Coelocanth81
-
Posts
33 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Coelocanth81
-
-
I'm experiencing a metallic clunk sound upon releasing the clutch pedal with the transmission in neutral. There is no groaning or squeaking, so I think my throwout bearing is ok. Clutch hydraulics are brand new, and the pedal is adjusted per the FSM. I can actually feel the clunk in the shift lever, and it occurs just prior to full clutch pedal release. I replaced the hydraulics because the pedal was soft, and master cylinder seal was failing. I thought maybe the hydraulics were causing a clutch drag, but now I'm not sure that was the problem. Reverse has been grinding upon engagement. Anyone have any ideas?
-
I have a '76 280z that has received a 5 speed swap prior to my owning it. Did the 5 speed transmissions even have a "top gear switch" for the purpose of advancing the distributor? I'm thinking about removing the vacuum switching valve when I rebuild my fuel rail.
-
7 minutes ago, tube80z said:
I'll take a moment to reply to the tone of this comment. On HybridZ we (admins) are not suppressing feedback about vendors. What we are doing is trying to make sure a thread stays on topic so that future users will be able to use search and find good quality content that is helpful and relevant to their search. Ideally the original thread should have stayed on topic and a new thread started about vendor feedback. A link could be left in the technical thread and both discussions could happen and be more likely to be found be search in the future.
Hope that helps,
Cary
I appreciate it, Cary. This thread got a little sideways there for a minute. I didn't see what happened on the other one.
9 hours ago, 260DET said:As a general observation I don't understand why inevitably aftermarket suspension suppliers don't publish any changes they make over stock specs and the reasons for such changes. It would save so much questioning plus add credibility to their products.
Agreed. It seems perilous for a manufacturer to let the users control that narrative. Hopefully some more information will be forthcoming.
-
So, 280Z heater cores have been unavailable for a while now. I've been told a Ford Escort heater core will fit, but I'm unsure of the year. There's also Brassworks - who can reproduce one for the cost of 400 dollars shipped. Anybody got any suggestions?
-
11 hours ago, JMortensen said:
I would point out that all of your GT class SCCA racers are using SLA front ends and quick change solid axle rears, so at some point you have to decide what a Z is and when one is modded to the point that it no longer qualifies.
Like engine swaps, I view this suspension package as a fairly substantial re-invention of the car. I was looking at the AlterKtion suspension/steering package for the late 60's early 70's Mopars in much the same way. To some extent, you give up the very essence of a car the moment you dream of further empowering it. Mike Kelly talked about how far his project had taken him from the simple joy of driving a stock Z, and there's no doubt about how far one could go down the rabbit hole.
I might try to pick Ohm's brain a bit more. I really don't want to trouble him too much - as I'm not a customer yet. I'd like to know what specific criteria he had in mind when designing the product. I understand the motivation for the rear suspension; it's a bolt-on solution for handling greater power, more tire clearance, and more adjustability for a variety of setups. I think the jury's out for me on the dual control arm front suspension, though. Like some of the other commenters, I'm not convinced that the McPherson strut front end is in need of a complete replacement.
-
On 1/29/2021 at 1:26 AM, 260DET said:
Sometimes a reality check is needed and that can be provided here by looking at Z race cars and their results. The fastest Z's have always used the basic stock suspension, it's great that there are those who think outside the box and who are willing to put their $ where their mouth is, Once they do that however they need to turn a profit so they have to be commited to their product. What does not seem to be widely understood by potential users is the complexity involved in any suspension redesign. At the very least the actual dimensions and locations of all components needs to be established using proven methods. Until that is done we have what is basically promotional comment. Bye, getting real is often not popular.
Race cars are controlled by the rules established for each class, so there are as many "fastest Z's" as there are classes. Obviously, we wouldn't have a cottage industry built around modifying the stock design if it went out and won every race in showroom form. There's a lot of thoughts about how the Track Attack design "looks", but so far we haven't conclusively laid out any specific ways in which the design is deficient.
Since we don't know much, let's start with what we do:
1: There could be noise, harshness, and durability issues due to the large number of heim joints - especially on the street.
2: The relationship between the front and rear suspension dynamics need to be studied to determine their overall impact on car control. (good discussion to be had here)
Adjustability, weights, installation issues, and impact upon the drivability and performance characteristics of the car are all still unknowns - as are any cost/benefit ratios for various applications.
-
On 1/27/2021 at 8:31 AM, caperix said:
Can't you modify the arm pivot to allow more spring travel for a given wheel movement. This could have some benefit on a low z car that has very little suspension travel.
Depending on the design. If the pivot swingarm has different attachment points for the shock and strut-rod, then the leverage ratio of the spring and shock are adjustable. In doing this however, you’d want to optimize the wheel travel to match the full travel range of the spring and strut. There's likely only one ideal placement point for the respective items on the pivot, so a wide range of adjustment options may not prove as useful as they initially seem on paper.
-
Very good advice indeed!
He also taught us to not “fall in love” with a design, and be open to continuous improvement and criticism.
6 minutes ago, AydinZ71 said: -
For a street car, excessive noise could be a show-stopper. I watched that video, but I’m not sure that the racket we were hearing was actually coming from the interior strut assembly. It sure would be nice to get some in-car footage of a running setup to know for sure, though.
As for weight - I’m not certain what the apples to apples weight comparison is between a stock Z suspension and the track attack components. As long as the weight goes towards strengthened components and improved suspension articulation, I wouldn’t mind it - although, as a 2+2 owner with factory A/C, the lightweight train departed the station before my arrival! Haha..
-
4 hours ago, ///M3 & Z said:
I started thinking about the Heim joints after you mentioned it. There are a lot of them, 22 In the rear kit to be exact. If you planned on replacing those with the ridetech R joints it would cost you $1900 usd to buy enough of them.
People seem to say they get contaminated pretty fast with dirt and road debris, would hate to have to be either cleaning or replacing that many of them.
Iv always also wondered what the cabin noise would be like with the struts and joints being right behind you inside. I like loud engine and exhaust sound but little bumps and vibrations I'm not a fan of at all.
That's what I counted, too. I definitely feel that the design leans on them a bit much for my purposes.
The cost of those R-joints are eye-watering - I think I'd only put them in locations that are external - leaving the interior joints to regular hiem joints - as they won't be subject to contamination inside the car.
With respect to the noise, I'd bet shock valving would be audible if there were no slack in the joints. Being outside the car, we never hear the noise that our struts make, but I can promise you they're not completely silent. The open hole in the top of the strut tower might also be an inlet for exterior noise, depending on how it gets sealed.
-
2 hours ago, Ironhead said:
I am interested in the R joints in concept, but I don't understand what makes them superior to standard Heim joints, other than costing 3X as much. They do not appear to be "sealed" from dirt and moisture, and while the metal ball rides on a plastic bearing surface, that is true also of many Heim joints that are Teflon lined. I am also a bit dubious of some of their claims about poly bushings. They repeatedly cited "squeaking" as one of the major faults of poly bushings, but if they are properly lubed with Teflon grease squeaking is a complete non-issue. I have a track car on poly bushings that I greased/installed almost 20 years ago. Not a squeak in 20 years.
My point being, hard to separate the truth from BS marketing with the R joints.
If I remember correctly, R-joints use some kind of spring-loaded tapered sleeve that has a self-tightening effect to prevent slop as the joint wears. I also wanna say that the sleeves were grooved to promote a self-cleaning effect, and are made of Delrin(?) instead of teflon. They're definitely not sealed, but if they have the ability to shed/reject grit, it might bear some fruit for reliability.
I agree with about their claims on poly bushings. If they're lubed correctly, they'll stay quiet. They've got a point about increased bushing "stiction" reducing the suspension performance. The upside of a bushing is also in the fact that it has some slop in it - which can save components from breaking in the event you hit a pothole in a turn, or some other "feature" that wouldn't exist on a properly groomed road course. In the end, I feel like a street car could definitely benefit from poly bushings over hiem joints in numerous locations. They gotta make a sales pitch, I suppose.
-
Thanks for posting this - I could've sworn that there had been an attempt at a pushrod linkage suspension before...
-
11 hours ago, ///M3 & Z said:
I'm very seriously considering to buy the track attack rear kit myself. I have to admit that the main reason for choosing it over other offerings is the I am wondering if it is completely necessary to also run the track attack front kit in conjunction with the rear kit in order for the car to be properly balanced. Would be nice to save some money up front if possible but its tough to determine that outcome until its been tried. Would have been nice if the front kit came with 5 lug hubs.
I was considering this as well. I've got nothing against the McPherson strut design - I'm just trying to maximize the inboard wheel clearance. It occurs to me that the inner front wheel clearance limitation on a stock system with coil-overs might actually be the inner fender (when the wheels are turned), and not the spring/strut assembly. In this case, I'd be happy to retain an improved version of the factory front suspension.
This is just me thinking out loud. Any takers?
-
I'm not sure there's any reason you couldn't mix and match. They appear to be highly customizable for various configurations - although, I'm still trying to get some feedback from someone who's actually got it installed and running. For a street car, my main concern is the abundant use of Heim joints. These are fantastic on a race car, but they're a bit firm on the street, and are subject to damage from contamination. I'm looking into the possibility of getting the kit, and substituting Ridetech R-joints in all the external locations to help mitigate that.
My primary interest in this kit is the potential for gaining inboard tire clearance beyond what is possible with a McPherson strut system with coil-overs installed. I'm trying to minimize the amount of fender flaring that will be required for tires in a 275 to 315 width range.
-
2 hours ago, HS30-H said:
You're about a week late with that.
I'm the OP, and it's more a measure of my patience than tardiness, I promise.
2 hours ago, HS30-H said:I think the recipient vehicle and its intended use is a very relevant factor here. I'm not a fan of what I see from this Apex kit and I think you'd be wasting your time and money if you went with it.
.
Excellent. Can you please expand on what you specifically don't like about it? I'm genuinely picking your brain here.
I completely subscribe to your point about the recipient vehicle.
In my case, I'm building a car that will be 85% street and 15% track driven. It's a pure hobby project. I'm estimating about 600 horsepower, and I want to get as much tire on the ground as possible under mildly flared steel fenders (no bolted or bonded-on kit fenders). I liken my end goal to being something like a BMW M series - a street-friendly sleeper that's equal parts sport car, and muscle car. I intend to get as much performance as possible out of the vehicle without eliminating the factory interior, and rendering it unrecognizable as a Datsun 280Z. I realize these are opposed goals, but finding a happy balance between them is the challenge I'm most excited by.
-
40 minutes ago, HS30-H said:
Seems to me that picking apart the design, engineering and dynamics of this "Track Attack" kit are something of a moot point given the intended recipient vehicle. I guess shaving a few tenths off your time in the weekly dash to Walmart is some kind of an 'attack', but still...
I'm just trying to learn some things, and create a relevant thread for the discussion of this suspension upgrade - preferably from people who have some experience with the kit. Got any contributions besides snide remarks about a fellow hobbyist's project goals? Cheers.
This thread is NOT about Porsche. They have their own message boards. If you have no knowledge or interest pertaining to the Apex Engineered Track Attack suspension, please refrain from posting.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, TUME said:
First, front upper control arm is pretty short. This means that camber gain is massive. I would prefer lomger arm´s, upper and lower also. Coilover attach point maybe lower control arm.
Thanks for bringing that up! I'd like to learn a bit more about this point. I was also thinking that those control arms were a bit short.
Admittedly, I was excited by the tire clearance made from the inward relocation of the strut - as I plan to try to keep the fender flares minimal.
7 hours ago, TUME said:Back, i´ll say that push-rod system is unneccessary. Just show off, i think and extra weight. Can´t say much of geometry cos poor angled pictures.
Point taken. As for the weight, the mounting for the struts/springs doubles as a strut tower brace - which I would have installed anyway. As a 2+2 owner with factory A/C, I'm probably not as worried about the final weight as someone who's aiming for a pure race machine. I'm probably a bit of an oddball on this forum.
-
On 1/4/2021 at 2:54 AM, primaz said:
People forget that yes they are ok with climbing over bars but most others are not
Very true...
When drawing the lines on functionality, the margins get pretty slim when door bars and multi-point harnesses come into play. I'll leave factory seatbelts in place for convenience, but I think I'm going to try to keep some type of welded door bars in the picture. My thoughts are that if someone won't/can't enter the car because of the door bar, then it's not the car I should be giving them a ride in - door bars or otherwise. I'll have to reserve the Datsun passenger seat for those who are excited by it. For everyone else, I've got a comfy daily driver that'll do just fine.
-
No offense fellas, but a 280z is in my garage, so that's what I intend to work with. If I were looking to second guess my ownership and/or consider a Miata or Porsche, I'd hit up the forums at Zcar.com.
Now - about the AE Track Attack suspension... Resume.
-
1 hour ago, primaz said:
Are you talking about that Race Cast LSV12? I think it has that cool factor being a V12 and does use LS engine mounts, but that I believe is a cast iron block, so why not get an aluminum block LS instead as you get the same horsepower & lighter with much more options in parts, etc.?
I am all for cages but the reason why I mentioned what I did on my mild street Z's is that to me it gets the chassis stiffness without the need for a cage which is good for a more street car. Your significant other will typically not like being in a car with bars all over and if they have to climb in or over bars that car will only be driven with you in it and sometimes that causes people to sell the car unless it is for the track and they have the funds to have a lot of cars. To me for the street you really only need a cage if you want to track it and the rules require that or if you are going to the extreme and the car could roll, etc. due to crazy speeds or extreme racing. I do have one street car that does have a semi-cage because the goal is over 200 mph on the street yet I did not go all the way as I did not want to go over the line and make the car impractical for the street, which is easy to do. You car sounds like a cool build but be careful not to go over the line as it sounds like your car is like my cars primarily street.
The Australian "LS" V-12 is indeed the one I'm eyeing. I'm looking at the aluminum block option, which has a slightly smaller displacement (9.2 as opposed to 9.5). All told, I think it weighs around 650lbs, fully dressed. Definitely heavier than an alloy V8, but on par with the DOHC turbo inline 6 offerings - so I'm not too worried about the weight. Besides, I'm reaching an age now where I'm more interested in air conditioning than in shaving off all the fat.
As for the partial cage, I think it's mostly for peace of mind. The idea of a side-impact on that chassis terrifies me. Secondly, having length-wise tubular structure that's triangulated to the car's floor rails would create a "box frame" that's 18 or so inches high - bracing the tops of all 4 strut towers. I liken it to the biplanes in WW1. The upper wing wasn't necessarily for more lift - it was there to create a stronger structure by bracing it to the lower wing.
For what it's worth, that's the logic behind my thoughts.
-
...until one of you lunatics pulls it off.
This is a challenge. 1st person to do it should get a lifetime supply of Fosters (Australian for beer).
http://racecast.com.au/?v=3a1ed7090bfa
-
Thanks for all the replies, everybody. Yeah - it's looking a bit like the Wild West right now.
To make things even shadier, I was going to install this suspension in a 2+2. I asked Ohm if he foresaw any problems in doing that, and he said that it should be possible. At a glance, it looks like the rear seat might even still be able to function with the springs loaded between the shock towers. No doubt, there will be some fabrication required.
Other than potentially modifying the spare tire well, it looks like the front spindles get removed from the strut tubes, and welded into a ball-joint assembly as part of the front control arm setup. That's the only major chopping that I can see so far.
-
- I'll be building a street car - although, it'll see some "weekend warrior" track use (no class-specific racing).
- The plan is to seam weld, re-framerail, and 1/2 cage the car (braced main hoop and rear shock towers, door/rocker bars, a firewall dash bar, with bridged load paths from the front strut tower support - almost a full cage, minus A-pillar and roof bars for street safety. I want chassis reinforcement and safety improvements for a car that will be driven mostly without a helmet. The car will retain its full stock interior - with the exception of Recaro LX seats and front harnesses (maybe rear harnesses too, for laugh value).
- I'm considering a 9.2L LS-V12. HP is in the neighborhood of 750, and 600lb/ft of torque.
- The 2+2 definitely seems to be a red-headed stepchild. I'm discovering differences between it and the coupe that I never anticipated.
-
22 hours ago, Sanchez said:
Checkout the Drivetrain sub forum for a thread called “Thoughts on Apex Engineered Subframe” or something close to that. It was originally about the standard rear subframe they make, but it has info about both as well as some questions answered by the creator, @ohmster101.
There is also a YouTube video of some guys who used the Track Attack subframe on a Hellcat swap Z you should check out. I haven’t seen any updates on the car since then though.
I’ve decided to use their standard rear subframe to run a Ford 8.8 and there are a number of people here who have ordered and started installing them but there is a lack of final reviews and videos going over the kits in depth. When I do mine I will definitely do a detailed write up for my build thread.
Thanks Sanchez,
I'd gotten to the end of those threads too, and wondered "everybody's at a stopping point before completion - is there some kind of hangup that was roadblocking things"? I wish Ohm would publish an FAQ that established expectations of what is required to complete the upgrade - i.e. cutting/welding front spindles, frame reinforcements, necessity for different brake systems and hubs. A general guidance document would encourage me to pull the trigger instead of waiting on other people to finish. I'm looking forward to seeing your write-up. I'm just down the road from you in Memphis.
curious to know what are the best L Series Transmission options now?
in Drivetrain
Posted
Manuals are definitely "yesterday", and so is skill - with all its trials, tribulations, and triumphs. I'll happily keep living in the past. When it's time to give up on driving, I'll just buy a Tesla and let it's unparalleled performance auto-pilot me into a bridge pylon. DCTs are for passengers.