent Left Side percentage: (LF + LR)/ Total = (679 + 682)/2617 = 51.7 percent These percentages are the same as my final values as expected. The only ways to change the left to right and front to rear percentage is to move things around the car or to remove/add weight.