JMortensen

Since no one else seems to be willing to speculate, I would suggest that you need to find the pointer in order to use the timing light. On the stock timing cover there is a pointer that points to the marks on the balancer. On your setup there has to be some sort of pointer as well. I suppose you could just play with it on a dyno until you get it close, but if you can figure out where the pointer is then you can set it exactly. Maybe it's just the picture but it sure looks like there is a line which could be the pointer directly opposite the "M" on the belt in your 3rd picture. As far as adjusting it if that set screw doesn't allow the distributor to rotate then I guess you have to disassemble it like you've been doing, but it really looks like that allen head screw holds the clamp down around the distributor housing from the picture.

The parking lot hero strikes again! All hail the master of the parking lot...

I think there's enough meat on the AZC flywheel to surface it once or maybe twice. I don't think it's a throwaway part. Plus if the step is still good and its not heat checked all to hell you can just use a die grinder and a sanding disc and scuff it and reuse it.

http://www.fototime.com/ftweb/bin/ft.dll/detailfs?userid={7DC317B0-8EDB-4B2E-A837-F708D07C9769}&ndx=16&slideshow=0&AlbumId={0FA6B84D-BEE5-4B2F-9DCD-FA0B09AEA3B8}&GroupId={EBBD2B2B-8A64-41ED-B7AE-1950BF3C8843}&screenheight=768

In the second picture it looks like there is a set screw on near the base of the distributor right next to the timing marks. Can you loosen the set screw and rotate the dizzy? It also looks like there is a mark right there too. So you probably set the timing by loosening the set screw, revving the car to 3000 or so, then setting the total advance. It looks like you would set it at 35* or whatever total advance you want. That is an interesting setup. I've never seen it before, but it would get rid of all the slop from the gears that run off of the crank. Do you know who makes it? Can you still get parts? When you get your V8 installed I may know a buyer....

They just sit there loose. Someone's kit includes an O-ring which keeps a little tension on them, but it doesn't really anchor it down in any way.

Most alcohol based fuels don't have as much caloric energy per unit as gasoline. But with 104 octane you can turn up the boost and make up the difference. This one must be pretty close to gasoline if you can use it on an SAE car, unless you get to shed a few lbs to run it to compensate. IIRC none of the SAE cars had forced induction, isn't that right Drax? My understanding is that the other problem with corn based fuel is that believe it or not we can't produce enough corn to run all the cars on it.

Pressure plates don't usually "go bad". I think it is something in the hydraulic setup that is causing the issue. Do you have any freeplay in the pin that goes from the pedal to the clutch master cylinder? You should have 1/8 to 3/16 free play. I'd be willing to bet that this is the problem.

If it is a stock R200 from that car it would be a 3.54. Casting numbers don't tell you the ratio AFAIK. You can pull the rear cover if it is out of the car and on the edge of the ring gear the ratio will be stamped. Your 3.54 should have 39:11 stamped on it. Divide the 39 by 11 and you get 3.5454545454. 3.70 is 37:10, 3.90 is 39:10, a 4.11 is 37:9, etc. If it is still in the car, mark the pinion flange and mark one of the wheels. Hold the other wheel to prevent it from rotating, then spin the pinion until your mark on the wheel comes all the way around. Then multiply the number of turns you made on the pinion by 2. So if you spin the pinion a little less than two times and the wheel comes around once, then you've got a 3.90. A 3.54 would be about approximately 1.75 pinion revolutions. A 4.11 would be just a hair over 2 revolutions. Or just spin the flange until the wheel goes around twice and count the pinion revolutions.

So Terry, does that mean that you have shorter tie rods than control arms? I think the rack spacers are going to have both an Ackermann effect and a bump steer effect as well. With that in mind, your setup should have the same problems with those issues as well.Have you ever measured bump steer on your car? I seem to recall bump steer spacers and rod ends on the outer tie rods... how about Ackermann? I'm beginning to think that it's not worth messing with, but I'd still like to know exactly how detrimental the effect is, if only to satisfy my own curiosity. I think chmercer is right, that this is a hacker's way of getting more angle. I know I've got Ackermann envy from my 510 friend. His car with basically the same front end setup turns in noticeably better than mine...

All right, no one wants to play along... Its a racing thing. Racing studs are always long for a couple reasons: To allow for spacers if you want to use them. So that during a pit stop the wheels don't fall off once the pit guys get them on the studs. So that the stud clearly sticks through the nut showing that there are enough threads engaged for tech. To allow for the little bullet shape on the end so that during a pit stop the guys can just use the air gun without starting the lugs by hand That's all I can think of, I'm sure there are more reasons for it.

You know what goes with big studs... big nuts You didn't get matching wheels with 2.5" thick flanges? Maybe they're trying to compensate... So your friends could rightfully call you "Big Lug" That's all I can come up with... anyone else???

The inner tie rod is the stop. By moving it out 5mm, you can turn the wheel that much more. That increased movement turns the wheels farther or at a greater angle than without the spacer.

Search online or here if the search works for "octane booster" and you'll find tons of info. I've run race gas and pump gas mixed, AV Gas and pump gas, and Tolulene and Xylene mixed with pump gas. Not sure on the Iso Octane, but Tolulene is in the gas you get at the pump already, just in very small amounts. From what I've read you can burn up to 30% Tolulene (114 octane) or Xylene (118 octane) before they start to rot your fuel lines. If you search you'll also see that most people recommend adding a little ATF and mineral spirits to your home brew to keep things clean and add a little lubrication. Octane isn't going to do you any good if you don't need it though...

"hey guys. i have the s14. you guys are blowing it way out of proportion. all it is is a thick washer, maybe 1/3 1/2 cm thick, that goes over the inner tie rid end, where it threads into the rack. you seem to be confused. this mod dosent really quicken the steering wheel, like a low ratio rack, full lock is still the same (1.5 turns from center, on my car) but at full lock, the wheel has more angle, to the point where it hits the stopper on the wheel knuckle. It would probably turn even more if i moved the stopper." We get it. It turns the wheels farther. But that's not ALL that it does. I don't know what effect that 3 or 5 mm spacer would have. I can tell you that 1/4 turn on a fine thread tie rod adjuster turns my car from 1/8" toe in to 1/8" toe out, and that makes a big difference. I wouldn't discount the 5mm change that you get from the spacers without actually knowing what the heck it does. I actually used to install bump steer kits for 911s that had a rack spacer and a rod end outer, so I am familiar with these kits to some extent. I thought that the 911 stuff did that because from the factory the control arm and the tie rod were different lengths. Maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe it does. I really don't know, but I would like to hear from someone who races or an engineer or fabricator who can tell me what it will do to the Ackermann.

Sure you can adjust the toe out. Here's the thing I'm stuck on. From a racing suspension site (circle track): "With oval track cars, we can have additional complexities. As the questioner notes, it is common to use unequal-length steering arms on oval track cars, usually shorter on the left. In fact, this is the only way to get positive Ackermann on a front-steer stock car, unless the rules allow fabricated spindles and we accept a much larger scrub radius than we’d like. A shorter left steering arm only gives positive Ackermann when the wheels steer left, at the expense of exaggerating negative Ackermann when steering right. This is not an option when the turns go both ways."

Got it, thanks. So basically you're adding length to the rack before putting on the inners. Or you're installing the inners farther out. Doesn't that screw with bumpsteer? I had always thought that the steering pivots and the control arm pivots needed to be the same length in order to get rid of bumpsteer. Or are drifters just more concerned with being able to counter that much more rather than worrying about the bumpsteer.

I tried posting this question before, I don't know what happened though. How does a different tie rod change quicken the steering? Does it have a post that goes where the outer tie rod connects, then an actual tie rod in a relocated spot? I couldn't get the jist from the picture you linked to before.

Mike I thought your failure was using 5/8" aluminum. The 3/4" are a lot bigger. I got some pics, but I can't seem to get them uploaded to the album area. I'll try emailing you Owen. I like the old system better where you could actually SEE the other guy's email address...

Owen, that $36.90 complete strut bar at AFCO's site was what I was trying to link to also. Damn that's cheap!!! Mine are aluminum tube, and I've never had a problem. The aluminum tubing is THICK. Mine have to be 1.25" with .25 wall.

How do those tie rods make the wheel turn more? I don't get it.

You shouldn't need to retune after adding MSD. Doesn't your 78 have FI anyway?

Yep, about 3" of thread IIRC, So you wouldn't have 74_5.0L_Z's problem... Did a little searching. Check this out: http://www.secureperformanceorder.com/afcostore/getproduct.cfm?CategoryID=8&ClassID=115&SubclassID=533&ProductID=731 FWIW I'd never heard it called a J bar before this post. Was always a strut rod end to me. That AFCO page doesn't say what size it is, but I'd guess 3/4". You might be able to measure the TC rod and buy a completed "strut rod" and then only need to make a clevis to mount it in the back. For CHEAP. Also the other end needs to be cut and new holes drilled to fit a Z. The existing holes were in the wrong place on mine so the guy who made them welded up the existing holes, then drilled the new ones to fit my car. This definitely looks like it could be a do it yourself thing with this already completed strut rod.

PUSHER - if you do try some method of getting the wheels to turn farther, remember to check and see if the wheel hits the TC rod. That's bad. I also have the quick steer knuckles and I love them too.

The 510 knuckles are backwards because they are a rear steer. The are also longer than the 240 arms IIRC. You might be able to swap sides and mount them up on a 240, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be "bump steered" for a 240. I have my reservations about them being "bump steered" for a 510. You might find some generic value that gets you close like the JTR "move your control arm pivot up 3/4" thing, but bump steer really needs to be measured to be corrected IMO. DP definitely knows his stuff (more than me for sure) but I'm skeptical that this is really the best solution. Didn't they change the control arm pivot height right in the middle of the 510's production??? I have a friend who bent his 510 knuckles for Ackerman. Then he drilled them out to 5/8 and ran a circle track bumpsteer kit to fix the bumpsteer. That seems to me to be the "right" way to do it.