blueovalz

Dang memory like an elephant! I guess nothing gets by you. Here are a few more. It was a bad day for photography when I took these, but I didn't know when I'd get back around for another opportunity. As stated earlier, this was my first Z fiberglass work, and looking in hindsight, I learned a lot (made some blunders) and applied the lessons learned to the BlueOvalZ.

The wing can produce negative lift, with the penality of induced drag. The rear spoiler will create a high pressure area in front of the rear spoiler that counters the low pressure developed by the roof's (and the hatch) shape with the penalty of drag as well. My thoughts are the wing would ultimately be more effective if maximum downforce is the goal. My personal experience in "seeing" the effect of a rear spoiler was to see a downforce actually created by it as the Z reached speeds in the 70+ mph. It was an enlightening experience. Guessing from the amount of weight that was affected as a result of the experience, I'd say there was no less than 30 pounds of downforce applied to the rear of the hatch at highway speeds. Granted, this aint much, but it's a lot better than negative pressure back there. This was caused by the spoiler in the following picture: BTW, this was my first "Z" fiberglass project before the BlueOvalZ.

Hey Mike, check out this link. It's a fiberglass roll pan that fits a truck for these lights. Not wholly usable, but the individual (or pairs) of light cut-outs can be used (bonded) on a fiberglass panel if this is the route you choose. At $60, it may be worth cutting up. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6763&item=2479267604&rd=1

The oil, at pressure, simply developes a film of oil between the two metal surfaces. 1mm is a lot of gap to fill, but none-the-less, the oil film will in effect reduce the movement. If oil pressure is still good, meaning normal or better, then the bearing gap(s) is most likely good, and not excessive. Again, I'm only thinking this out and have no experience on this particular issue. BTW, pressures on the throw-out bearings can range from several hundred pounds to over a 1000 pounds and more. The 3" movement at the pedal is leveraged down to about .500" at the throw-out bearing (if memory serves me correctly) and only about .050 at the pressure plate itself. I'm guessing you'd only use the throw-out bearing ratio in trying to determine the force on the end of the crank, but it still comes out in the hundreds of pounds.

This is not direct experience here, but just thinking out loud. I would think the forces pushing the crank forward are the clutch pedal action. This pushes the pressure-plate forward to disengage the clutch, thus pushing the flywheel forward, and pushing the crank forward as well. With the motor running, oil pressure should fill this void you are writing about, and not allow the movement you are looking for. If it does, you've got other problems as well. I'd use the clutch to push it forward, and a prybar (behind the sway bar or whatever else is available, with a block of wood on the damper to push on) to push it back to the rear. Do this several times to squeeze out any oil that is between the bearing and thrust surface.

Agreed. I've got a 289 (was a 302 at one time) in my 204, with the hydraulic T/O bearing in a T-5, and love it. It is not hard to do, very simple, but will require some money for parts. Where in Arkansas are you located?

I found what appeared to be mouse droppings where my dog sleeps. I kept thinking that somewhere a mouse was getting into the bird food and leaving his trail behind. Then one night I was welding, and I guess the smoke and fumes, being they are hot, created an unbearable layer near the ceiling for the BAT that had taken up residence on the beam in the garage. The bat began flying around the garage (you can't even hear a bat fly they are so quite) and all I kept noticing was something out the side of the hood moving around periodically while welding. Anyway, that was 3 years ago, and every night during the summer months, the bat flies into the garage through the back door about 9pm, evades all the flags toolboxes, and cars, and quietly hooks onto the beam upside-down and proceeds to shit on the dog (which sleeps under the beam). Then around 5am he leaves once more to prepare is bowels for another assult on my dog.

!M!, your thoughts are correct. This is another advantage of having the long continuous plate behind the differential that the bar is mounted to. In practice, I could eventually move the body mounting points together to act as a single point directly behind the differential, thus nearly eliminating any effect of torsion the bar would normally provide. Any yes, it would be trial and error (at least for me anyway)

These numbers look good. Mine is close, but I've got about a point or so more toward the front than your numbers show. I'm running 265 rear/225 front, and am quite happy with these rates. Not too stiff, but enough, with a 7/8" bar front and 3/4" rear to satisfy me. I am going to reduce the effectiveness of the rear bar though by moving the body mounting points closer toward the middle (just outside either side of the differential) and attempt to mimic a 1/2" sized bar.

Dan! Ouch! Okay, maybe you're right, so here is a quick reminder of days gone by:

Thanks guys.

Well guys, the nays have it, and not by small margin either. Thanks for the input and reality check. Officially they will not be seen again as shown. Thanks again.

It was a dark and stormy ni....oops, wrong story. I was stopped at a red light in town Sunday afternoon, and while I patiently awaited the change of the light (whilst enjoying the rump, rump of the high strung 289 under the bonnet), much to my delight, an AC Cobra (replica of course) turns off the adjacent corner in front of me and heads up the road ahead of me toward the interstate on-ramp. Just as he got going out of the intersection that I was waiting at, my light turned green, (and yes, this was picture perfect), I was the first car in my lane! Boom!... out of the starting gate I went to catch up with the red/white stripped beast. As he approach the on-ramp, he had to slow down to yield to other traffic, which was my opportunity to catch up to him. He obviously was an experienced driver as he immediately noticed me in his rearview mirror, and at that point seemed to loose all interest in quickly slipping in-between the right-of-way cars to continue his journey. The last car ahead of him finally went through the corner we were waiting at.... waiting.....waiting.....waiting...no more cars now to slow us down at this point.... and waiting. The Cobra's driver then takes off his baseball cap, I notice two slight puffs of smoke out both his exhausts, my pulse takes a jump, and we're off in a full drag down to the interstate. It was great! I had to let off the throttle 3 times to keep from running up the Cobra's back end before we called it quits. Later we pulled over to talk and enjoy the moment. He had a 351W, lightly modified, with a gross weight almost identical to mine. It turned into a perfect afternoon.

"Too Cool for School" as my wife says.

I realize this is comparing apples to oranges, but I'd go with the Quaife. I've had a 9" with a locker in my '66 fastback that I used to race (road), and I now have a Gleason-Torson (not sure if Quaife manufactured it or not) in my Z (which I no longer race), and what little comparison I can make on it is the Quaife is more "user friendly". It's quieter and less abrupt on it's slipping action for anything other than straight line racing, but it costs a lot more than the locker. The other side of your argument is the Quaife is easier to install than the locker (9 inch), so I suspect once the 9" is finally installed, cost differnces will end up being null

Update: I've finally put some miles (street mile though) on the Gleason-Torson differential. I find that It makes hard (spirited) driving in the corners more controllable, and as John said, adds some amount of input into the way the car handles in sweeping curves. I've not learned how to use it fully at this point, but was initially surprised at the amount of on-throttle under-steer/trailing-throttle over-steer charateristics in comparison to the open differential I had before. If the clutch type is more pronounce than this type of differential in this aspect, then I can see were it would be scary at times. I'm glad I installed this part as it was well worth it in terms of the driving experience.

Thanks for ALL the comments. These have enlightened me to other avenues in this area.

A "before" shot. The photos above don't do the strakes justice, but thought I'd throw them out for comment regardless.

As was stated earlier on another string, I enjoy the build part of my Z car work, and as usual, I can't leave well enough alone. Well, I experimented with the side vents behind the front wheels to see what some side strakes , inserted into the vent sculpturing, would look like. They will be attached with screws so it wont be permanent should I decide not to use them, but they seem to "work" to help lengthen the front clip (as if that were a problem?). Here is what I came up with:

Well Ernie, that's great news to hear. Glad to see you land on your feet after the shop closed up.

I'm not well versed in the differences between the two. The C4 should be plenty strong (if that is what they still call the SBF autobox) and I'm unsure of the actual differences between the 4 and the 5. I've seen problems with the C6 behind the Cleveland motors so I'm not sure there is any substantial improvement in going to the larger tranny.

I thinks it's going to look good. Please keep the pictures/updates coming in. It's hard to get a good idea on the shape of the fender flares due to the lighting, but am looking forward to more shots as the work progresses.

You've almost hit the mark Jon, with "pennies on the dollar", and "hours of work". It's a labor of love with no justification required or requested. My car looks great in the garage, and I enjoy the attention I get when I take it on the road, but even more satisfaction and joy comes out of the question, "what will I build today?" when I walk out into the garage, with NPR on the radio, and a cold beer on the workbench. Once the paint goes on then the long and enjoyable process of "design and build" is finished. I suppose this is the reason I do have so much time and effort in the car in the first place, because I placed more emphasis on the means, rather than the end. Somewhat ironic in a sense.

I like your style Tim. Designing and building has always been my focus as well. I'm just waiting to put a paint job on the BlueOvalZ and then consider the same fate for it. My Formula Subaru is still crying to be let out of the boxes it's been packed in for the last 10 years.

The T-5 is a modern day manual 5 speed. The C4 is the small auto. I've heard from time to time of a C5 auto which was mentioned as a heavier-duty C4 but I've never seen one. The C6 auto is a heavy-duty auto used behind the big blocks but can be used behind the small blocks with the proper bellhousing. The Top-loader was a '60s and '70s cast iron housing 4 speed that was pretty much bullet proof, but has gotten pricy in my eyes, and a bit heavy.