JMortensen

The YZ covers more of the front tire which is what you want aerodynamically speaking. It is also a smoother shape so likely has less drag. I think the YZ would be the better shape for a splitter to work on, but that would have to be tested to find out for sure.

The problem with a 4 speed is no overdrive. I know Cary (tube80z) has driven an LS2 Z with a Super T-10. It's a light trans, but with a stockish sized tire you're limited in speed to about 140 mph. If it's a weekend toy that might not be a problem. If its a weekend track car, that might be a limitation you don't want.

Suggestion: if you want to follow the "ride the crest theory" use Mark's cam. His hp peaks at 6000. Or just get a cam that makes so much more power that it is better than a cam with a lower hp peak that you can ride the crest on. That was a new idea to me until a thread about LSx cams. Apparently guys autoxing are finding the bottom end unreliable over about 6500, but some of the options make so much more power that even though the cam might peak over the redline you want, you'll still get more power out of it from say 4000 - 6250 than if you go with a smaller cam. http://forums.hybridz.org/index.php/topic/80120-cammed-ls1-guys-need-advice/page__view__findpost__p__761479

I'm a bit stumped as to why John would see this as an issue. Mark is making 85hp/liter with a 3.1 and lower compression and redline with smallish 40mm carbs: http://forums.hybridz.org/index.php/topic/24798-na-31lhead-camshaft-questions-no-shortcuts-max/page__view__findpost__p__678488 Then there was that other guy, John Coffey, who got 320bhp 287whp at 6800 with a similar compression ratio on 3L. That's 95 hp/liter, or 267 for a 2.8: http://forums.hybridz.org/index.php/topic/42632-highest-numbers-for-na-stroker/page__view__findpost__p__353597

A couple points. A cam has a very small PMOI, so that effect of being out of balance wouldn't be nearly as strong as a crank or a wheel or something larger. The cam is captured and that means that even if it is out of balance it's not going to start a big oscillation like a wheel would because it can't move outside of the bearings. So it seems that the limit of the effect would be confined to the clearance in the bearings, and perhaps some bending in the cam as it rotates. A cam is very long, so if you balanced it by adding weights to the gear, I think you'd have what could be compared to a static wheel balance and there might still be a dynamic balance that is out. IME it's been pretty obvious when valve float happens. It is possible that there might be some less dramatic version of valve float going on because of cam vibrations, but if it was a real problem I suspect you would be able to see it on a dyno graph. If you can't, then is the problem worth worrying about? I don't doubt that balancing the cam has the potential to make the engine run smoother, and I wouldn't rule out the possibly of cam balance have a small effect on valve timing events, but I do question the ROI of going through the trouble to fix it. I don't think it will hurt anything more than your pocketbook to do it though...

Those 4x4 calipers, while they seem heavy, are only a couple lbs heavier than the stock 2 piston calipers. Going from memory the weights are something like 7 vs 9 lbs. The weight isn't the problem... I did a 4 piston front brake non-vented setup with early 280ZX in the rear with a ZX master and adjustable prop valve. I went to a HPDE school and one of the things they told us to do was drive through a big puddle and slam on the brakes so we could get the feel of a 4 wheel lockup. I was not locking the rear brakes, even in a puddle. I ended up completely removing the rear proportioning valve and was still not getting enough rear brake. So I switched back to the stock front calipers. This enabled me to get the bias right and the brakes worked pretty good like this for a couple of laps. I've heard others with similar bias problems with other rear disk setups and front 4 piston calipers. I think the answer is larger rear calipers, but then in most cases you're losing your e-brake, which is important for a street car. Autox with either setup wasn't a problem, but at a big track with the slicks I was running I could put enough heat into the system to cause trouble in just a few laps. I ended up punching a hole through a brake pad with the stock front calipers (pics of this in my album, search for "R4S"). At this point I switched back to the 4 piston calipers, just because the brake pads and calipers were larger. I had a serious overheating problem and not only had trouble with pads, but I also boiled the brake fluid a bunch of times even with the 4x4 calipers. When this happens the non-compressible brake fluid becomes steam which is compressible so you wind up at the end of a straight, you hit the brakes and the pedal goes straight to the floor. Not fun. So here's my take on brakes: Stock is adequate for autox. You wont' put enough heat in to cause problems even with multiple drivers and sticky tires. I used to run 3 drivers a lot and never had trouble with brakes, even with street pads. The stock brakes also work for track days if you aren't using sticky tires. The stickier the tires the more heat you will put in the brakes. If you're forced to use the stock brakes, there are things that can be done to mitigate the problem even with sticky tires (venting, bleeding between sessions, etc). If you are driving your street car to the track venting isn't the best idea because your vents can pretty easily get ripped off on the road. Good race pads also help A LOT. The problem with race pads is that they don't work when cold, so they are very dangerous to use on the street. You can switch pads when you get to the event. This is what I was doing at the end there. The better solution for a street/track car that is overrunning the stock brakes and doesn't have class limitations is a big brake upgrade. Most guys can upgrade to the point where they can run streetable pads without vents and still not have issues at the track. If you're getting real serious and have big sticky tires and lots of power and have the big brake setups, even the big brake upgrades can be overrun at some point, in which case you're back into venting and race pads, etc. It's not like you solve this problem once and for all, but as you step up in performance you need to address it again, continually. The bigger your brakes are the heavier they are. The heavier they are the more they'll slow you down, just like a heavy wheel will, as it is more unsprung weight and more rotating mass. Ideally (just like everything else on a race car) you want the brakes heavy enough to take the punishment without breaking down but not heavier than necessary and slowing the car down.

If he is underage, then I agree. The whistling at the girlfriend and leaving witnesses stuff had me scratching my head too, but I figured he was trying to be funny. I ASSumed you were going to take it in a different direction. Sorry about that.

That's a discussion that can quickly turn political, and he didn't ask whether or not anyone thinks that he needs to carry. There are plenty of arguments for both sides, but they all aren't allowed here because Hybrid Z doesn't allow political discussions anymore.

1911 is too big for me to carry, so is a large frame 357 that would have greater than 6 capacity. If you want to carry your gun I'd get something smaller. For an exposed carry I think I chose pretty wisely with my P226 in .40, but it is also too big for concealed carry for me, unless it's the middle of winter and I'm wearing a parka. I've been looking at concealed carry options for a while now, and I keep coming back to the small revolvers. I like Ruger revolvers, and the LCR is now available in .357. I think I'd probably buy a .357 and run it with .38's Your idea of going and renting both is a good one. FWIW, I think revolver grips are generally speaking more comfortable than semi-auto grips, and I'd even go so far as to say single action revolver grips are the best for comfort as they convert the recoil into a rolling motion, but they're obviously not very practical for concealed carry...

I drove with a heims jointed TC rod for 40K plus miles on the street with no problems. I didn't feel that it was very harsh with 200/250 springs and Illuminas on 1 or 2. I also had camber plates and helms jointed front control arms, so basically the only suspension bushings were on the steering rack and the rear control arms. If you're worried about the angles on the TC rod, the simplest solution is to slot the hole in the control arm. If that doesn't appeal to you you can make your own ends which use a clevis on the control arm end and a turnbuckle in the middle and then a rod end or tie rod type pivot in the back. I copied Dan's end which he was nice enough to post pictures of here: http://forums.hybridz.org/index.php/topic/41611-tc-rod-pivot-relocation-bad-dog-subframe-connectors-slotted-crossmember/page__view__findpost__p__567622

I don't know about the Nissan FI, but I know my Toyota had mechanisms in there to make it decelerate more slowly. Just judging from your videos, that seems slower than the carbed light flywheeled L28's I've driven. Might be my imagination, but that's the way it seemed to me...

There is a tool that you can use to flycut the pistons you already have and then you don't need a new bottom end. It's like a really long valve with the cutter at the valve head. You just stick it in the head, put the head on the block and spin it with a drill motor (tape around the edge of the piston). You can refer back to the million other threads about strokers for more info there, but for my $.02, it's a good idea if you can get all the parts cheap. If you can't you might do better to put the extra money that you would have spent into the head.

I had an airdam with a rubber skirt and it would start flapping at about 90 mph. I replaced the rubber with plastic lawn edging from Home Depot and it worked much better and didn't flex. I think you're going to have to experiment with the spoiler. I'd be tempted to make two, then start with a small one that goes across the decklid and is basically flat and then adjust the angle, and then do the same thing with a larger one that extends off the side of the decklid and see if you can see a difference in lap times.

Are you aware that the stamp shows the teeth count on the ring and pinion and then you have to divide out to get the ratio? So a 37:11 would be a 3.36, and a 37:10 is a 3.70. Somebody just recently posted about gears from OS Giken I think, and they had a 3:15 ratio but wanted $1500 or something for them. I think for that kind of money I'd be figuring out how to put a Ford 8.8 IRS diff in. All kinds of ratios cheap and lots of limited slip/locker options too, and the housing is aluminum.

I asked about those multimeter probes and was told they take too long to get a reading. How long does yours take? You really need to get tire temps as quickly as possible when you get the car off the track. As far as your mods, it's best to do one thing at a time whenever possible. It'll be interesting to see how that works out though.

Good call. I didn't even think about how the chain is built. So really the answer then I think the answer is no.

Could also just run the windshield. Don't use plexi, it's a ***** to cut. Lexan cuts really easy with a jigsaw.

It's really not that big a deal, but one could start with that Mercedes chain that has a master link if it that makes it better. Don't ask me what Mercedes, I don't remember, but it fits the L series and was commonly available about 10 years ago.

Agreed. I'm actually going to try a square setup, but not because I don't believe a staggered setup can be made to work. My impression is the more power you're putting down the more sense the staggered setup makes, because what you're really getting out of it is the ability to accelerate out of a corner with more throttle. That advantage might be more apparent at an autox than it is at a road course.

Vette, M3, M5, S2000, Supra, CTS-V, Camaro all have staggered tires.

Do you have any support for that statement at all? I think I can find a lot of arguments that staggered tires work better, especially on cars that have a rear weight bias. Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini come to mind in the street car realm, ALMS, F1, sprint cars, and just about every other kind of road racing uses them too.

I would guess no, based on what a complete ***** it can be to get the right size chain on with the guides moved all the way. Might be able to customize the curved guide to flatten it out a bit, but really, seems like there are other solutions here to take advantage of. I like Pete's domed piston suggestion too.

I believe it is true to say that you would have to mill 1/2 the distance from one link to the next in order for the chain to fit correctly. You can measure a chain and see where that leaves you, but I think that's a whole lot of milling in order to make taking a link out an option.

Weld up the chamber instead of cutting the head would be the obvious solution.

I put up some pictures here: http://forums.hybridz.org/index.php/topic/89478-making-droop-limiters/. You can use straps but then it's hard to adjust the slack in them. I used turnbuckles for that reason. Might redo the fronts. The rears are going to work fine as shown.