JMortensen

Here's a rear quarter view of a full on race Europa:

I used a chop saw on all of mine, beveled the pieces, clamped them onto a piece of angle iron, and spun the top piece until there was the smallest gap, and welded them up.

Not a bad idea...

I agree 100%.

There are so many variables there that I don't think you're going to get a "test result" for this question. I've driven the same Z with a stock flywheel and a 12 lb flywheel. Makes a HUGE difference. I've also driven one with a 10 lb flywheel. You can actually feel the difference in the 12 lb to the 10 lb flywheel pretty easily. I traded my friend some 25 lb Carrol Shelby wheels, 15x7 for her ZX 6 spoke wheels which are 14 lbs. She got home and called me to tell me that the car didn't seem as fast and didn't brake as well. Anecdotal I know, but I think that's the kind of info you're going to get on this one.

Changing title...

It fell off the radar because I needed to have some parts machined and to buy some more stuff to get it completed. I'm just about ready to jump back into it. The monoball holders will be used on the inner pivots, rod ends on the outer pivots. A 5/8" monoball (com10) with no holder at all, just the bearing itself, almost fits into the outside end of a stock control arm. I can't remember how far off they are, but it's like .010 too big or right around there. The exact info is in that thread I linked to before. The 3/4" monoball (com12) that is used in this piece that bjhines ordered is way too big to put into the rear control arm on the outboard end.

Getting the weights before and after a swap would be very valuable. This also wouldn't tell you what the difference in the engine weights is, but would probably be MORE useful than that info because there are other things to factor in, like the nearly 100 lb heavier T56 that most people seem to use. The following figures are from zhome.com, and came originally from R&T magazine: 70 240Z 2355 lbs 73 240Z 2450 lbs 74 260Z 2665 lbs If you have the early 260Z, it should be in the 2450 lbs range stock. If you have the later 280 style, then it should be in the 2665 lbs range stock. I don't know if "curb weight" includes a full tank of gas or not, but regardless, it doesn't appear that you have added much if any weight to your Z.

That same torrington bearing design is used on the GC, EMI, and TT plates, and I'm sure others. I think the benefits are a friction reduction when turning the wheels, and it eliminates most of the load from the monoball. Still it makes me wonder if we might not be better off with the AZC style where the upper spring mount sits directly on the monoball. The whole thing makes me want to get some upper spring perches that rest on the monoball directly and do some back to back testing...

You know what? You did push my buttons just right and I think I overreacted. I apologize. I'd like to see any actual proof you might have one way or the other, I'm sure there are many others who would love to see numbers as well.

What would make me happy is those numbers you were talking about. Without that, we're not going to make any progress at all. I'm comfortable with this rough comparison being a rough comparison. You've only said "No because I say so" and ridiculed the people who took the time to measure the weight of the shortblocks. That ridiculing IS an attack as far as I'm concerned. Give us SOMETHING other than your say so, or leave it to someone else to provide some ACTUAL PROOF of your point. I have no problem with you being right, I have a problem with the way you argue your point.

Now THERE is a valid point. One which, coincidentally was conceeded by the guys doing the measuring. I'll refresh your memory: Good thinking. Tear someone else down by being a jerk, but provide no proof of your own ideas. Just post that you have proof, but we're all too stupid to believe it. See how appreciative we are of that strategy?

Maybe there's a ton of Mikunis in NC. Out here I'd say a good set of 40's complete with manifold and air cleaners would probably be worth $8-900. A complete set of 44s should be in the $1000 to $1100 range. You can compare to this website to see what he's getting: http://www.wolfcreekracing.com/classified.htm To find out what size they are, measure the hole on the manifold side of the carburetor. This means you'll need to pull at least one carb off the manifold. I would sell them on ebay if I were you, I've seen them bring good $$$ many times.

Right on Mike. I could put both engines on an old time balance scale like the "scales of justice" type of thing and be totally comfortable with the one that sinks lower being the heavier one. Likewise I think the bathroom scales are a reasonably accurate way to measure the difference. Maybe you won't get the weight down to the ounce, but you can tell which is heavier. Maybe you need a $2000 set of scales Lee, but I sure don't. Speaking of which, why not show us what those guys came up with instead of alluding to it as "real" proof but not showing it. And questioning the weight of carbon and oil? How much do you think that oil weighs??? When you read this, did you think that Ron and Paul represented that they were figuring the weights of the engine down to the oz? I sure didn't. I think their information is not exact and was not ever purported to be. What it does tell me is that there isn't a whole heck of a lot of difference in the weight of the short blocks. That's all. Doesn't take into account the heads or manifolds or the rest.

Not the same. 300ZX NA isn't useful for any early Z swap. The shafts are too long and the flange is too wide.

Weight jacks are used to raise one corner of the car so that corner weights can be set. On the early Z the weight jacks we normally use are threaded collars and coilovers with 2.5" springs. On circle track cars the weight jacks are a large threaded shaft that screws into the body and then the top spring perch. By turning the screw in that corner gets lifted, and by turning it out that corner gets lowered. Here is an example: http://www.secureperformanceorder.com/afcostore/getproduct.cfm?CategoryID=17&ClassID=222&SubclassID=1043&ProductID=910

I suppose that should work. I imagine you'll cut the monoball holder down a lot so that it is only ~1" thick, then you'll weld it to the TC bucket. The TC bucket is probably less than 1/8" thick. You might try to figure out a way to reinforce it so that the bucket itself is less flexible. As you pointed out the rod ends are a lot stronger when they are turned 90 degrees and the race is in line with the load.

How are you going to integrate that part into a TC rod? I'm using the first one my rear control arms by the way: http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=106457

http://timken.com/industries/torrington/catalog/pdf/needle/n_thrust.pdf FNTA-6590 + the hardened washers fits a Ground Control 2.5" coilover spring perch for a 240.

Hmm... interesting. I thought you had a Quaife and AZC arms. I must be thinking of someone else. If you have the CLSD then I don't know what's up. Check for bind in the CVs through the whole suspension travel, and if they're bound then maybe add some length to the control arms by getting some adjustable control arms. I would think that would be the less expensive alternative to having CV axles machined unless Ross could help you out with that. I wonder if maybe the CV is maxing out its misalignment angle. If that were the case, maybe raising the diff like Terry did might help. This is all pure speculation...

It will bolt up to any L series or NAPZ engine. The 510 and I think some of the truck transmissions are shorter, so you would need to shorten the driveshaft in that case since the new trans is longer.

A CAN OF WD-40?!? You're one lucky guy!!! I assume it was the hoist? Very nice. My wife was begrudgingly asking me what fuel cell I wanted for Xmas yesterday. It can be a sticky point between us, but on the other hand, I've watched her spin off the track at a road course in the Z while probably doing 80 or 90 mph, so I can't complain too much...

Don't worry, you weren't "The Source"... Maybe it was that the side loading from ours being a strut suspension was so much greater than the side loading from the spring winding up, that it just wasn't worth it to spend that much money to reduce the side load by such a small amount. I can't remember. Maybe The Source will pipe up... Cary???

They don't work on struts.

My thoughts: 3/4" is larger than necessary for the front LCA. I haven't found threaded square stock. I think people are taking a piece of 1/2 or 3/4" plate steel, drilling a hole and tapping it. Easy enough to do. The guy who did my round tubing found a size that was tight enough that it had to be hammered into the cut end of the control arm. He then turned down a threaded tube end and welded that into the end of the arm for a 5/8" rod end. If you do it that way you don't have to cut the control arm open, but you do have to turn the tube end to fit in the smaller diameter tube. Make your control arms at least as long as stock. I mean with the rod end threaded ALL the way in, it should be as long as stock. This will give you more room to add negative camber with the arms. The TC rods with the inner tie rod are a fine idea. What I don't get is how they threaded the tie rod into the end of the TC rod. It kinda looks like maybe they cut the TC rod after the J end, then welded on a tube with internal threads and that's what the tie rod screws into. Looks very similar to what BRE used on their 510's back in the early 70s.