blueovalz

The shafts will do fine if you move the differential rearward. I believe all that is needed is the later model mustache bar and mount to do this. The driveshaft length will need to be addressed as well. Will the R180 hold up to the 300lbs+ of torque? I'd say marginally. I've personally only known two folks using stock powered 350 SBC powerplants (both with automatic transmissions) and one broke the R180 twice, the other never. So....

To gain a competitive advantage, any manufacturer will compromise durability for performance, and this is exactly what Michelin did. And this philosophy has paid dividends all season, at least until the USGP. But instead of dealing with it in a proper way, Michelin chose to make it a public issue by demanding the race be modified for its benefit (and its benefit only). 6 years (plus the recent testing by IRL and NASCAR on this new surface) experience on this track means they had the data they needed, but chose not to apply it. If the FIA starts changing the rules every time a performance gap opens, then F1 will turn into another NASCAR, which will be the end of my support.

It's been decades since I've bled drums, but I believe the bleeder is on the back side of the cylinder (back side of drum just above the axle). Get a flashlight and look...it will be back there somewhere.

I was wondering the same thing. Just a guess (based on the same thing happening to me many years back) but I bet the PP is what failed, and everything else got taken with it. My problem was caused by slipping the clutch too much during a race (sure, I can make a torque converter outta this clutch!!! ), the heat got the best of the PP, and the rest is history.

I'm at a point on the front that I don't wish to go any further down. The issue is that when I changed the suspension for the street, I "built in" some understeer. Unfortunately, it ending up being more than I like, and I'm wanting to get it a little looser. Stance is perfect so I don't want to fool with that.

Perfect Jon! I called them and it seems they can help me with what I want. My car is not as neutral as I'd like and rather that soften the front any more than it is now, I'm going to stiffen the rear a bit more with a bit more bar (you know how it is, I just can't quit tinkering with this thing!)

Where does one go to find the racing type bars (spring bar with splined ends like Nascar uses)? I've googled my head off, and Speedway is the only source I've found, and their shortest bar is 32", which is too long for what I want. If seen where these are used on some Porsche models, but this was not a lot of help either.

So Dan, which one is the wife, the one with the white ball cap or the dark ball cap?

I have had to do this to the rear brakes with a modified bracket one time, and a 4" angle grinder did the job. It was a on-off-on-off-on thing with the caliper until perfect, but it can be done on the car, in your garage, with a little ol' grinder. Just take your time and don't take too much material off at one time. A small straight-edge (like a 6" ruler) up against the surface periodically during any grinding will help you get in the ballpark more quickly as well.

I think 2126 hit it right on the money. Further wear will verify this. It just so happened that when I did this conversion, my particular set of struts had ears which were very smooth and flat (on the new mounting side) as well as parallel to the rotors face, which made any true-up unnecessary

Yes!!!!!!

The 302 is a 3.00" stroke, and the 289 is a 2.87" stroke. Then the even smaller 260 is the same short stroke, but also with a smaller bore. I believe the stock rods work fine up to at least 7000+. Better rod bolts, forged pistons, and a really good valve train will be the key at this rpm. I run my 289 past 7000 every time I take the car out with the OEM 289 crank and rods, and with the above changes. Back in the late 70's I used to take the 289 to 8K many, many times, but I eventually broke a piston ring land (cast piston) one time, and broke a crank later on (not sure if the main cap webbing gave way, which destroyed the crank, or if it was the other way around).

hee, hee!

That's great. I had an SCCA legal cage with no dash in mine (at the 2160 lb weight), but it sounds like your cage is at least another 50 to 75 lbs heavier.

No matter what you do, the "grass is always greener on the other side." Many times I think I'd like a clean, untouched body. But when I had one, I thought I wanted huge flares. So.....Let the car talk the walk, and walk the talk. Balance the form with function (and visa versa). A flare on a car makes much the same statement as torn out sleeves and neck on a tight T-shirt on a body builder. He's got big guns in those arms, and your car will too. So flaunt the fact that "I can't fit in my clothes" and push the dang wheels out. It doesn't have to be huge, but enough to say "think about it first!!."

When I was investigating the use of CV joints back in the late '80s, the consensus I received was that, about 13 degrees of angle, under "significant" torque (whatever significant meant), was the safe limit.

Why use a mustache bar at all, and instead, integrate the rear diff mount into the cross bracing?

Heat is a big problem as well. I've had to trim some tempered glass for the home, and I needed about 1/8" trimmed off. I actually sanded it (which makes me believe the above idea may work well), but the key is to keep it cool (water, slow down, whatever is needed) because any appreaciable heat differential will also cause it to shatter.

You've done very well getting it below 2100lbs. I got mine ('71) down to 2160, and I could have shed a few more, but never to below 2100lbs. A 200 pound loss by exchanging fiberglass for metal will be tough to do. CF parts would help, but my guess (without looking at specific weights) is that the hood, fenders, hatch, and doors (I assume you've already removed the bumpers and gutted the doors) don't even weigh 200lbs total to begin with.

Exactly why at 48 I feel I'm closer to my prime than I was at 18. Getting older is getting wiser (at least I hope so).

This may not apply if you want slicks for drag racing, but have you considered the Goodyear cantilevered slicks? Very stiff sidewall, and an excellent way to get maximum rubber on the ground with minimum wheel width.

Very, very, (I'll say it one more time) very nice. Keep the photos coming. I like!! Especially the front 1/3rd of the new roof line.

Looks good Jon. It may be even more trouble, but dropping the mustache bar should allow you to remove this new assembly??????(I looks like you could remove the 4 bolts on the assembly and slide it rearward and down away from the differential. Yes, the diff will be supported by the front mount for a few moments, but would this work?) Glad to see it come together. Let us know how it works out in regards to adjustments made.

Glad to hear the family is getting larger! Well keep our fingers crossed and prayers headed your way.

My take on all the stresses these parts take is this. Lateral loads on the rear suspension are taken predominantly by the rear bushings because the axle centerline is closely aligned with this bushing. And these lateral loads are kept in check with the two bolts holding the uprights to the subframe. If we could insure that these two bolts could never become a failure point, then the need for a transverse link would be unnecessary, but Datsun wisely reinforced the uprights, located near the bushing location, with the link, which then distributes the lateral loads between two uprights (or four bolts) instead of one. With the welded tie bar that you've used to tie the two uprights together, you've gone in that direction, which then reduces the requirements for the distribution of loading to pass through the transverse link (thus making the new adjustable transverse link strength requirement less and less important). Obviously, the wider, and the lower (in location), the welded bar/rod/angle is located on the uprights, the more effective it is in distributing the lateral loads between the two uprights. I've not seen the welded bar between your uprights, but I'd make it as wide (and perhaps gusset the ends) as is permissible with the rear cover you're using. Just some things going through my mind at this time. For me, I'd like to know that I would not need to depend on the adjustable link for supporting lateral loads if I could somehow get away with it, and have it used as simply a means of moving the bushings left and right as needed.