jeffp

Hi all, I bought the kit and assembled it about a year ago. Not to hard to assemble and it appeared to work well. I got the display kit as well, and it is pretty accurate, coming from a test and measurement company I built and aligned both units at my work, and they are accurate for the most part. Anyway, I never finished up the data logging part of the unit, as I did not want to deal with looking at the logging on an accell spreadsheet and trying to determine all of the itterations and their relationship to time and rpm and all that stuff. I did not feel the logging was to user frendly, and I am not a novice at all of this stuff, so I just blew it off and opted for the display and use it to verify tuning. I decided to check out their site today after looking at your posts and was very pleased to find there is some software that is worth downloading so I did and got it on line with my laptop and now I am going to hook up the rpm, user1=MAF readings user2=stock O2 sensor readings and last but not least the O2 readings from the wideband sensor. So we will see just how good this unit works. I am going to take it to the dyno, and compare it to the horiba sensor used for the tuning and look at the results. I am hoping that they will be very close to the horiba readings. Sure would make me feel better about my 300.00 dollar investment, and we will not mention the two L1H1 sensors I bought. anyway I will let all of you know how it works out, but it will take a few weeks.

You are correct, the kit from MSA and VB are not designed for the ZX cars, but you can make them work. I installed the kit for a short time and they worked ok, but the pivit started getting worn. So I decided on rod ends. Turns out, that when I did the mods to the bracket to fit the rod ends, it made the kit work excellent. I drilled (7/8" hole saw) the standard hole through the bracket to fit the rod ends, but I was not able to get them installed as the couplers were short. So I was looking at the kit and decided to try it with the stock washer for the rubber part, and the insert fit the washer well. So what I ended up doing was to use the stock rubber part and washers on the strut side of the car, then install the big washer on the other side of the bracket, and it fit excellent, then the pivit and the aluminum part and a stock washer then the nut. That worked out very well, I was surprised as heck. I tightened them down and had the stock rubber to keep them tight. The car ran excellent, no binding, no noise. What I finished up doing on the car were the rod ends, and that has worked out well also, but the ride is a little harsher now, but that is ok for me. here is what it looks like. http://www.angelfire.com/extreme/280zxt/page20.html The car runs on rails now

First off I have stronger springs, and KYB non adjustables on the front. the rear has stronger springs and tokico adjustables. The tires on the front are 225 15 and the rear are 245 15 The front of the car is setup with -1 degree of camber and +6 degrees of caster. toe is set to 0 or 1/2 degree. The front of the car is rock solid. i have never slipped with it. the rear on the other hand is set to position 5 and they are stiff, but I do strait line racing for the most part, position 3 is better for cornering. I have strut position bars with rod ends, no rubber, the rear is poly bushings as well, so there is no movement of the wheel under hard cornering. The biggest thing is the Quaife diff, when you go into a corner the car is very responsive, but the control is at the gas pedel, it wants to go strait under heavy power and when you letup off the throttle it tries to turn sharper, the tires dont push as much. the car is not loud like say my wifes 300 with wide tires. Driving in the rain has always been not to fun in the car even with stock tires it sucked. So I can get a little more grip with the wider tires just because of more contact area, this is out the window with slicks in the rain tho. So look at the tires you want to use, and select a tread pattern the promotes grip in the rain, and also, the skinner the tire in the rain the better its contact area will be, the wider tire will hydro plane easier. Every tire has its limits so find the happy medimum for you and go with that.

Everyone always comes up with the heavier flywheel reply. Simply put, rotating mas is rotating mass. A hevier flywheel will take more torque from the engine to get it spinning, no question about that. What gets you down the track, and with good times is the engines ability to increase rpm, and the torque the engine produces. Bogging, now that is a funny one. I can tell you @ 3000 rpm's my engine is not going to bog, no when you nail it an shove in 20 plus pounds of boost, your problem is not bogging, but rather keeping the car from doing a long burnout, that also is not good for racing, sure it looks good to spectators, but it ends up in slower times. I took my stock flywheel off of my car and sold that boat anchor, and aslo you say the stock part is the best. I disagree with that myself, they are made from the cheapest material Nissan could find, all of it based on cost. The aluminum unit with the steel insert is a much better material for the clutch then the cheap material used in the stock part. Go for it, call David at Mlvern Racing and get a part from him, install it, and if you think it was a bad choice then I will be more then happy to buy it from you as a spare for my car, thats if you dont destroy it or gall the bolt holes. Regarding the clutch, the stock Nissan turbo clutch is better them most out there. I can tell you the center force part is not worth the powder to blow it away in a race application. I got 380 foot pounds of torque from it, and it puffed a little smoke from the bell housing and it was done, and when I took it on the freeway and tried to pass a car under high boost in 5th gear it slipped. I dont know about the ACT unit because I have never run one, but I do know one thing, if that unit is manufactured with standard disc material, it will not hold the power my car has, no question about that. And, there is an old saying, you want to play you got to pay, meaning to install a clutch that will hold the power, you are going to give up some of the street drivability, you cant get around it. Take a look at my page at the clutch disc, that part held 473 foot pounds of torque on the dyno and can hold more. I did lose some streetability as it doesnt like to slip much, but if it means I can realy put the power to it then I will just deal with it, and it isnt that bad anyway.

I woyuld not recomment the ZF6 install in any zcar. The shifter is offset to center of the case, and real imoportant, the input shaft is not center to the case either, so what that gets you is the shifter sitting about 3 inches closer to the driver seat, and you will need to do more then hit the tunnel to make the gear box fit and remove that part of the tunnel and make a new cover. So that sucks. The tranny itself, is very strong, but I found out that alot of the units have a problem with second gear and its oiling in the gear box, they go bad, but there is a fix for that problem. Looking at all of the problems and challenges of installing the tranny for my car, I did not like the tunnel mod, I did not like the shifter, and it is sloppy anyway. and I really did not like the second gear issue. I went with a tremec TKO2 tranny and that has worked out very well for me. I used the stock T5 bell housing, the stock clutch fork, the 240mm clutch. And I used the LSD diff flange and was able to setup the whole thing with 1310 spicer universal joints. The tranny mount was not to hard to modify. I 3as able to use the T5 speedo pinion (20 tooth) and just machined down the holder to fit the TKO. I did have to take to the 20 tooth pinion on a lathe, and use a dremel on the teeth to make it fit. The 19 tooth pinion fit perfect, but my speedo was 5mph off with my tires and gear set. The clutch was made for the TKO input shaft. I had to make the throwout slider based on the T5 slider and use a Isuzu throw out bearing to fit the stock pressure plate. The thing I really like is the second to third shift, EXCELLENT, perfect transition. The tranny is very strong, and with the .82 over drive I run about 3K rpm's @ 80mph, topend is 165mph. I think for the manual tranny that is the best option. Also, you may want to get in touch with Gforce, as I understand they now(only after my install) make a new gear set for the T5. So there you have it. LOSE the ZF6 it is not worth the trouble in my opinion. I dont like hacking my car like that.

on the ZX the longer shaft goes to the right side of the car, also if you look at the snap ring location, you will find that the longer shaft has the snap ring location going into the diff farther then the left side. The only reason I checked it out was that I had them swapped at one time. The laft side shaft had to be compressed almost all the way to fit it to the flange, and it wore into the side seal.

I ran the 3:54 gear stock in my car and it was good. When I setup the LSD unit it had 3:71 gears and that is what I kept. Keep in mind that was with the stock T5. Now I have the 3:71 gear set and a TKO2 tranny in the car. My topend with the gears, tires and the .82 overdrive instead of the .750 overdrive in the T5 my top end is about 165mph, fast enough for me. I did not have nay spool problems with the 3:71 gear set. I could go from no boost to 20psi of boost when I took the car to 3K rpm, not bad at all. If I was going to setup a full on race track acr what I would do is use the power glide like james is setting up, the 3:71 gear set with the taller tires to get me the topend. The thing about the rear gear set that I dont think alot of people think about is the the lower ratio is a harder gear to turn then the higher ger set. My thinking is the even tho you say put out 400 foot pounds of torque say, the 3:71 gears will get better torque to the ground then the 3:54 or the 3:36 gears. see my point, get so that you get the mechanical advantage at the diff as well and you have a monster. More power will be put to the ground easier with the higher gear set, and for me the 3:71 seems to be the best ratio all around. Just my O2

I noted the use of the power glide install. good choice, that is a strong tranny. There is a company that makes an addition to the tranny off the back in place of the tail shaft. I cant tremember their name, but it is a gear add on to the tranny. They advertise unlimited torque, even under race conditions they guarantee their product. The one thing that appealed to me is that one guy put that part on his hot rod, 950 hp and with the unit installed, he was able to drive the car and get 10MPG on the road. Try a search, and you will find it, or car craft, that box is a direct bolt up for the Chevy auto trannies. If you would be interested in that option.

I had my cam retarded 4 degerrs or so. But I did not take the time to degree the cam, so it was closer to 6 degrees (crankshaft degrees) The car ran well, but I did notice the real power range, at least where it wanted the most fuel and tried to go lean was at the 5-5500 rpm range. Then I put the car on the dyno and sure enough it wasthe best torque in that range. So this time I had the car apart, I decided to degree the cam and bring it strait up where it was ground to. Now I am noticing a lean condition in the 2-2500 range, and in the 6-7K range. I haven't pushed the car to hard, and am running stock boost, well 8psi and the car does well there. I haven't put my broadband O2 sensor to verify the mixture, but I am quite sure it is going lean. So today, I called and setup an appointment to put the car on the dyno and have it retuned to run at the strait up setting. I am guessing, and educated guess at that, that the power band has moved past the 5500 range and into the 6K range, fine by me. I need this data to fine trune the next grind I am going to run. My goal is to get peek hp and torque into the 6-7k range, in other words WOT. But I am still undecided on that point. You remember what the car did when I gave you a ride right James? Not bad at all, but I have some things I am working on for another build for a specific application, and I am going to need the power in the higher rpm range to get maximum topend from the setup. The thing that is not to fun about changing the cam timing for me, and for you is that you will have to play around with the AFM to get the mixture correct for the changes, and it is questionable if you can get the tuning correct with the stock system. What I would do if I were you, is buy a degree wheel setup from Summit, and start with the cam set to factory specs. Then you can advance or retard the cam timing and decide what you like best.

Bob, can I use your pic on my webpage? I would like to add it to the diff page.

I cant give you the flow rate of the pump. I never flow tested the part, but I do know thay have a 65psi relief valve in the pump, so it will NEVER pump a higher pressure then 65psi. A good alternative pump is the Bosch unit. That pump is a direct bolt in to the car and it will flow 65GPH at atandard 2 bar fuel pressure, and support a turbo application to about 20psi of boost @ 2 bar static pressure.

First off there really is no comparison between the two systems electronically. The stock 280 hardware is an 8 bit system, so you from the getgo are going to have a resolution issue that can be masked in a number of ways, but the bottom line is that you will NOT get the response that you will get with a 16 bit digital system. That is the first issue, the system is just to old, the engineering technology just was not there in 83 as compared to 89. Second, Analog, although can be made to work well, needs to be fooled into working well and with that being said you will get limited results with such a system. it is like comparing a carb to a fuel injector for fuel flow, the injector will ALWAYS be easier over a wider range of flow parameters then any carb could ever hope to get, no question about that. The next issue is tuning, both have been tuned and designed to operate over a variety of operating temps, weather conditions to name a few. You would be extremly hard pressed to tune a 280 system that in my example that could push 400-500 hp acheive 30mpg and have the ability to adjust itself to compensate for changes in air pressure from sea level to say 5000 feet like I have been known to drive my car to and still maintain a correct fuel mixture without getting out and tweeking the system. I can and have done just that with the 300 system, why, because it was tuned well to begin with and it also has the resolution built in to accomidate those extreme changes by itself. I am an electronice guy and to tell me that it can be done is like comparing a 8mm film to a DVD and say the clarity and picture is the same, aint going to happen guys. The downside to the 300 part is that Nissan did not make any provision for the owner to modify or improve on what Nissan did without hacking into the code, changing components and hardware without doing what Bernard has done and JWT has done. On the flip side, the 280 system is similar to the 300 in that it was never intended to do any more then what the design engineer made it to do, and to get any more from it requires a hardware change and alot of messing with trial and error to obtain nominal results, no disrespect intended to anyone who has made significant mods to the unit with positive results. The electronics, now there is your best bet for modifications undisputed. when you consider the time investment between the two, my time is much better spent working on the digital unit over the analog unit any day no question about that. While there is vilidity in the statement that there was little change between the two systems in stock application, you need to keep in mind that BOTH were designed, tuned to acheive very close to the same results to the end user and that is why they act and react the same in many applications. if you want to do 600 hp then go with the modified 300 box, if you are happy with 260 or so hp then tinker with the 280 system and get those results, but dont expect much more then that from the 280 system. just my O2 here guys.

I was up against that wall myself for a good while. I did a TKO install on my car and that has worked out very well. I ran the car for about 30 miles and that tranny is very tight. The shift pattern is about 1/2-3/4" from nuteral to first and the shifter springs on the 2003 hurst mustang shifter are very strong. I dont think I will be missing third on a speed shift. So the TKO2 install turned out excellent and I maintained the stock bell housing and clutch assembly, throw out fork and all that neat stuff. I did have to machine a new throw out bearing slider and use of all things a Isuzu truck throw out bearing with the stock 240mm pressure plate. The added touch is in the driveline. I was able to incorporate the use of sloid 1310 spicer universal joints. So we will see how much abuse they can take, and I finished that up with a Quaife diff. Good setup. The funny thing is that when I started in on my quest for a new tranny, Gforce had no option for the T5 so I had to come up with a custom design and setup. Now those suckers have just what I needed all along, go figure. I would be interested in seeing just what they have to offer for the T5. The only option I found for the T5 was from a company in UK and it would only handle 450 foot pounds of torque. The gear set was the dog ear setup (lift and shift) If you are interested in the TKO2 setup, give Keisler Automotive a call and talk to Shefi about doing the mods required to make it fit, and then get on my web page to see what else is involved for the complete install. I can give you drawings for the throwout bearing slider and the info for the bearing as well. I really hope the Gforce option works out for you James, it sure would be alot easier to do then the TKO option I came up with.

The car is coming along nicely and is very close to put back on the ground. I have decided to take a little more time and complete the suspension package total upgrade. I ripped one of the sway bar straps on the left side. I am going to machine a bracket for that out of aluminum. I had to buy special order bolts in an allen head, but the 1.25 pitch thread is special order. One of the SIGNIFICANT things I am working on is the lower control arm bushings. I installed the derlin and aluminum insert adjustable bushings, but when I made the caster adjustable, and pulled the front wheels 6-6.5 drgrees forward, the lower control arm bushings went bad, to much force trying to pull the wheels that far forward. So the Derlin bushing install is out. I am installing 3.4" sphearical ball rod ends on the lower control arm. Good to go, but now I am going to have to get camber plates, as it is to difficult to make the lower control arm adjustable, and that will make a weaker part being adjustable. I contacted a company off my web page, dont remember who, but they say they have a generic camber plate that will fit my car. I will have to drill the holes to mount the plate to the shock tower, and maybe turn a shim for the shock to to fit right. The big thing is that I may have to take to the car with a hole saw to make the center hole bigger for the camber plate adjusters, and I am not all the keen on that aspect of the install. I am just going to have to put my eyeballs on the adjuster and see if I really fit on my car and my stock schock and spring setup. Most people go coil overs with that application, but I dont want to go that way with the car, maybe the back as a fun project someday. So that is what I have to finish up in the fabrication department, and the rest of the stuff is just bolt on for the most part. WHO KNOWS LOL I got to get it right or it will never hold a front end alignment well.

I posted this on Zcar last night, take a look and tell me what you think. Hi everyone, I just got these part pieced together today. I think they turned out good. What do you think? I am going to have them tig welded and then power coated texture black. The link is http://www.angelfire.com/extreme/280zxt/page2.html

I went with a set of crower rods and they are 5.350" that is about the longest you can go without putting the wrist pin in the oil groove. I thought about going with 5.400" but decided the gains would not be worth the potiential trouble I may have had with the oil ring. I realize that I could have easily gone longer, and yes they do have ring sets that make provision for this, but I wanted to play it safe because it is a street engine.

You will want to mount the rear cross member to the car with the bushing I designed. You will want to go with better strut enssioning bar bushings. Get rid of all the rubber mounts in the front. Buy better shocks and springs, especially for the rear. Then get some good sway bars and you will be in there.

I went with longer rods in my 3.0 build, yes you can increase the rod length, and it is worth it in the torque figures.

I am collecting all of the orders now for the parts. Call me at my home (724) 966-0108 or during the day on my cell at (714) 943-2373

Hi everyone, well I have finally gotten the go with the bender to do this build. I have been contacted by the person and they are waiting for a P.O. from me to get started. I have received and filed most of your information. I will send an email to everyone here that wanted the parts. I will need a quick reply to my mail and I will get this going. Payment for the parts will have to be upfront as I dont have enough funds available to buy every ones parts out of my own pocket. So I will send a mail to everyone with the order sheet you have sent me back with your order and parts you want. PLEASE DONT FORGET THE COUPLER COLOR. Lets get this moving forward and get this job completed. I will have to do the billing for the shipping on a seperate bill as I have really no way of calculating the shiping costs currently to everyone. looks like it is a go if everyone still wants their parts

I just installed a Quaife in my car. I had a LSD unit before and when I took it apart I found out one shaft was longer and binding the diff. I had no idea they were longer, but here is what I did find out. First I had my shafts rebuilt, and here may have been my problem. When I first installed the LSD I had no problems at all with the install. Then the shafts were rebuilt, and as I said I did not know at the time they were different. I did notice I had a little trouble installing the driver side shaft, it did seem a little to long as compared to the passenger side shaft. That was about all I thought about at the time. Then when I took it apart that is when I noticed the binding. When I installed the Quaife, I made sure the inboard shaft was the correct one for each side. I checked the distance on the shafts using the snap rings as a gauge for the carrier and the shaft (oh BTY Quaife doesn't install the snap rings, you have to get them from Nissan for the diff) So I made sure the correct input spline to the diff was correct on each side. Then when I installed the shafts I did notice again that the driver side shaft fit loser then the last time I installed them. Seems to me I just may have lucked out on this one as when the shafts were rebuilt they swapped out the shafts and did not realize it. So I will keep an eye on them just to make sure they have enough free travel the first time I drive the car.

I got the 240mm clutch and it also would not disengauge when I first tried it, but then it started working. I did not think to much about it at the time, but when I took the clutch off the car I found out why it would not disengauge the first times I tried it. Seems the clutch hub for the springs were hitting the flywheel bolts just on the top about .075 and the hub cleared the bolts by tearing the top step of the bolt off where it was hitting. I would not recommend a CF clutch to anyone. Not only did I have this problem with the unit, but it wore out very quickly, and in fact it would only hold 380 foot pounds of torque on the dyno. There are better clutches out there for about the same money, and you will not have the problems the CF part has given you.

Hi everyone, I called Brian today and got a cost breakdown on the damper and the various bolt on options for the part. 1) two belt damper(with front face plate) 362.44 plus tax and shipping. 2) damper with third pulley (for power steering) 487.44 plus tax and shipping. 3) Damper trigger wheel (only the wheel) 124.94 plus tax and shipping. They make the trigger wheel to the specs of the management system. Now the damper can be configured for three pullies (for power steering on the ZX cars) and the trigger wheel that the various after market fuel management systems require. Note however, that because of the added 1/8" thickness of the trigger wheel, you will have to slot the power steering pump mounting holes so that you can move the pump 1/8" forward. Not to hard to do. Also you will have to shim the idler pulley out 1/8" as well so that it is aligned correctly. REMEMBER, This is ONLY for the cars that want a trigger wheel and the power steering pump pulley. All other cases need not be concerned. Now, Nissan in their infinate wisdom made two size belts for the A/C compressor. The cars 71-79(yes the first year ZX) came with a 22360 belt, its like 11/16 wide. 80-83 cars have a 17360 belt or 1/2" wide. So there will be an additional part number for the smaller belt for the later 80-83 ZX cars. When Brian and I were discussing the damper, I did not know they did two different belt sizes, he built the wider belt configuration on the damper. When I installed the Damper the belt would not work for my A/C pump. So we have been on the phone sorting out the best way to handle the situation, and it was decided to come up with an additional part number. Myself, I got a 79 compressor which is a hitachi MJ-167 compressor with the wider pulley, the idler pulley. The compressor on my car stock also has a Hitachi MJ-167 compressor. So what I did is swap out the idler pulley(and you need the shaft it mounts to as well, as it is longer then the stock one for the car because the idler pulley is wider) and I was able to swap out the compressor clutch and magnet (both are required as an assembly) installed the older pulley and everything is just great, a direct replacement with NO modifications required, even to the A/C clutch wire is correct for my harness. Not the easiest way to fix the problem, but I was not going to take the damper off the car. I waited to long for the thing. The older pulley has a bigger pulley diameter then the one I took off the car, so the pump is going to spin slower then it did. I dont think it will be much of a problem, but it may make the A/C less cool at idle, but that is a remote chance. But what that has done for me is enable me to spin the engine at a higher rpm with the A/C on and not worry about munching the compressor because it is spinning at 7K rpm. No big deal, just thought I would mention it. Anyway, that is about it for this upgrade, and believe me it is worth every penny to stop the damper elastimer seperation that happens to the stock parts. You will be able to get a very good picture of the damper in the next issue of SportZ as I have sent in the pictures and information on the part so that it could get the best visability for the market place. anyway.

Give Brian a call at (510) 797-6780 He has the pricing on the part and can tell you all of the options you can get. You will want the part with three pulleys, the third pulley is bolt on for the power steering.

First off, you are corrdct the stock 30 year old suspension sucks, replace it, all of it. Remember, the car was termed a touring car from the factory and it is mushy from the get go. But if you want to do some significant suspension upgrades, they are out there, and along with the added upgrades I have designed for the car, I am very confident in saying that my ZX handles just like a race car now. There situations with the ZX that you really need to address, and once that is taken care of it is a new car. And one thing I will tell you, once you have done all of the mods you can do to the car, when you get into a 240-280 and ride in that car it feels like you are driving a rattle box (no disrespect intended) I dont know anybody that drives a tighter car then mine, hell I have even done mods to the car Paul Newman did not do to his car, and it paid off big time in the end. Products and support of the ZX sucks really, for some reason this model seemed to fall between the cracks and no one ever really did a complete suspension package for the car, anyway. I know all of the ricks to make this car tight, and if you dont believe me, come and take a ride in it, LOL