blueovalz

If you were running the same sized tire front and rear, I'd say you would have a pretty good set-up. But the larger rear tire will make quite a bit of difference. My experience showed significant changes even with a 20mm difference. Does the MSA rear bar mount behind the differential?

vacuum.

The Weber set-up I purchase (at a very good price) had no linkage other than a single link that connected the left and right banks of carbs (V8 application). After looking at the TWM part, I decided to fabricate a similar piece with only the materials on hand, a drill press, and a TIG welder. Original linkage supplied by the merchant. The right bank pushes the rod which operates the left bank: Notice that the link actually makes contact with the throttle arm preventing full closure even with rod end extended as far as I dare (white arrow). Newly fabricated part to copy the functionality of the TWM piece: What initiated this project was the lack of sychronized opening rates for the two banks of carbs plus the very quick initial opening rate. The rotating bellcrank (disc on top) allows a very slow initial opening rate that accerates as the throttle approaches WOT. This weekend (no photo yet), I fabricated a cable operating system that will use the disc (modified slightly) as a pulley with the cable partially wrapped around the circumference. First I cut out the disc, and drilled and milled the seats for the two 3/4" sealed ball bearings. Then tapped it and set it aside. Then cut out the base, column, and top plage for the pedestal. Then welded it all together (not yet very proficient in aluminum welding), semi finished the parts, and bolted it all together. Now, instead of one bank operating the other bank in some bad geometry, a single linkage system operates both independently.

This chart confuses me and (for me) indicates the smaller the bolt cross section, the higher the tensile strength?).

AND...and poly mounts in the mustache bar. Pinch you twice? But then, perhaps the tube's bushings will mitigate that issue To put a positive light on this, if the tube was of sufficient wall thickness, and the 4 piece front differential mount was remachined to be 3 pieces (single cross piece with 2 caps), then it may not be such a bad solution. Check my logic here. Assuming 300 lb/ft of torque, and for argument's sake, and the front mount is exactly 1 foot from the axle centerline. If you consider the ring gear as immovable, and the average distance from the pinion centerline to the ring gear is say...1.5", then you should have an 8:1 ratio of torque causing the pinion gear to crawl up the ring gear with 2400 lbs of force. If the ring gear is 8" in diameter, and the differential front mount was 12" forward of the axle, then this would be a 4" to 12" ratio, or 1:3. So then the 2400 lbs would be reduced to 800 lbs on the differential mount itself? A longer differential case would have less force on the mount than a shorter case, but obviously the rear mount will have an affect on this rationale....why do I do this to myself?

.Take a look at the last photo. It appears some additional effort (and parts) may have been put into stablizing the tube somewhat from rotating? The lowering of the outter pivots was a neat project, but not one I would recommend. It took a lot of work, and very carefull fitting and proper welding because all the braking, lateral and longitudinal forces work on that area of the strut. If I had to do it over again, I'd do it in a modular theme in which a fully fabricated extension is bolted onto the strut using the existing pin boss and whatever else is rigid.

The real McCoy here, but he's fabricated the headers and all kinds of things on this. I spent all day last Saturday drooling over his work. 400+ inches based on a Windsor block. Nothing is left for want on this project, and I mean NOTHING! BTW, even though this is on a lift, this is the ride height of the car. Some of his other toys

Yep, that was the puzzler of the week for the Click and Clack duel a few months back.

Did you hear sound of the P4 (guess) passing and moving on up the track? Awesome video!

The reason I said that was because I've made a fiberglass air filter holder that fits between the tower bracing that looks somewhat like a large teardrop. When the engine has been run, and the holder is hot, the fiberglass will bend much more easily than when it was cool, and will retain that bend if allowed to cool under the force of that bend. Because of this, I had to be more creative in the design by incorporating convex and concave shapes that would not bend as easily when warm. The previous design, once it went through the heat cycles was permanently deformed. One thing to think about here is the age of the glass. Seasoned glass is harder than freshly made parts. My understanding is that the resin is constantly curing, even years later. Perhaps the newness of my parts was allowing this change to happen more easily than if the parts were more seasoned.

Fiberglass will soften will heat (don't know how much, or at what temperature), but it does somewhat resemble plastic in that once it weakens, it can carefully be forced into simple bend that will remain after it cools down. My experience has indicated there is a fine line between getting more flexible with heat, and acutally burning it.

My practice is to place a bolt into the threads prior to welding, and then remove it just after the welding is finished. I've never had this situation cause the seizing of the bolt, and it protects the threads from an errant dingleberry attaching itself onto a thread not seen.

I would strongly suggest the removal of the two duplicate postings before moderator comes crashing down on you. One post in the appropriate forum (this one) is all that is needed or allowed.

Thanks for the tips. I'm planning on adding the H-pipe some time this summer, and the template will come in handy. I'm looking for data on where the H-pipe should be located optimally. I'm very limited on its location and concerned it will be placed too far rearward to be fully effective.

Since its all cut out, how about a dramatically recessed panel of consistent material and appearance (please forgive the poor drawing quallity)?

Oddest symptom I've ever heard. If indeed everything is correctly installed, then my guess is the booster is at fault. The vacuum is metered I believe, and if that metering no longer exists, or is faulty, then the full vaccum signal might be applied to a fairly large diagram (I believe the ZX diaphram is larger than the Z). I would disconnect the vaccum hose and drive it that way to observe the difference (be sure to block off the hose toward the engine or you'll have a massive vacuum leak). My brakes have a very slight drag as well. I've never had a set of disc brakes that did not "scrap" as you turned the wheel (jacked up and hand spun), but it must be very slight because it doesn't slow the wheel down. Remember, the seals around the pistons will retract the piston a slight amount, but (depending on the design), the pads are usually (not both of them anyway) attached to the piston, so once the piston retracts, the pad(s) may still rest against the rotor with no ill effect.

. . . . . . . . . . . . Oh, you want the rear end instead of the rear end:

My personal experience has been the that the radiator provides no recognizable affect on down force. the air velocity and mass flowing through the radiator is not enough to do this. What did help the downforce issue was that angling the radiator one way or the other (goal was to reduce the "vertical height") which then allows the changing of bodywork and hood angles to promote the downforce (area within the first 2 feet of the front edge of car or hood)

Doc got it on the nose. What happened is when I installed the damper, it pushed the spring off the seal, (and get this), got caught between the damper sleeve and the base of the crank (actually left about 1 1/2 inches of the spring almost imbedded into the damper sleeve. Anyway, it's all out, new seal in (WITH the spring in place). First time for everything, even after 30 years of putting motors together.

Drained my oil on the new engine, and this was on the magnet!

If I get the oil temperature issue taken care of soon, I'll dyno the current Holley set-up before mounting this. It's been at or near 100º for the past week, and the next week or so looks just as bad.

The hood blister is not wide enough to allow a straight up orientation. The big-block Weber set-ups use a 10º tilt, so I studied the situation and went with an 8º tilt to help clearance issues with the tower bracing and the hood clearance. Last night I finished tilting the mounting studs as well, so everything is finished. Roger, I plan on using the typical screen covers at this point. Lastly, (and this is kinda silly), I wanted to space the velocity stacks so that the spacing between the the same-carb stacks was equal to the across-the-manifold spacing of the stacks (silly, but it makes all the stacks equally spaced front to back, and left to right now). The 10º would have pushed them too close to each other.

It took 20 years, but I finally found a Weber 48 IDA system I could afford. It was such a good price that I decided to forego the EFI I was planning. So, I cleaned them up, installed new gaskets, bigger chokes, and then milled the intake for an 8º tilt of the carbs. It is ready for the swap (as soon as I change the triangular bracing a bit from the towers to the firewall. I'm all a twitter!

DavyZ...awesome memory!

I've decided to go with a Keensert instead. Thanks guys. http://www.bjg-design.com/designbook/pdfs/INS-KNS-KNS.pdf