blueovalz

Surely you jest!

Wouldn't the traditional "reaction disk" issue be the misplacement of it during the booster assembly? I'm puzzled in that my assumption is that the car was driven with normal brakes, and then this problem suddenly or gradually developed "before I took" the car off the road. I agree it's a booster issue, but perhaps on the vacuum hose end (provided no work was done immediately prior to this issue developing).

I agree. Looking at other photos of this car, it was apparent these quarters were either modified OTC parts, or completely fabricated.

I love to help dispense advice, but when I have to read a post 4 times, and I've got a headache trying to separate sentences (yeah, periods and commas are a must as well), and understand what the author meant to say, it takes all the fun out of it.

I'm using the PP Ford intake with passages in back as well. The cooling benefits are debatable, but what I find advantageous is the ability to remove air from the back of the block through one of the plug holes in the rear passage.

Danny (BowtieZ) is in the process of putting this under is car as I write this. I believe he is waiting for the shortened axles so that it can all be assembled.

In my swap I used the front-sump pan, which required some front crossmember modifying, BUT the advantages are nice. 1) In a low-slung car and/or motor, the oil pan sump is in line with the front wheels, which means that the pan rises with the front of the car over speed bumps. A rear sump pan would be headed back down toward the pavement about the time the sump gets to the crest of the speed bump. 2) Any angle put on the drivetrain will make the front of the engine higher than the rear. It won't be by much, but every little bit helps.

What Jon said. You could go pretty high on the spring rate and still have an acceptable street ride quality provided the dampers are matched up well and the chassis is sufficiently rigid. The cage should help a lot there.

I've always subscribed to "form follows function". A scoop should at the very minimum appear to function as such. I'm concerned that a sheet of glass that is bowed around the window opening will not provide the "look" you desire (in the long run). I would seal it in back so that it at least looks like it functions as a device to collect or direct air flow. In regards to pressure, it will not be as high as you think. When I was measuring pressure increase with speed on an isolated ram-air set-up on the front bumper, I found pressure was almost insignificant even at 60 MPH. at 90 MPH it started showing a rise with increased speed. Lastly, I'd incorporate a means of using fasteners to hold it on from the inside of the car, and not bonding it; Especially due to the water issue.

I remember a fellow Z person telling me he looked into this and told me the short and long R200 covers have the same mounting pattern on the differential itself (but not to the mustache bar). I have not verified his claim though.

All the "great BMW engineering" and I'd never own another one unless the warranty was for the lifetime of the car. This year I've spent as much in repair bills as in car payments, yet my 240SX with 212K got $0 (zero) dollars last year in repairs.

Thank you. The photo evidence was not matching the early explanation, but this explanation seems to have hit the mark.

Question: Why does the wear pattern extend all the way up to the ring ridge? I'm wondering why the pin wear doesn't stop much lower below the ring ridge.

I went up for a second time in one of the Collings Foundation's WWII bombers. My favorite WWII bomber was the B-17, so I chose it again. Open hatches, basically unlimited movement throughout the bomber while in flight (don't step on the bomb-bay doors, don't lean against the control cables, and watch the aux fuel tank switches). Anyway, here are some shots from inside, and outside the plane (head outside the hatch while over the Arkansas River). The source of my fun this weekend: View from the Plexiglass nose: Vew of the source of a beautiful noise from behind the cockpit! View of the pilots from a plexiglass bubble: From the top turret: View of the surrounding plane from outside the top-hatch (this was windy!)

I may go ahead and use these new smaller ones. Pennyman. When you say they seem to work better than the original large ones, can you be more specific? In what way do they seem better (better ride, control, installation, etc)?

Thanks for the offer (this offer reflects the great community we have), but I'm looking at different options for now. But that does not preclude me from investigating your offer further down the road.

Hmmm... I had to read that post four times to get my hands around it (proper punctuation and gammar will make it a LOT easier on the eyes). Brake fluid behind the cap is an indication of the seals leaking, and is usually characterized by a pedal that slowly sinks to the floor if slight pressure is applied. Since the clutch appears to function well in some of the gears, it appears the disc was installed correctly. So I'm led to believe you may have two issues. One with the MC (bad seals), and the other with the throwout bearing (was replaced with the clutch?), throwout bearing adjustment (sounds like it may lack any clearance at rest, and if so, I'm not sure what would cause that), or transmission. Curious if some (or all) of these symptoms existed prior to the clutch replacement.

It sounds like the turbo engine could use some work or something. The boost should come in smoother than you've described. The 302 block can be a weak spot, but the "magic" block splitting horsepower number has a lot to do with overspinning the thing as it does with brute torque. With the turbo 302, I fiqure the weight will come in pretty close to the LS6 (turbo, plumbing, etc), but even with a small amount of boost (8-10 lbs), you'll have more torque out of it than the LS6. But you'll have more work to do as well, so I guess it all boils down to more money and work = more power (which everybody on this site has already figured out).

Hmmm.... The Beck Arnley arrived, and they are exactly like the MOOG bushing except they are softer and resemble more of a silicone material than the harder rubber of the MOOG. Correction to the drawing previously posted. These newer bushings will fit in the recessed area correctly, but again the portion used to support and dampen the compressive forces is smaller than the OEM bushings.

I bet motorsports sent spindle pin nuts (M12) that go on the rear suspension, or even smaller, the spindle lock-pin nuts (M8).

I'm going to raise the issue of thrust (axial) force here again. My thoughts are the helical cut gears, or any gear cut other than straight would impose some kind of thrust on both gears. This is true with transmissions or any angle-cut gear. Would not the ring/pinion cut not also apply?

The Beck Arnley are the ones I've got headed this way. Thanks guys.

The large cupped washers on either side of the bushings are 2 3/4" in diameter, which is the same as the bushings behind (between) them. The two issues I have are: 1) Using the smaller ones means the same forces are being applied to a smaller area (just over 1/2 the area of the OEM size). This means the amount of deflection and give is going to increase for the same force applied. 2) The OEM bushings fit into a "dish" in the boss holding these bushings, and this dish is the diameter of the OEM bushing, not the smaller one. This means there is no positive lateral control of the bushing other than the compression provided when the large washers squeeze the bushings together. (This diagram is based on memory and not me looking at the set-up). I'm going to revisit the rod-end option one more time before I go further. I've got one more set of bushings headed my way to see if this change is more pervasive then MOOG. I suppose if you were to look at it from a "half full" perspective. the ride may be a little softer with more compliance in the bushing than the OEM size (great for those stung by the Polyurethane/TC rod failure issue). Obviously compound plays in here as well, but I've no set-up to test it, nor do I care to spend the time to find out.

I'm enjoying the street ride at the present time, and until the money gets green enough to purchase another truck and trailer, I'll have to be happy with that. If I see a time when I can get it back on the track, there are all kinds of things I've got stowed away for that.

My understanding of the 3550 is that it was the predecessor to the TKO line. A bit weaker (350-475 lb/ft depending on the model)