Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


rabrooks last won the day on January 3

rabrooks had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About rabrooks

  • Rank
    Moving Up

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Is this for the larger diameter 280 tubes or the 240 Thanks
  2. Thanks to everyone for supplying all this information. I will certainly be able to make better decisions going forward. The info below is what another Z enthusiast is using since the discontinuance of the bilstiens F4-P36-3022 Rear- 1992-1995 BMW 530i/540i (front HD inserts) F4-P36-0262-H0 Front- 1984-1989 Nissan 300ZX Turbo HD Inserts
  3. I agree with all the above. Definitely using coil over style struts with camber plates. Failed to mention that earlier. My battery will stay in the factory location. Going to the ls1 and t56 changes the ratios to a level that requires more thought on my part to get back closer to the 50/50 ratio. That's why I'm moving the fuel cell forward of the original tank and not moving the battery to the rear. I may go with a fiberglass rear hatch and plexi window. I do have another option to move some weight back forward. I can go with a built T5 transmission. In a road racing arrangement I think it will hold up. No hot launches and rev matching downshifts.
  4. Thank you for this information. Based on the spring info is it safe to say your springs compress 2-2.25" I will shoot for 50/50 but changing so many things, what I posted is my best guess. I'll probably keep the battery in factory location. Hope to switch fuel cell moved forward by 6 inches of factory tank. If left right mix and cross weight ratio is out of wack I'll move the fuel cell over or place it in the floor of the passenger side. This is probably the best fix but it takes away a few options I'd like to have. Like passenger seat.
  5. I believe my car will weigh in at 2450 or less. I'm trying for 2300. So if I hit my target of 2450, with a 52% rear and 48% front wight bias. What would you guys recommend for the spring rates and spring heights Thanks
  6. So it sounds like if I go as I plan, converting to coil overs the car will sit down 1.5" in the front and 2.5 in the rear. If that's the case, then I just need to concern myself with making an adjustment so the lca's are at original geometry. Which means the spacers up front and the pin tube dropped for the rears. Am I understanding your information correctly.
  7. On the 528 BMW insert working on the 280z's, I got that info from a person that has been running rally races for 15 years in his 280. He is sending me info on all the suspension parts he buys to make his system work, front and rear. When I get that info, I will share what is pertinent. I know a good bit of his parts will need to be changed for stiffer springs and or different valving due to him running on dirt and me on asphalt with sticky tires.
  8. Thanks for the insight. I do pkan on running bilstiens. Ihave heard the frobts can use bilstiens for a 52i bmw without mods. I have the wrld on threaded spring perches also. I will look into the bump steer springs I agree that factory setup isnt ideal. I dont like sruts. I was planning to develop double a arm setup. But the cost will nurt the project. So the best setup of the suspension as it is, is to keep the lower control arms close to he factory angle. I dont want a lowered car with the lower arms high outboard. So thats why i was thinking spacers up front and a new lower tube in the rear Thanks for all the info. Its great to process it and to hear others have done tbis
  9. Help me beat this dead horse. I'm building a 280z track car. I want to get decent suspension without spending a fortune. I don't care for strut suspension, but I think I have to stay with it in order to curtail the spending. I know alot of people lower these cars with coil overs. but it seems to me if you set the geometry of the suspension different than intended it makes things more harsh and it doesn't work as well as if it were in its original geometry. I'm sure what I have decided to do has been thought of long before now. I want to run it by the gallery to get some feedback. For the front,I thought I would cut the strut tube down 1.5". then add a bump steer spacer between the lower control arm and spindle. That should get the car lower while maintaining the best geometry. Its as if I put 1.5" lowering spindles on it. The rear will be similar but I will have to weld a new pin tube to the bottom of the hub to raise that spindle (lower the rear of the car) I'll likely run bilstein double adjustable shocks and not sure on springs. I guess Eibachs. What are your suggestions for springs I want to run 16" wheels and tires, comment on the size tire that fits the wells the best. It will be wide body but I'm looking for diameter. I have an LS1 with t56 for the car. Thanks for your help Roger
  10. Great build. Attention to detail is awesome. Great inspiration
  11. rabrooks

    3.6l LFX camaro v6 swap

    After alot of contemplation over this 280 build and which engine to use, I think I've decided to go with a Nissan SR20DET engine. I really want to concentrate on weight savings. After all teh power adders on the SR20, its weight will be a little above the VQ37 engine but it will have more power. The trans for the SR20 is considerably lighter and smaller than the VQ trans. I was hoping to stay NA for a track car but I'll go turbo and just learn how to drive it and keep it in the high rev zone. Any insight is appreciated.
  12. rabrooks

    3.6l LFX camaro v6 swap

    My conscience wont let me buy or use a Coyote engine. May sound childish but I have my reasons. terrible shame my conscience controls that, because it is by far the best sounding engine on the market today. The only engine sound that rivals it for sound is the ferrari.
  13. rabrooks

    3.6l LFX camaro v6 swap

    After reviewing everything, I'm leaning back to the LS package. Plus there seems to be so much more info on the LS conversion. Isnt the LS2/LS3 packages in the 380 lb range. On the LFX engine, I entertained fabbing an oil pan but as you mentioned earlier, that pan is structural and I wouldn't want to create a block stress problem. I did consider building a structural pan along with a dry sump system. The pans that ARE makes for their dry sump systems are very robust. But that's another 5k to the build. If I had an unlimited racing budget, it would be a no brainer. But I don't. My goal was to achieve good power as light as possible. Overall weight is as important to the project as the power, So that does make me think about the 370Z, VQ37VHR engine. I believe that engine weighs 320 lbs. Not sure how the trans for that engine compares to the weight of theT56. My guess is it is lighter. This leaves me in a quandary as to take the project the easy way and go with the LS, or stay the course with a light weight goal.
  14. rabrooks

    3.6l LFX camaro v6 swap

    I'm not so sure power to the ground will be very hard. to accomplish. It seems the lighter weight will allow the car to rocket off the corners with great torque and acceleration with proper throttle modulation. agree the engines were talking about can overpower these little cars, but I think the traction will be really good compared to the heavier more powerful cars. we're talking 1/3 less weight or potentially even more. So based on the non fit situation of the 3.6 l engine, this points me in maybe three different directions. one light weight mid power direction would be the VQ37VHR from a 370Z. I dont know much about them. A second choice is the LS swap and I'm quite familiar with that engine as I replaced a few LS7's in my vette. Third would be the Coyote. No doubt it is the best sounding engine on the road today. The LS engines sound good but only at high rpms. at idle without a hot cam they sound like a tractor
  15. I started a thread in the engine swap section so we can continue to discuss this 3.6l swap. I'd love to hear your thoughts and review your information