G-E

This isn't a bad thing like you think it is, the toe curve would be fully tunable by using simple spacers: anything from toe-in on compression to toe-in on droop Secondly, while I didn't draw a connecting piece, I envision a whole replacement bar that bolts up to the factory mount, which would have balljoint bosses for the toe rod and reverse a-arm to pivot from. If the balljoints were facing down from above the new plate, you'd have increased roll resistance; if the balljoints were under, you'd have the opposite, and the bar could be symmetrical to allow being flipped, or even have several potential boss locations for even more toe or wheel position adjustment The toe rod would connect to the arm with a rodend, perhaps studded rodend to make life easier to insert spacers... Makes sense?

What are your thoughts on something like this: Ignore the over-simplification of the pivots, it's the layout I'm focusing on...

I like to design parts in a way that everything is cumulative, like a clean upgrade path one by one, or all at once, sometimes that means a little compromise... That said, I'm looking at finally cracking this nut that people have been hammering on for decades, and I think to do that, convention has to go out the window, it has to be a fresh approach.

I agree, there should be balljoints at the hub and sphericals involved on the inner pivot... Just curious, why did you choose the toe adjustment on the leading edge?

The gears should be available in 12mm version from the late z31 as well, but if you have a 12mm bolt pumpkin, your 10mm bolt ring gear will have to be opened up right? The 10->12mm sleeves are for using a newer 12mm ring gear with an older 10mm pumpkin.

So without being design specific, what features are most important, assuming it's strong enough, and all bearings are oriented in their strong axis? I played around with several designs for a rollcenter adjuster, but aside from making it compatible with stock arms, it doesn't really allow you to fix the major faults of these other arm designs. So if I do progress with it, it will likely be a design around a new arm as well....

Ok just because this point has been brought up more than once (shortened control arms), and in lieu of the camber adjustable coilover adapters I'm producing [see here: http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/119399-240z-camber-adj-rear-coilover-adapters-bolt-on/ ] Assuming one were to use my kit, which would be the best setup to use then? Mike's or tube80z's seems to me the best style, since any toe adjustment with rodends will cause binding if the distance isn't accommodated with shims... What do you guys think? If TTT's are really just rodend converted factory style arms, no huge bonus points there right?

Another option for maximum tire http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/119399-240z-camber-adj-rear-coilover-adapters-bolt-on/

Unless you have a ton of downforce, the car just doesn't weigh enough to justify 275's up front, there is such a thing as too big...

Ok I'll randomly select aluminum bolt-on Sneak peek:

There are people who race with no front swaybars and stiffer springs, a lot of times grip is lost it's that swaybar causing 1 wheel to lift unnaturally... johnc is right, there's ways to tune your chassis for this. But hey, if you just wanna be unique, don't let us stop you BTW Q45 and skylines have the rings on the axle stubs if you want 4-channel..

Ok so I have 3 potential designs for this: 1. weld-in 2. bolt-on steel 3. bolt-on aluminum.... Who would be ready to buy in...... and who's interested in which option? G'ready. G'set. GOOOoooo....

I'll chime in to say that although all my cars are non-abs, I've have to drive and diagnose many that were, and unequivocally I can say, anything older than late-90's abs systems suck as a rule, while many still sucked into the 00's Perhaps you can get an external abs/traction controller box that can use the 240SX sensors and rings?

I don't think that's proof of anything, there's another more likely possibility: contract manufactured You'd get a discount if you ordered 20pcs too... unless you have some advertising agreement, how you priced your re-sale is up to you

I'm still convinced this a roll-center issue, either needs a taller rca up front to raise rc, or a lower rc in back... ride height can accomplish this to some degree, so you could try lowering the car in the rear and raising it in the front as suggested

These things:

Have you got rollcenter adjusters up front?

Those will need to be measured... if someone has a set they can sacrifice to the god of prototyping?

So the only redesign I need to make to my adapters is a longer base, and a very slight bump in diameter to be tighter to the tube wall.. Parts used: 240z '73 rear strut, my z31-s13 coilover adapter, and stance s13 coilover bracket

That looks pretty good, certainly beefy... Just a side question, if using intrepid hubs, wouldn't it make sense to come up with a caliper solution to use intrepid rotors?

If each of the inner rods had a lever at the end, you could use an adjustable bar with rodends to keep a set distance. Or ever a simple round flange with mutiple holes around the edge, allowing whatever is top most to be bolted to the mount to stop rotation.

I had the same thought. Why didn't they make it square or hexagon, and have fixed points to rotate it to?

As someone who designs suspension stuff, the setup baffles me a bit too, even if we exclude total failure, it's inviting things to become misaligned...

You mean like so: http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/117455-rt-cromoly-60mm-extended-studs-foolish-april-pricing/?p=1101207 Oddly you posted M12x1.25 for fronts and M12x1.5 for rears... ?

In my experience, keeping the diameter changes small and consistent over the length of the whole system, ie. stepping up 1/8" or so every couple feet, will help reduce backpressure, and lower the tendency to resonation.... oh and it lowers the pitch of the exiting sound If you're considering using it to "tune" the power band, keep in mind that there's a narrow sweet spot for every diameter and shape, so you might gain a few hp at say 3000-3500 rpm with one size, whereas another would gain you a few more only above 4000... This is also true for a straight diameter the whole length, it will operate most effectively at a given engine rpm/load, above or below that will be less efficient. Pro tip: don't cut your tips at an angle, it makes them much louder