logr

I have 17" wheels(245/40/17 tires) and with my car lowered to 5" under the front crossmember (I think that is 6.5" at the rocker) the front control arm is almost flat. I would like a bit of camber gain under bump and I already have the thickest bumpsteer spacers I could find(30mm). It is illegal to move the inner lca pivot in SSM so the only way I can think of to get some camber gain and closer to normal roll center is to add another thinner spacer. I'm thinking 1.75-2.0 inches total spacer as I think I have that much room. The toe end would probably be the limiting factor for hitting the wheel. Is it a good idea? Is there another idea?

Why not just change to a short nose R200? There are plenty of ratios available then. 3.5, 3.7, 3.9, 4.08, 4.3 to name a few. Use a Giken and the long nose stub shafts go right in. I have a 3.9 long nose that I might part with because I just put a short nose 4.08 in my 240Z and reused the Giken from the long nose in the short nose. I bought the front mount bracket that is available on Hybrid Z but will probably redo it to a mount with the same design but mounts to the other side of the diff.

If you get an open long nose R200 you can use any lsd designed for a 240sx open diff. The open long nose stubs will go right into the sx lsd. It is one fairly reasonable option.

I'm in the process of changing to a short nose diff. I need it for the ABS sensor as well as I would prefer the 4.08 ratio of a stock 240SX. There are some issues but nothing that can't be fixed. All R200 short noses use the same pinion even though the ABS version has a longer housing. The input flange is longer, for the tone ring, and where the length comes from. S13 R200 housings are solid mounted to their S13 subframes.(The subframe is rubber mounted instead.) If you want the short nose to be rubber mounted using the available front diff mount. (The one from BURLEIGH.) An S14(4.08) and J30(3.9) both use the rubber inserts in the front of the diff which will bolt to the available mount from BURLEIGH. I am using a J30 diff (for the rubber inserts and the ABS) but want the 4.08 ratio. I am therefore swapping the diff guts between a J30 and a regular S13 R200. J30 and R200 long noses both have the thick spacer on the passenger side while the S13/14 have it on the drivers side. This is important because the long stub axle goes on the side with the thick spacer inside the diff. This means that putting in the short nose is going to require swapping the stub axles to the other side of the car. I am using 300zx turbo CV's with CF axles so I will be swapping sides with the stub axles only(removing the inner cv and putting it on the other side of the car) The difference is in the thickness of the ring gears. The J30 and the long nose R200 of a Z both have ring gears that are thicker than short nose diffs. This is why the thick spacer changes sides inside the diff. I am using an OS Giken LSD which uses the open stubs and why this should all work. ******I can't find anything on this stuff but if I am just wasting space please tell me so I can finish this without all the typing.******

Ken, Just redrill the 240z stubs you are using now for 5 lug. You know you are going to break those and wish you had gone to 280z ones instead. Didn't I send you a spare 240z one? I think I found the other one too.

Ken, if you are going to change wheels, why not go to 5 lug? Early 300Z hubs and redrill the rears can do the job. I have 15X10 wheels for 5 lug you can have very cheap but they are Diamond also.

Ken, Are you sure the inside ring on the wheel is on the same plane as the outside one? The older Diamonds that I have are not. I wonder if the inside ring is used more for centering than as a mating surface.

Changing the pivot point of the inner arm makes it illegal for SSM use. Don't know how important that is but it would cut down the customer base. edit; I guess in this instance by using the original attachment point, it might be legal anyway.

Dang it something was tight somewhere. I ordered B4-B30-U232A1 gland nuts and they worked in my 280Z tubes. Anyway that is what the invoice says. 22.50 a piece in 2012. Look here for more info or possibly confusion.http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/69623-the-strut-thread-koni-illumina-tokico-carrera-bilstein-ground-control/page-13 Can someone corroborate if that is the right nut for a 280? I don't know how it could be wrong since I have 280 tubes front and rear but I don't want to lead anyone astray.

Remember the nut is different if you are using 280z tubes which is what I did for the strength and the shocks go in easier too. They can be a tight fit in the 240 tubes.

It was me. I think I can find the number of the correct gland nut but they were expensive. It might be on the strut fact thread. I used a 1ton lug nut from my old International but a Chevy one should work. It is much taller than a regular lug nut and has a large concave surface on one side which fits the strut nicely. Pretty sure you want the Sports.

I bought the MSA f/g ones and they fit pretty good. I think they will look nice with a bit of finish work and some black paint. My car is green/black so........

It was a quick thought but after reading some of the threads mentioned on here, I see it was thought of a long time ago. I agree the inner pivots have to be on the same plane.

I'm not looking to reinvent the wheel. I am building for a class and to keep the car drivable on the street, which is pretty much mutually exclusive if I am real serious. I'm not. The ball joint could be on either end of the spindle so I think I will try to make something along these lines. I can't change the inner pivot point for SSM and I have cv's as well as 12.25" rotors, Superlights, and Bilsteins that I like. My diff is also what I need for ABS, so... My rear toe is excessive (.25" not sure why) and since I need to fix that, I'm just hoping to make a better mousetrap along the way. RCVD?

I have an idea. What about using an adjustable length ball joint on the spindle? I think there is a way to make the arm adjustable in and out as well as adjusting toe separately. Mounting a tapered hole for the bj on the spindle is easy enough and the bj is made for the application. I drew up a quick diagram but I can't upload a pdf to photobucket and the jpeg doens't show all of the pic but here is what I have. What do you guys think? The upper left is the ball joint and there would be rod ends at the ends of the other arrows. The bj would hold the main loads and the rod ends would all be working the proper direction. Roll center could be changed on the bj. Toe and in and out of the spindle is adjustable on the car also.

Helping the roll center would be nice.

All of these designs incorporate a rod end as the outer pivot but when braking or accelerating aren't the rod ends working on a side force instead of the way they were made to work. In case that isn't clear, the bolt through all of the mentioned designs is horizontal(spindle pin) so the acceleration and braking forces act against the side of the rod end. If the bolt was vertical wouldn't the rod end work the way it was designed to? By changing to an A-arm design aren't most if not all braking and acceleration forces acting on the one fixed rod end, instead of 2? What is the reason for changing the floating arm to the front from the rear? I believe the TTT designs main function is to give adjust ability which it does. The AZC/Silvermine design would be illegal for SSM as it changes the pivot point however it would be legal for XP. edit: I see you guys have discussed the rod ends working direction in an 08 thread with no firm answer. http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/62776-yet-another-rear-control-arm-design/page-8?hl=%20rear%20%20control

I know there are newer and probably better systems. The C6's that I have driven are pretty good as are a few others but I have never met any serious autoxr that wants to give up abs if it works well. There are times that no matter how hard I try, I can't keep a front wheel from locking up. I believe it is a function of how stiff an autox car is to turn quickly on rough tracks. I am running 325#Front and 400# rear springs now with 52% rear weight and no rear bar. I don't lift a front tire in turns. My last car went up a level and was much easier to drive when I added abs. I realize it is the nut behind the wheel that locks up the tires and I am doing everything I can to fix that but not having to worry about flat-spotting an A6 to the cords in one over-driving moment or a touch of gravel is a great feeling. Jason's S13 abs system is exactly what I am proposing using and it has worked very well for many of us. Too bad he didn't take that car a bit more. PJ and David won SM in an S14 the year I went to Nats. They have since added abs and love it. They are winning SSM sometimes as well. Nats will be interesting this year. A friend from Seattle will be going in his S13, with abs just added, as well.

I have an adjustable proportioning valve in my z. I will try more rear bias before I go further but the system has always worked well the way I originally set it up so I didn't change in the middle of racing. I was using Z11 street tires at the event. They are not nearly as grippy as race tires but pretty dang good for the money. I doubt I would have had the problem as bad with A6's. I kind of just want to do it since no one else has.

I don't much like abs in a daily. My pickup is terrible about kicking in abs when I need it least. I agree that many abs systems are not great. Something other than the sx system might be better but I believe I can make this one work with the oem hardware and I have seem others that don't work as well. The sx one is a simple stand alone affair and it is 3 channel. I could use a Z32 diff for a 4 channel system but doubt the output shafts would work. I have experience with the sx system and know it works well enough with even huge tires and different ratios, front to rear, of piston volume. I keep the ratio as close to oem as possible. My last autox sx runs 285's and 315's with wilwod fronts and s14 rears and the abs does it's job on that. I sold it last year after a health scare. The reason I was thinking of using the z strut tube is because I have no idea what length I will need it. I always had to cut down and remake the mounts on sx tubes to get everything where it needed to be so I figured a clean slate might be easier. I can't start until for a couple of months, until after my last autox. I have all of the parts I believe I will need laying around already. I'm thinking of pulling the z front suspension and making a jig for each side that has all the pertinent parts located exactly. Then unbolting it and bolting in the sx hub for a start. I can then get the ackerman back to original easily and maybe take a bit out since that seems to help an autox car turn better(don't want the inside tire skidding as much due to the slip angle). I remember seeing once where someone put a miata rack in a z but have not been able t find any info. I am looking for 2-2.25 turns lock to lock so I need to see what the new rack would yield but it is easy enough to move the toe arm as long as I can get the rack mounted correctly to reduce oem bumpsteer. Remember I can't move the lca mounting spot so I have to modify the rack and it's mounting to reduce bumpsteer. I tried to think of a better abs system to use but the ease of using a short nose diff and matching front spindle seems the simplest.

Under SCCA SSM rules I can't change the suspension pick-up points but I can replace everything that bolts to it. If this didn't work, I could always go back to what I have now. My car is already 5 lug(same as an SX) and I have the big brakes that would only require a different rotor hat to work on the SX hubs.

John, By using the sx diff and spindles, I can use an sx puter, actuator, m/c and sensors. Plumbing is easy. The last autox car I built had the actuator behind the passenger front seat which is probably where I would have this one though upon reflection, it might be better to move the battery and put the actuator in the batteries spot. Make a Z complicated? LS, cv's, power steering, whole new rear suspension, these things and many more are done all the time and require much more work, money and complication than adding abs, but few things will improve an autox car more, imo. ABS on an autox car, on expensive, easily flat spotted tires, has proven to be a real time and money saver. The National Champion SM car just added it and then wondered why he didn't do it sooner. We had been discussing it for years since I had first added it to mine but he hadn't thought it that big a deal. He is a believer now. My reason is partly because I only can run 245 tires under my stock fenders( and therefore easily slide them) and partly for the challenge. Anybody done it?

I have been thinking about this for a while. I have added ABS to 240SX's quite a few times but never tried on a Z before. What I'm thinking but would love more thoughts or ideas . Take ABS SX front spindles and weld the the cut off bottom portion of other sx spindles onto the bottom(to correct camber gain and roll center) of the ABS ones but switch the bottom portion right to left. This would give me front steer and give me a large area to weld. I could allow for ackerman by welding the bottoms on twisted. I'm thinking of cutting the 280Z strut tubes off the spindles to add ears to for the sx spindles. This way I could keep my Bilsteins. I have modified SX spindles numerous times for autox cars in this way, without the switching part. I always speed up the steering at the same time. I can then mount an sx abs diff in the rear which works just fine with the Giken and R200 shafts as well as the 300zx cv's now in the car. I have a 99 miata power steering rack that appears to be very close to the correct length. The reason is that I believe ABS in an autox car is invaluable. There was an off camber slow down last weekend that I could not do without locking up a front tire. The sx system works pretty well. Thoughts?

A Power FC would have the stock signal coming out of the SR ecu connector. You can use it to trigger an MSD adapter for a coil signal to run a 280Z tach which is adjustable to match the 4 banger speed. Get a KADE tach to have something to match yours to for accuracy. It is what I have in mine BUT I don't know how the split-fires work. If you don't have an igniter, I don't know if the signal would still be there or not. It should be the yellow/ red stripe wire for the tach signal.

My mistake, Porschephile is right. I had measured 240 fronts and 280 rears but not 280 fronts until checking them now. The front flares cannot be lowered without new fenders as Nates are cut. You might have liked the look before but everything was riding on the shock to top hat( I would say bumpers but there were none). The handling was probably not optimum that way.