tube80z

Ceramic can use lighter weight oil versus grease for lubrication. There is some info around wide 5 conversions for circle track racing. For the money they are probably not a good trade off unless you can't use a larger bearing and are losing a steel bearing during a race due to load or heat issues. I doubt that would be many of us. REM finishing and good grease along with the spacers would be a large improvement. When I checked on ceramic prices one bearing was the cost of doing all 4 corners.

I have used those for a few years and I liked certain aspects but they are not a good street shock. They are digressive shocks and probably too harsh for street use unless you really want a canyon carver weekend toy. They work best on a race car with very light unsprung weight. They require yearly rebuilds as the seals seem to die and lose oil. The cost of the rebuild last time (a few years back) was $175 a corner. I had them rebuilt in the winter and they leaked most of the oil out before they were used in that summer all while sitting on a shelf. When I called GC they said they'd need another rebuild at the same cost. I don't think GC makes them anymore but will service what is out there. I wouldn't recommend them even if you can find a set. I can post pics of my insert and measurements it that would help. They are very short compared to most inserts you'll find. Cary

I've done a few sets like that and used Subaru inner rack ends. They are metric but look very similar. I've seen some Triumph or MG products that were similar but probably standard threads. Keith, the clivice is a standard part you can order from speedway or summit. For the plate I'd recommend a higher grade steel than mild. My local steel supplier has a plate they call formaloy 4040 or something very similar that is a lot stronger than mild steel but will still bend rather than brake. For any 0.25 inch brackets I like to use it. One option for these is to make the hockey stick out of an old TC rod. You will need to grind for clearance to make it work with a 5/8 clevis. Your next step up is 3/4 and a thicker hockey stick and it may not bend. But that means something else might. Cary

Another option is you can have bearings REM finished and cryo treated. Some places will do it for Timken bearings but many times you need to take them apart. I never knew you could do that until a friend took some apart, cleaned them, changed to a lower drag seal, and put in better grease. Ceramic would be the best option but are very expensive. Cary

For the springs I'd run the rear either the same or perhaps 50 pounds lower in rate than the front. The higher rate will help keeping the chassis from moving so much and if the suspension is compressing from downforce it will about half of what you're seeing now. I'd agree on as much caster as you can do, which will also increase the wheelbase and help with stability. In looking at the picture of your car from the side it looks like you need to lower the rear. That would reduce the angle of the windshield and might get you a few more tenths. Any reason no rear spoiler? That should help reduce drag and make the car more stable at the speeds you're running. A friend has an EP car and it routinely hits 158 on the straight at PIR and when braking the car is moving a lot from the in car footage. He said when he ran the GT-2 Z it was much better in this regard. One difference was the rear spoiler. Hope this helps, Cary

You also need a lot more spring (450 to 550). A friend ran a splitter a little larger than that and grounded it from 4 inches doing 160 on the straight at Thunderhill. This would allow you to lower to keep more air from going under. Cary

Another thing to look at is the liner when you start getting weird results. If you bend the torch a lot it wears quicker. Drive rolls lasted much longer than liners when I had my hobart handler. When you're welding it should make a sizzle noise almost like bacon cooking. If you don't have that you're moving too fast, wire speed too high, or not voltage is wrong. That was my key indicator when using the handler was to adjust the voltage to get that noise and it worked much better.

It sounds reasonable. If you weighed your parts then you could do some frequency calculations and know where you start for sure. I'd probably start where you propose knowing it's a little soft but should give some scope for tuning. While I wouldn't use them while driving on the street the use of droop limiters will help to control roll and pitch. When setting up A S30 chassis roll is something you try very hard to avoid. The limiters let you run softer rates for the amount of body roll that you'd normally see. Cary

Yes, just need to remove this extra degree of freedom. Braking level was 1 G or so. Wheel hopped so bad it broke the rod end. If you have the strut off and just the steering arm on and you move through rotation and it suddenly flops from front to back that's a sure sign you'll have an issue. At lower load never a problem. The other issue I see in this is that you're going to see higher tie-rod loads. So on a car where those are older or marginal you might have a problem. It's an easy fix if you do run into the problem. Simple sub in a solid rod and and declare victory. Cary

Years ago we did something like that and found using the double rod ends didn't work. Under hard braking the wheels hopped. If you replaced the rod end on the control arm it was fine. I don't see how these would solve that problem unless I'm missing something fundamental. Cary

On your pic I had a similar failure but for a very different reason. I had the front sprocket break a chunk of cam and slip and that broke a rocker similar to what you have along with bending some valves. What I wonder is it possible something got into the cylinder and caused enough of a jolt to break the rocker? Have you been able to look into the cylinder at all? It sucks when stuff like this happens but when you've done it for long enough it happens to us all. Not that we enjoy it any more than you are. Worry, hope the the luck improves! Cary

I second the raybestos pads. Those are the only thing that live on a friends EP car. Supercooled rotors do live longer but are not always to come by. Cary

If this is a race car then one option is to remove the stock hinges and place a plate with holes where they go. Then on the hatch you make a 1/4 to 3/8 pin that goes into these. Very easy to pull off but holds the car. Normal hood pins or aerocatch can be used on the rear end. Cary

Really sorry to hear/see this. You were well on your way to getting a really competitive car. Cary

The rear wing looks like it has too much angle. Check to make sure it isn't stalled. Cary

It looks like if you modified the stock 240SX cradle this would be easier to do. I'm guessing there's an opportunity for an enterprising individual. Cary

The QA-1 struts are in their new catalog you can download. It doesn't show any info about parts that fit. I'm guessing it uses the same parts as the other 46 mm double-adjustable shocks. They look like a decent option assuming there are valving options available.

I don't think $2500 a shock is all that expensive for a custom made piece of high-end race equipment. You have a record breaking car so I'm not sure why you think any one part of it would be inexpensive. The only "lower" cost DA insert I know of is either Koni or the Ground Control AD shocks, which I don't think they make anymore. There may be some options if you're willing to get creative and fab up some parts. Perhaps one of the Koni drag struts for a different model (Mustang/Camaro) but it sound like Koni isn't really up to snuff for this? Perhaps you could run a coilover shock outside of the strut housing. Years ago this was done in IMSA and other orgs as long as the rules allow it. It opens all manner of possibilities. You could even use the varishocks you have on the rear of the car at the front. You did start out by telling us that you were interested in Penske shocks or something similar and that you're a serious racer. So it sounded like you already knew this wasn't going to be a cheap request. It's not hard at all to get ballpark costs from the internet. So I'm not really sure where all the price sensitivity came from. It's called racing and the joke's always been you make a small fortune from a big one doing it. What it sounds like is you're trying to convince us Stance are the best DA shock for you and get us all to agree (fat chance). There are as many opinions on this forum as there are members. You did the research and have talked to them. If that's what you want then go with them. It's that easy if you have all the data points you need. It's your car, your money. You don't need to convince us. Get some great results and help stance in the drag market. I'm sure it would help a lot of people to see that they have a quality product you set records with.

For the bias ply tires I'd probably start in the 18 to 20 range. You may need to run lower. They are more squirmy than the A6 you had and take more slip angle to work. When you turn you're going to need to do it quickly and a little more lock to compensate. Camber will be in the 1 to 1.5 range unless you have a lot of roll. If you're running front droop limiters you may need 1 degree or less. My old car settled on 0.5 to 0.75 degrees depending on the course. Even used these should amaze you. If you decide on new tires or Berget can get GY 15 inch atlantic fronts try them. Only in R160 compound. 10x23x15. Reports of them doing 160 runs still fairly well. Tighter than Avons but overall grip may be just a little lower. May seem expensive but should be cheaper than the A6s. Similar size but will last much longer. R160 compound requires a little heat but you should be golden in Florida. These are generally considered a good match for the Avons. GY used to make a slightly softer compound that was even faster but we can't get them anymore. We have a 240Z and an RX-7 (2nd gen) running those tires. They work well on both cars but since they are soft you can kill them easily of you don't stay on top of pressure and wear patterns (if you're not measuring tread temp).

I have the $30 cheaper knock off and it looks just the same as the eastwood tool. I'd bet made by the same people but sprayed with cheap paint.

You're going to run an LS3 aren't you? You should be able to run those 6500 stock I guess that's only roughly 20k or so, which may not be worth the extra wear and tear. Keeping the revs down with help with oil issues too. Cary

The advantage of this system is you can build it so one bolt holds it on. Then a quick disconnect on the fan motor and the entire unit can be removed. Cary

My personal thought is you'd be better off moving the cockpit front side of the cage to the firewall for you design. Or another idea would be to add tubing that mimics the bracing of modern cars in the engine bay. This would be similar to your cross tube in the cockpit. Then you can connect the strut towers to this similar to most cage setups that go all the way to the towers. And I'd add an inverted V that connected at the center of this bar and then went down to the engine bay frame rails. you'd lose about an inch doing this of space behind the engine but I think it would be helpful. You could also add doublers in the cowl that were either welded or structurally riveted. For a car with nice paint using rivets and modern structural epoxies might be an option. More expensive than welding but probably less so than having to touch up the paint. The plus would be not heating the metal enough to worry about oxidation starting.

Not knowing much about circuit autos I'm interested. Do you still have the converter or is this a straight drive like a circle track setup? Also curious about weight. I'm currently setup to use a dog ring 4-speed but could see swapping if this looks better. Cary

I'm not sure if this would work but for a no cost fix try swapping springs front to rear. Your setup if definitely front stiff so it doesn't surprise me that it understeers. On a Z you need to control roll at all costs so I don't think I'd do a softer front bar.