JMortensen

I think the CV has about 1 7/16" worth of plunge, so at 1" you should be fine You can double check me on that pretty easily. From full droop to full compression on my car the length change of the shaft was 3/8". I sent that batch of axles out and Jamie twisted one right away with his 600 hp turbo V8 drag racer. I figured out what the problem was (incorrect tempering) and recalled the ones that had been shipped without the correct heat treatment, had them treated, and reshipped them out with a different shorter axle. They way they were the first time (lengthwise) was really OK, that's why your friend didn't have any issues. I don't have a firm hp or torque number that they will fail at without the correct heat treat. The earlier shafts that I sent out were from a different machinist and so were correctly tempered the first time, so wouldn't have the obvious burnt looking part at the ends. If you just want better ones, the stuff that Joe is selling now is stronger 4340 and has the correct heat treat.

If the axle you reinstalled doesn't have that burnt look on the end, then it didn't get the second round of heat treating. If it did, as long as it isn't bottomed out, should be good to go.

No. I was selling the shorter CV shafts through my company M2 Differentials. I also had Z31T companion flanges made for the 27 spline stub axles. I had an issue with one batch of shafts that I produced. None of that has anything to do with Modern Motorsports or Chequered Flag. I gave up on Joe's supplier, because like I said, I got promises and no parts for about a year. I had someone else make the parts that had issues. Those problems aren't in any way related to what Joe is selling.

Looks like one of my CV axles, yes.

I honestly don't know what kind of forces there are there. Would take some actual measurements to clarify. I think the idea is that any part of the drivetrain that can move before the car actually accelerates will do so. Soft motor mounts will squish, mustache and control arm bushings will flex, etc.

I think my axles were 4130 and similar heat treat. What is probably the important factor is the axle diameter and spline count on the Z31 CV vs the Porsche 930 CV. I can't recall specs on those, you'd have to dig a bit for them. EDIT--Snapped axle looks like one of the batch that I had to have heat treated again because they came out of the machinist not hard enough. They were induction hardened on the ends to a pretty high number. Want to say it was mid 50s on the Rockwell C scale.

I believe Joe's stuff is 4340, double heat treated. That's what it was going to be when I was trying to get the supplier to finish it for a year. Finally gave up. Joe is actually able to get the guy to move.

The strongest set up you can get with the stock longnose R200 is Chequered Flag's 930 deal. Chromoly stubs for the diff, chromoly companion flanges, 930 CVs with chromoly races, and chromoly shafts. The limiting factor with that setup is the 1.25" diameter of the stub axle.

It's not just the weight of the transmission on the mounts. Particularly when you shift there is a lot of stress on the transmission mount. I ground mine for clearance with the L6 and ended up snapping it in half shifting to 3rd. V8, sticky tires, etc, you're going to be putting a lot more force on there than I was with my 240ish whp 6 cyl. Of course, I also weakened the thing by grinding on it...

This might help too: http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/54124-step-by-step-installing-an-lsd-into-your-open-diff/

The strut housings are longer on the 280 and the insulators are taller and the rear strut towers are different. The mustache bars swap, the control arms swap, etc. On the 240 the distance between the diff flange and the companion flange gets shorter when you lift the car up in the air. I think it's pretty safe to say that Nissan wouldn't build a car with bottomed halfshafts from the factory, so there must be a difference. Seems like the relative height of the diff to the companion flange is different, and that must be why it works.

Related info on shortening stock halfshafts. Nice to have in the same place: http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/103890-half-shaft-shortening/

I had them making both.

I wasn't saying don't do coilovers in the rear, I was saying don't section in the rear. Coilovers are a good idea IMO, and on that previous thread you linked to I related my experience running a 240 with coilovers on unsectioned struts. Because the 240 top already drops the rear an inch or an inch and a half, you just don't need to do it. Keith is right in that you could run camber plates in the front and get both ends level, plus you could add some neg camber in front. That might not be such a bad idea if you're looking to get it done without the actual work of sectioning, but the actual job of sectioning itself is pretty easy if you have the tools.

If you have a 280 with 240 islolators, I would leave the rear end alone and section the front. If you section the rear there is a good chance that you won't be able to get enough ride height in back. If you level it out or rake it a bit, you'll be near the bumpstops in the front.

The supplier makes fantastic stuff, but I had a very hard time getting them to actually produce anything. Joe @ Modern Motorsports seems to have figured out how to get the guy to move. Sounds like Whitehead is having the same problem I did. I spent about a year waiting for them to do the 930 CV conversion. Finally gave up. Joe got them to actually produce the thing...

Should work fine. When I ran 4" sleeves I just set them up so that the spring hit the top and bottom perches with the adjuster all the way up.

http://www.modern-motorsports.com/z31-half-shafts.html

The rotor and cap on the 280Z is larger than the rotor on the 280ZX IIRC.

Different mirrors, but shows how to complete this kind of installation and the issues Pillar mentioned: http://alteredz.com/TercelMirrorMounting.htm

When you add or subtract caster the problem is the LCA angle changes relative to the TC rod. It's not that the TC rod can't move at the heims joint, it's that the fixed stud that you've welded to the LCA won't allow for the LCA angle to change. Made a crappy little picture to show the problem. Took the same image and rotated the LCA 5 degrees forward. You can see that the back of the TC rod is no longer in line with the frame rail. If you had a pivot in the front that could be locked down, then you could swing the TC rod back to the TC box. With a solid connection at the front there will only be one angle that works, no adjustability.

The more camber a tire likes, the more caster it will like, because caster gives you neg camber on the outside tire when you turn the wheel. This varies from tire to tire. Some tires like a lot less camber, like bias ply slicks, so they will like a lot less caster too.

Caster adjustments are useful and there are reasons to want more or less at a given time, or with particular tires, etc. Camber adjustments are too, but IMO they're better handled with plates on top, so that every camber change doesn't require a toe change.

Bad solution. Now you have only one caster setting that isn't putting some kind of side loading on the TC rod and LCA. With the clevis the pieces can articulate and then be locked into their new position after adjustment.

There has to be a place closer to you, but if you can't find one Chase Race is right around the corner from me. You could leave your car here if necessary for some reason. Does exhaust, cages, all that stuff. Doug bent the main hoop for my cage based off of Dan McGraths jpg image posted here. Fit perfectly. http://www.chaserace.com/rollbars.php