JMortensen

EXACTLY!!!

Like I said I was running it 7/16" higher than stock and that stopped the bumpsteer. I originally slotted it as far as I could and I only needed to go up that far. This time I'm going to run it all the way up and use a bumpsteer spacer setup on the tie rod to space the outside end down to compensate. That will give me a higher roll center and better camber gain. That's the plan anyway.

I used some 12 ga .105" thick plate. I also went to 5/8" rod ends for the control arm so what I did was to strip the paint first. I used a cutoff wheel to cut through the spot welds as I haven't had any luck at all trying to chisel spot welds off, then I opened the stock hole up to 5/8. Then I set it on my workbench and used a square to mark the high end of the slot. Then I drilled that out progressively to 5/8", then I used a dremel with a cutoff wheel to connect the holes. I did the same thing on the plates, then welded the plates to the outsides of the crossmember. I ran my old crossmember without any reinforcement at all, just washers on each side of the slot, but in retrospect that was pretty dumb and I wouldn't recommend it, even though I never had any trouble with it like that.

There is no point in going to the larger master with stock brakes. I agree with you on rebuilt masters, they generally aren't very good and don't have 1/2 the lifespan of a new unit. Last time I bought a new one it was close to $200 though, so you kind of have to weigh the pros and cons.

The floorboards look solid. Nice car. I like the silver.

Are you talking about redrilling the hole as per the JTR instructions, or adding a slot? Don't get too caught up in the precision of the location of the hole if you're just drilling a hole. The Z chassis wasn't all that precise to begin with. If you're 1/8" off on one side it isn't going to make a noticeable difference. The "hard" part is getting the washers off of the crossmember. When I measured where my control arms were when I bump steered them with a slot, I found that I had only moved them up about 7/16", FWIW.

Just don't take ALL of the slack out. You need 1/8" or so, otherwise the brakes will stick on.

I could see someone paying over $1000 easy. Did you look for threads on the 3.36 R200. They're not nearly as rare but I seem to remember people throwing around numbers like $800 or $1000 for them, this is probably more than a year ago. I'd stick it up on ebay, post about it here and zcar.com and classiczcars.com and see what happens.

Buy the Energy Suspension kit from Summit Racing, and check Ebay for the springs and struts. I don't know of any good deals on stainless lines, but you might should save quite a bit of money on the other stuff. You can get Illumina's off of ebay for about $360 if that gives you any idea...

Wow, that is pretty severe anti-Ackerman. I wonder if you couldn't find another Nissan front steer type knuckle to use.

Damn Alex, that's cold. Funny though. Really funny...

Look at that steering wheel. Someone watched too much Knight Rider in the 80s.

The spin balancers can do either a static or a dynamic balance. A static balance on a spin balancer is the same type of balance done with the old bubble style balancer. You can't dynamically balance a tire with weights only on the inside. It just isn't possible. If you couldn't feel a shimmy at 140+ that's great, but that doesn't mean that the tire was balanced dynamically, or that the static balance was as good as a dynamically balanced tire.

That has NEVER happened to me. Ever. Like I said, I spent several years busting tires, so I've got a bit of experience. Say it as many times as you like, it is still wrong. http://www.gsp9700.com/pub/features/intro.cfm Quote: Static wheel balancing uses a single weight plane and only addresses "up-and-down" imbalance. This is simply not adequate for today's vibration sensitive vehicles. http://www.volvoclub.org.uk/faq/WheelBalance.html Quote: Static balance is accomplished by placing the rim/tire on a special balancing stand that has a cross hair and bubble level in the center. Wheel weights are added to the appropriate place along the outside edge of the rim to line the cross hair with the bubble. When this is accomplished, the tire is balanced. The major shortcoming of this method is the fact that the tire is not spinning and therefore the added balancing weights are unable to compensate for any rotational inconsistencies. Years ago when parallel steering systems and "mushy" bias ply tires were the norm, static balancing generally proved adequate. http://www.innerauto.com/Automotive_Definitions/Dynamic_Wheel_Balance/ https://www-auth.cs.wisc.edu/lists/vfr/1995-July/msg00821.shtml http://www.tpub.com/content/construction/14273/css/14273_330.htm This last one is particularly good: http://www.cjtire.com/pdfs/Servicing%20Tires%20&%20Wheels.pdf#search=%22static%20dynamic%20wheel%20balance%22

Someone needs a camera mount! Might try the stickier tires on the front. I would guess that would be the Hoosiers. Looks like a pretty wide open course, just the kind that I like!

Fresh out of high school I had jobs at a couple different tire shops. I've seen enough comebacks get "fixed" when the owner agrees to put weights on the outside of the rim that I know that I'm right. I've also had to take my own car back to the shop when they did a static balance after I asked for a dynamic balance. The vibration at 65-75 was gone after a proper dynamic balance.

Make sure the wheels and tires are DYNAMICALLY balanced. If they're only balanced with weights on the inside of the rim that could be an issue. That's probably the #1 cause of tire balance issues, especially with all the blingy rims that don't have a lip on the outside. You have to use stick on weights with those, and lots of people don't like the weights showing. Also, if you're using wheel spacer make absolutely sure that the inside hole in the spacer is big enough to fit over the hub. I chased what I thought was a wheel balance issue for a LONG time and it turned out that the spacers you buy from the auto parts store have a hole that is .005" too small. Could also be a bent rim. I would say look for a bent stub axle but if you feel it through the steering wheel that's probably not it.

Brakes, Wheels, Suspension, Chassis http://www.pdkfabrication.bravepages.com/240%20front.htm

The short bushing goes forward.

No, when I say bumpsteer spacer kit, it is just a package of assorted shims that have 5/8" ID. You can buy them from pretty much any circle track parts house. They run about $10. http://www.colemanracing.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=2089 I think you're right on the bolt being smaller than the rod ends or the strut housing, but I also don't think it matters. When the bolt is tightened down it's not going to move. This actually kind of ties back into your original question that started this thread. It doesn't have to be a press fit to work, because if everything is tight the suspension will move before the strut (or the sleeve for the bushing) slips.

Do a search, MSA sells them, PDK fabrication sells an insane version that hooks to the sway bar mounts and attaches to the firewall in 4 places, Top End Performance sells a triangulated one. They're also pretty easy to make. There was a recent thread on John Coffey's setup, I posted pics of mine in there too.

Doesn't seem to be anything Chevy specific here. Moved to BWSC forum

Moved to drivetrain forum.

That's my guess.

Search. Or read this: http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=107794 I thought I already pointed you to that thread. Did you not read the whole thing the first time?