blueovalz

WickedWild; What is the coating used on the air cleaner? Bed liner material maybe?

Now that's ORANGE (sunglasses on). I like a color that draws as much attention as does the car itself.

Thanks for keeping me honest Dan. Yep, I had to drop the steering rod all the way out of the column, turn it 90º (or closest I could come to it) and shove it back up the column again so that it would match the pinion gear, and then adjust out the few degrees the steering wheel was off.

Again, I like the orange (not the photoshop orange). Add a little mica or metallic to it and the curves and contours should stand out even better. Grabber orange, or something like that. The bad thing about yellows and oranges is that a small change in shade or tone, and a "good" color now doesn't look so good anymore.

I do not think removal of the differential is necessary to remove the mustache bar. If worst comes to worst, you could remove the studs that hold the bushings on by unscrewing them from inside the car (remove the rubber plugs over each stud (actually it’s a long bolt) and then unscrewing the bolt up and out. I believe as well that the cylinder that the rubber bushing is bonded to at each end of the mustache bar must be left intact (check on this from other responses) as the urethane bushings press into this "sleeve" and not solely into the bar's curled ends (as best as I can remember other posts as I've not done this myself). Have you tried to remove the clamps holding the rack on and thus pull the rack forward, so that you'll get more room to shove the steering rod back up into the column? Steering coupler? Ya don't need no stinkin' steering coupler. I just removed the rubber puck, and bolted the two pieces back together again (metal on metal). There is an abundance of engaged splines inside the collapsible column to make this safe.

Thus was the creation of the BlueOvalZ. Anyway, prior to the most recent painting, I was looking at a brighter color more fitting of a sports car. An orange of some sort was one I threw around but she was so adamant about the dark blue that I stuck with it.

Great post John. Both are true to the heart of the matter over there, and the second quote is me all the way. Fortunately (or unfortunately as some would see it), I don't form an opinion of any administration based upon a single event (as drawn out as it may be), but try to look at the entire picture and make a determination, or form an opinion, upon that. So far, I lack the "warm fuzzy" I'd like to feel about my president based on the 30k view.

I don't live in MEM but go up there occasionally. Let me know what turns up on this venture of yours.

Looks good!! Keep us updated on how this is turning out.

If you're handy with sheetmetal or fiberglass, a rear light panel is pretty straight forward (depending upon the design's complexity). Even the simplist design only requires a flat panel that is slightly convex.

The primary reasons for the parts I chose for my first brake upgrade (using the 300ZX rotors and 280ZX floaters) were: 1) Lighter weight, which on a limited budget at the time looked to be the best alternative. Unsprung weight was something I wanted to avoid. 2) The 280ZX (and this is not as clear to me as when I originally performed this swap) caliper piston area was greater than the total area of the two pistons in the Toyota caliper which meant greater clamping force. 3) I wanted to avoid a wheel spacer at all costs, which would have been required if I used the Toyota calipers with my wheels.

Your second post on weight is much more realistic. I went with a full fiberglass body (front clip, doors, quarters-which added weight, and hatch), removed every light, hinge, bracket, tab, and screw that was not necessary (seriously gutted), lexan rear windows, aluminum heads, flywheel, seat, WC T-5, and cell. With a legal cage the car weighed in at 2160 lbs. I could have perhaps lost another 30 lbs with a different choice of rotors and calipers and windshield. The best cam I ever had for many years (decades) was the old original Ford LeMans cam. Awesome broad torque curve! Every time I tried another cam, I always ended up going back to the LeMans. Only recently have I found another cam I like better, and it is a (mild by roller standards) solid roller designed by Ultradyne. My motor is a 289 (it was a 302), but either way, I never had any problems with the WC T-5 close ratio tranny. Obviously this motor is not a stump puller, but is puts out about 375HP reliably.

Impressive!

Very nice!

I focused on the top portion. In essence, I took the OEM arch, and then moved it up several inches. This way a full cut is made on top, and less and less material is removed as the arch progresses downward until little cutting is done at the bottom. This way you maintain some of the unibody strength with the OEM welds down low. My upper limit was determined by the crest of the wheel well. It is (IMHO) unwise to go any higher than this due to the rapidly increasing complexity of the job (which then requires the removal of the wheel well, and then the unibody strength is about shot at that point). Yes, a tube frame could make up for this loss, but again, a minor job now becomes a major job. In the case of your ZG flares, I'd trace out an outline of the flare where you want to position it, and where it then bolts (bonds) onto the body, and then cut well inside this line (to allow enough sheet metal so that the flare can be mounted correctly. This position is obviously determined by how low you want the ride height to be.

I like the idea as well, especially some info about the driver, the car's history, and other "human interest" data.

The J-B Welds material gets softer the hotter the part becomes. My experience with this product is that it also looses it's bond when the metal get hot (And in my case, hot was not 500º, but more in the neighborhood of 350º-400º). I would not consider this as a quick fix.

That's a sneeker preview!

Excellent JohnC!! All the while I was reading this I am trying to compare an optimal patch for drag racing verses road racing. Initially, my assumption was that if a wide, short pattern is good for lateral loads, then a narrow, long pattern would be good for longitudinal loads (drag racing patterns and road racing patterns having patterns perpendicular to each other), but obviously you don't see drag racers with narrow tires. So somewhere in this information a hint must indicate why the two types of racing work well on essentially the same pattern. My guess is that the slip angles (zero for the drag tire and minimal for the road tire) must be so low that they in essence can be thought of as the same or similar, thus the fat tire works with both. The heating/cooling efficiency caught my eye on this as well, but it is hard to accept when half a tire goes up in smoke on a burnout prior to a drag race. Balled up rubber (which is not mentioned here) must be considered as well. A wide, short pattern will not "roll" over sheared rubber (marbles) as much as a narrow, long pattern would. Thus the contact patch following the area that is initially subjected to shearing is shorter, and hence, the marbles are dispersed more quickly. A long, narrow patch would seem to keep the contact patch over the sheared rubber longer. This article created as many questions as it answered, but thanks for the post! GnoseZ: This is why I went to approximately 7º of castor on my Z. The camber increase at this setting gave me a better camber change (overall) than the 3º OEM setting did. For the most part I was able to reduce the camber settings to less than half of what I needed prior to the change. The type of circuit, and suspension (springs and bars) has a lot to do with how well this works, but on my car it was a good compromise between the tighter courses and the high speed sweepers.

My understanding of contact patches is that the patch is directly related to weight on the tire, and inversely related to air pressure in the tire. This means that the contact patch area should remain the same, but that the configuration, or shape, of the patch will change. With the rigid sidewalls of todays tires, I would find it hard to believe that the patch does not reduce in size once the tire is tilted over a significant amount. I believe there is a correlation between shape and force, but I am lacking in absolute knowledge on it. There is a means of addressing some of this problem though, and that would be through the caster. With the Z suspension, one can increase the camber curve (increase in camber as the wheel is turned) by increasing the caster. Depending on the circuit, and your suspension, increasing the caster and decreasing your static camber could help you maintain a more optimal contact patch.

Welcome aboard. We enjoy photos from projects as they progress toward a final finish, as well as any tips to help others in shoe-horning the Ford engine into the Z. Popular concerns with this forum are motor mounts (no comercially supported parts like there are for the bowtie crowd) and engine position (in regards to the crossmember/oil pan interference for a front sump).

This is a nice adaptation to what you had to work with, especially with the curves verses a bunch of flat panels.

Looks great! Now when is the paint comming?

Took the words right out of my mouth. I don't know this for sure but I don't even think a chromed cage will pass a safety inspection for those classes requiring a cage.

I would also find out the tire diameter of the tire you would plan to use on the car as a means to determine the suitability of your suspension height. A 25" tire would have a 12.5" radius, add another 1" for a fairly descent visual gap, and you have 13.5" distance from axle centerline to the fender lip as measured vertically only (no angle outward toward the fender).