JMortensen

There were some halfshafts that had the inner stub connected to the halfshaft, so there was no flange sticking out of the side of the diff at all, kinda like a CV. I don't recall what years they were, but I thought they were R180s, not R200s. Any normal halfshaft that has U joints and flanges on both ends would fit your R200. I've got a couple I was going to put on ebay. PM me with an offer if you want them. The Nissan U joints are in good shape.

The early 70's had 4 vents in the rotor hat. I think that's part of why the scoop would work to a greater degree than on the later cars. If you're forced to use solid rotors by the rules of a racing class that's one thing, but if not a vented rotor upgrade is very worthwhile IMO. Once there the scoop makes more sense since as John said the air will vent enter the center and exit the edge of the rotor, especially if the vanes in the rotor are curved since those curved vanes work like a squirrel cage fan.

I guess my question with regards to that graph is how long can the Accusump provide oil pressure for? Looks like the Accusump was going all the way around some of the turns at Buttonwillow. It would also be nice to know what kind of car it was, and how much difference a baffled trapdoor pan makes...

^^^ I'm OK with that!^^^

Never seen a fast 280ZX on a race track in person, then again I've never seen a 280ZX on a race track period. I know that John is correct though. Seen plenty of fast 510s, and the suspension design is pretty much the same. Also seen plenty of fast Porsches which use semi-trailing arm design. Just toe in that rear suspension a bit and it'll stick just just fine. I think the reason you don't see the ZX more often is their weight disadvantage compared to a 240.

I had a similar experience DL. I paid to have my diff rebuilt and they didn't torque the pinion nut down... I drove the car around the block, then got my mechanic buddy in the car with me. I'm telling him "Now listen real close" and BAM!!! the car skids to a stop. We were about 4 houses down the street. Luckily we were only going about 10 mph and nothing broke. Just like you I had to call a tow truck. Wasn't my mistake, but I've made plenty since I've decided not to trust my car to others...

Early Z's (70, maybe 71) had this from the factory. The scoop stuck out about an inch and a half. I took mine off and threw them away, then I found out that they didn't all have the scoop built in...

You can, just go to Upload Photos, click on your first one, hit Enter/Submit at the bottom which takes you to the page where you confirm the photo. There, hit Upload Photos again and that will allow you to add another photo, then both show up on the confirmation page, etc. When you've got them all in there, then Submit them all at once. Figured that one out by accident a while back.

The way the suspension arms are hung at the front is what causes the squat. If they're hung from the middle of the car like a Z, then when you put power to them they don't squat by design (although the Z will still squat just by weight transfer). Here's a real quick experiment. Jump in your ZX. Pull the ebrake, put it in reverse, and start to let the clutch out. Surprise! The back end will climb about 6" up. Opposite happens when you put it in first. The car will squat down. I distinctly remember my auto shop teacher doing this in when I was in high school and thinking the car was WAY broken. Do the same in a Z and there is no effect.

Diamond quotes some of their lighter weight 15x10s at 18 lbs. Did you just buy the cheapest ones they had, or are their advertised weights wrong? See links for 15x10 @ 18 lbs. http://www.diamondracingwheels.com/RoadRaceSeries.htm http://www.diamondracingwheels.com/AvengerSeries.htm

I was going to use "popping wood" but I didn't want to offend anyone...

Cameltoe is something else entirely. Google it. No, we're talking about the way anyones' pants will bulge up in the crotch area when they sit down, and how my wife and pretty much every woman on the planet worries that men think that it looks like they're sporting a chubby, despite the physical impossibility.

Can you port them, or is there just not enough meat there? What you got obviously doesn't match the picture...

Sorry dude. This one's mine, go get your own...

Start searching this site for suspension modifications. Bump steer, camber plates, coilovers, spring rates, struts, etc. That should keep you busy for a while. There's a lot you can do, and without a more specific question it's kinda hard to know what info you're looking for. If you just want general info on the Z suspension, just start searching. It's all here.

Not sure if he ships to Oz, but here are some: http://www.modern-motorsports.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=66

Since we're not supposed to do the political thing here, anyone wanting to debate might want to check this out: http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18308

Actually the stock setup has lots of bumpsteer engineered into it straight from Nissan. I think car manufacturers use this as a safety mechanism so that when you push really hard the car plows. Understeer is "safer" than oversteer, and it's easier for Nissan to win a lawsuit by saying "He went too fast for the turn and understeered into the wall" than to try to explain why the car spun into the wall. You can get rid of it by moving the LCA pivot up the right amount. If you moved them both up then you would keep the bumpsteer as it was designed from the factory. There are some reasons that you might want to raise the rack, such as raising the pivots a whole bunch. If you raised the pivots 3" (not actually possible on the stock crossmember, just an example) then you'd need some LONG bumpsteer spacers at the outer tie rod end to compensate. But if you could raise the rack some, then you wouldn't need as many spacers at the wheel end. There's also the idea that Cary brought up a couple weeks ago of moving the pivot and the rack together. So basically you could set your bumpsteer, then raise the pivot/rack assemlby together to change your roll center without having to mess with the bumpsteer again when you're done.

I'd say so. I have a NA with ~240 hp probably 200 ft/lbs, 225's work fine for me. Most VARA CP3 racers are putting down ~300 hp and they race on 225/50/14's. Your torque out of your turbo is higher than an NA engine so that might make a difference. If you want 245's that's not a totally crazy idea, I'd just put them on a 9" rim. Of course you'll find plenty of guys running them on an 8" too, so take my bias into consideration.

John Coffey's real racing CF hatch looks like it might be a good fit for the rest of the car... http://www.betamotorsports.com

"Proper" tire sizing that you'll find at places like autoxes and racetracks goes like this: 6" - 185 7" - 205 8" - 225 9" - 245/255 10" - 265/275 What you usually find on the street is people putting the biggest tire on a rim that they can, which means 255's on an 8 is not uncommon. IME the 225 will handle and feel better on the 8 than a 255. If you only care about drag racing you might get better stick out of a 245 than a 225, but then you'd get better traction out of a 60 series than a 35 series for straight line acceleration too.

Stick to 235's all the way around, 225's would also fit well. They'll fit the rim better than 255's, and there won't be as much lateral sidewall flex. Go for around 50 aspect, 35 doesn't have very much compliance and the 50 series will actually handle better as a result. Wider in the back doesn't make sense on a Z unless you're pushing some SERIOUS hp. Even then you can make an argument that the front tires should be the same as the rear. Did a quick search at tirerack.com. Not sure if this link will work. Looks like there are no 235/50/15's, but a whole bunch of 225/50/15's. http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Compare1.jsp?width=225%2F&ratio=50&diameter=15&startIndex=0&search=true&pagelen=20&pagenum=1&pagemark=1&x=83&y=13&RunFlat=All