JMortensen

My opinion is that to run a cam that large efficiently you'd need a compression ratio high enough that pump gas wouldn't do it. I think you have your wires crossed a bit. You're going from "I want a race engine that revs to 9000 rpm" to "I want to drive it on the street and I'd like it to run on pump gas." To me those seem mutually exclusive for an L series engine. Have you thought of what would be acceptable to you in terms of durability? Most L's that rev that high have a lifespan measured in hours.

You'll need quite a bit more camber for the radials. As far as the spring rate thing goes, I think you're chasing your tail asking the crowd. What you need is to figure out the front to rear balance. Things like having a rear sway bar and the diameter of the front bar, the ride height front and rear can really vary the spring rate needed to balance things out. Try the Weight Transfer Worksheet. Play with the spring rates, and play with the roll centers. You'll see that there are so many variables that affect the car so much that its really not easy to make a very accurate recommendation.

With a street cam I'd say you're headed in the wrong direction. As Brad-Man says you'll have less power because of less displacement, and you'll have more theoretical rpm capability that you won't use because the cam is too small. If you were trying to wring it out to 9000 rpm I'd say this is probably a good way to go because the rod/stroke ratio will help out, but that doesn't sound like your plan.

Yes they do.

That sounds right. I remember my friend had a T/C Contender with a 14" barrel and we were told that if he got a shoulder stock for it it would have been illegal. There was also a related issue where they considered the .410 barrel (which makes the gun into a single shot break open tiny shotgun) a "sawed off shotgun" and hence illegal.

It's been a while since I've played with that adjustment, but if you're using a stock clutch pedal I think the free play and the rod adjustment are two different things. They relate to one another, but I think it is possible to have slack between the pedal and the rod and no slack between the rod and the back of the master. I think. Sorry, my brain is a bit fried right now... That sounds reasonable to me. The issue I brought up may have nothing to do with his problem, but it caught me out personally so I know it happens.

I would expect that there is no argument from the admins side on this issue. We have no compulsory membership program, and we've told people who don't like the rules about text message typing or cursing or politics or whatever to go start their own z car site. There are several big ones out there, we're not the only game in town. I think we are the best, and the quality of the info here reflects that, and I think that our position as "best" is both in spite of and because of our ruleset. As far as "appreciating the guests" I would argue that a lot of that is misunderstood. I had a guy get pissed off at me today because I shedded his post on LSD breakage. He PM'd me about it and basically he thought that my reasoning for doing shedding the post was because his post questioned my authority on the subject. I have no authority on the subject, and I shedded his post because it was redundant. I offered for him to post his specific question in the diff sticky post that I had written (to keep all the info consolidated in one post) but haven't heard back or seen a post yet... I think a lot of issues with the admins are simple misunderstandings like that. Some others occur when people want to question the authority of the admins. I think it is just in some peoples' nature to do so, and they can't help themselves. I can think of one member who was repeatedly told "Keep your politics out of it" and wouldn't stop and was banned even though he had a lot of valuable tech. I can also recall another who would constantly meddle in any situation where an admin tried to correct a user for almost any reason. He too was banned. People with good info may very well get booted out of the party. If that causes us enough harm, at some point I would think that there would be some discussion amongst the admins about changing tactics, but I don't foresee us having that discussion in the short term.

You seem to be upset with me, and there really is no need. I'm not challenging you personally, only the information in the FSM and the fiche. You're not arguing with me, you're arguing with the collective knowledge of the site. Hopefully some others will back me up here, but I do believe that the info you are relying on is plain old wrong.

YES, the rod length is CRITICAL, and if you make it too long it will partially depress the pressure plate springs. There needs to be 1/8" to 3/16" FREE PLAY between the rod and the master cylinder. If the rod is tight and there is no free play it is easily possible for the seal in the master to block off the hole to the reservoir. This means that pressure can't get out of the system. We've seen this come up several times with brakes and it happened to me on my own clutch about 7 or 8 years ago. Basically as the fluid gets hotter and expands (as you keep driving) the clutch will disengage more and more and slip worse and worse. When this happens with brakes they just start engaging more and more until the car won't move.

You need a descriptive title on your threads so that when people search they won't have to open "The Result" to find out if it has anything to do with their problem or question. Changing it now...

OK, that sounds reasonable to me.

My brother shot a 12 gauge pump shotgun when he was about 8. Same thing happened, he flew back and my dad caught him, dad and uncle thought it was hysterical. He promptly yelled "I WANNA DO IT AGAIN!!!" and did 2 or 3 more times. I'm way more of a weenie about recoil and didn't shoot a 12 gauge until I was 14 or 15...

It wouldn't be the first time the FSM contained errors. My personal experience and the info on this site does not agree with the FSM this time.

Those copper washers are washers, not spacers. They are supposed to go under the stub axle nut. Zcarnut has posted about them before: http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?p=546309#post546309. I'd remove them entirely. As these are ball bearings, you really don't want a lot of preload on them. Changing the torque on the nut in theory should not change the preload, as there is no mechanism for changing the torque to shorten the distance between the inner bearing and the outer bearing. You'd need thousands of pounds of torque to crush that spacer. I know John and I have disagreed on this issue before and the FSM seems to support him, but I just don't see how changing the torque affects the preload at all (once things are tight). You obviously don't want excessive endplay either. I would not take .010" off of the spacer. I'd start with .001 or .002 and work your way up. The one issue I can see is damaging the hub taking the stub axle in and out to get everything fitted up correctly.

Search and you'll find lots of talk about stock FI and cams. I think there are a lot of us that feel the first three stages of MSA's cams are too tiny to bother with, but even the stage III starts to make the FI throw tantrums. Solution: different induction (whether that be EFI or carbs) and bigger camshaft, or stick with the stock cam and work around it and do your other upgrades.

Maybe you're right, I can't recall exactly right now. Daikin makes the HD pp, and that does ring a bell.

Bastaad525 used an ACT pp with stock disk (or it may have been their kevlar disk) and I think he was putting down 300+ lbs of torque. I'm using a 225mm ACT pp with a stock Nissan disk and it holds my ~200 ft lbs torque ~240 whp NA motor no problem.

Let's keep the politics to a minimum guys.

I've seen three different nuts (VW, B30-629 Q1 and A1) and they all had the same seal

The other option (which I've suggested before on many occasions) is a firmer pp with a stock disk. Smoother engagement and still will hold more torque. At some point you may need both to hold down the power you're making, but my idea is why suffer with a chattery clutch when you don't have to?

Stock for the early cars was a solid cam with a spraybar. You can run an internally lubed cam with a spraybar. Stock for later cars (76 and on?) was internally lubed cam. You cannot run a solid cam with no spraybar. The spraybar gets fed from the cam towers, which get fed from the hole in the picture. There is a bit about opening up the hole in the How to Modify book, I would not recommend it as it will get you lower oil pressure it idle.

I'm guessing the nuts you got were the VW nuts. I got them along with the others that I ordered. I think the nuts that I got the first time, the B30-629 Q1 "MIGHT" have been the right ones. If you call Bilstein they should be able to tell you what would work based on the size of the threads and pitch AND THE THREADS ON THE OUTSIDE. Sounds like shox.com are a bit hard to deal with. Bad customer service is a bummer. For spacers I was just going to use a piece of 1.5" x .095 DOM tube I have lying around. The bottom of the strut is tapered so I would think it would self center. If that doesn't work, I'll weld a flat plate or a washer on top of the 1.5" tube.

I think that info is wrong. 79 S130 with a 4 speed manual? What country did they sell that one in? My 80ZX 2 seater had a R200 3.90. I thought ALL manuals had R200s and the automatics (except turbos) had R180s.

Looks like some of that roll is from the tires and not the suspension.

No, I don't know what exactly the specs are. It has been discussed several times though, so you should be able to either find the info or the name of a person who has ordered the pistons through Summit by searching the archives.