blueovalz

Dan, we still luv ya anyway. If you've got some really big rotors and calipers up front, the bias will not be problem that a proportioning valve can't take care of. I've got an arrangement on my Z that uses front Maxima vented rotors with front Cressida calipers (it used to be 280ZX calipers), all on the rear of my Z. It's a bit of overkill IMO (even with the racing set up and tires I had at that time) on all but the very worst tracks as far as brakes are concerned. Keep in mind though, even if this set up sounds attractive, the non-floating calipers you mention most likely will not fit due to rotor offset being designed for floaters, hence the caliper useage mentioned above.

Truely "uncharted territory" here. When you say solid driveshaft, that's exactly what you meant. Can't wait to see how it all works out with some miles on it.

RacerX sometimes gets pretty busy and may take a day or so to reply, so keep on bumping.

Outlaws - Green Grass and High Tides Black Sabbath - Iron Man Foghat - Fool For the City Montose - Rock Candy Ozzy - No More Tears Sniff'n' the Tears - Drivers Seat ? (Ventures?) - Walk don't Run Styx - Too Much Time on my Hands Nugent - Stranglehold Who - Won't Get Fooled Again OK, I'll quit now.

Yes!! Finally got the video. And after 5 times I still can't get enough. Awesome. I think the best thing F1 could do to increase the passing is award points for qualifying, and then invert the field similar to what Trans-Am did several years back.

What a PITA. F1 rules! BUT all I get is audio, no video. Oh well, I guess I'll run over to F1-live and check out the pratice results for this weekends race.

I'd wait for RacerX to reply to this. I would think the epoxy would be ideal, just as the GM product. He should also be able to answer your primer question too. He has much more experience in this subject than I do, and I would like to read his reply too.

This may not apply to you, but I found that separating the tranny from the bellhousing works better than pulling the bellhousing with it. I've got the McLeod hydraulic T/O bearing, and it has to be worked off the bearing snout first. After doing this a couple of times (before re-installing the tranny and bellhousing assembly back onto the motor), I figured out that drilling a 1.5" hole in the bottom of the bellhousing (avoiding any webbing in the casting) under the T/O bearing allows one to insert a long, broad head screwdriver between the T/O bearing and the tranny front bearing retainer. Using the screw driver (twisting action) to "break loose" the O-ring retainer allows the T/O bearing to slide off the rest of the way when the tranny is pulled out.

Note here: My '92 KA24E had a 7/8", which I later changed to the '85 VG30 15/16" when I went with the larger calipers. Just an FYI.

I had 200's all the way around for a while, and on your subjective scale, I'd them a 6. The dampening will be a big determiner in how it feels, but I was surprised at how well the 200's worked. As far a the street is concerned, your 180's on the front should be even better.

Well, your last post was very tactful. I'm sure you've set some wheels turning in that you may have initiated him into seeking a truthful "second opinion" in this case. I personally don't like spacers because it's just another link in a chain that could fail. Instead of one set of bolts and nuts, you have two (twice the risk?). But there are some well designed spacers out there. Ultimately, it's the contact patch that the suspension feels. Otherwise caster would mean nothing.

The precept that "a spacer is bad" is IMHO based on the idea that one is using the same offset without, and then with, the spacers, which in essence, moves the contact patch outward away from the bearings, causing the levered additional loading. If one is to replace a zero offset wheel with a substantially negative offset wheel (pushing the tire inboard), then the spacer will return this contact patch back toward it's original location, which ideally should be under the center of the bearings (or biased towards the inner bearing a bit). In severely cambered suspensions, the forces on the bearings are originating from the inner tire edges. This is one reason I had no reservation with running 1/2" positive offset with my front tires, because I moved the average contact patch back inboard with the small amount of negative camber.

I feel fortunate the the forum I most spend my time at is well moderated and it's members for the most part remain fairly civilized and mature in their remarks. Let's continue this good work youz guyz.

If I read this correctly, you are sensing a "beating" (similar to a twin engined aircraft with the engine rpm slightly different from each other). I can't imagine what would cause this other than one tire being worn more than the other side, making it shorter, thus causing it to spin slightly faster (or front-to-back too if there is a difference in the two sizes and they were just off balance enough to feel). A drive shaft U-joint would not exhibit this "beating" effect because they are both fixed to the same shaft, thus making them a more constant vibration.

Has anyone taken the Ron Tyler design, but instead of being solid, build it tall enough so that an OEM mount can be placed between it and the differential (the OEM mount on top of the diff instead of below it)? This way the hard hole-shots will compress it instead of pull it apart, and you will still maintain the OEM "feel" you want,

I'll ask one more silly question then. Does the wheelie bars then in essence lift or unload the rear tires so that the front tires now carry a higher percentage of the total weight of the car. Hydraulic cylinders? Hmm, active suspension on a drag car.

I'll show my ignorance here (and complete lack of FWD experience) and ask: Why put wheelie bars on the back of a FWD car. Would not sufficiently strong rear springs and shocks privide the same function? Some one teach me something here.

I would attempt the welding before the glass work. Fiberglass would do a good temporary job (this is my opinion). I say this because of all the fiberglass-to-metal repairs I've made (or used to do), the rust eventually starts back up again at the metal/glass interface and eventually turns ugly again. It may take a few years with a good repair, but it will be back. The smaller the repair, the more durable it will be, but broader areas of repair will cause problems later on. The expansion coefficient (with temperature) of fiberglass is much greater than metal. Thus, the larger the glass repair is, the greater the stresses on the repair. The larger repairs exposed to heat (even the afternoon sun on it) can cause eventual separation from the metal (not to mention that vibrations can exacerbate the situation even more) with time much more easily than the smaller ones.

I had some tall domed pistons for a N/A motor cut down to about .200" minimum thickness, which according to an experienced race engine builder, was about the thinnest I should go. This was a N/A motor. Originally the face thickness roughly followed the contour of the dome, and the minimum thickness was about .300" on small quarter sized place at the valve reliefs. I removed about .340" off the top of the dome, but it did not get into this thinner part of the piston face until the very end of the milling process (thus the thinner part of the face was not effected as much as the rest of it was), so check the piston carefully at different places to verify where and how thick the thinnest place is.

12" X 4"

151 posts and still strong. Eric, here is the straight rear shot, but closer to the car than I think you can use. I'm still toying with this idea, and being I've not permanently changed anything significant on the back sheet metal, I can try different ideas. The grilled or textured panel is under consideration too, as is other things. But this was too easy (3 days worth of quick work) to make this, so it was too tempting to resist. I'm thinking of splitting the lights horizontally, of a grilled pattern on the panel, short vents, etc.

It's not fancy or elaborate, but it is what I spent the last week on.

It's not whether it can be done, but instead, will you do it. I'm sure the first person that ever put a V8 in a Z asked someone "can this be done?". I for one would love to see this done. With some imagination, practical engineering skills, and mostly desire, you can do this. I'm sure there are many among us that will give you a plethora of advice and tips.

I thought about a response to this item, but I feel I have too many friends at this site that I may end up alienating by shooting off my big mouth. Anyway, how about ol' Elliot. Still got it, huh.

Can't answer that for sure, except that when I was putting '84 300ZX rear rotors on my 240SX, I compared the turbo verses the non-turbo, and the only difference was that the turbo had 5 lugs and the non-turbo was a 4 lug pattern.