blueovalz

Its on the opposite side of the fork motor and on the same side as the knife motor. (actually, I've never heard of such an animal)

DV and DCA (Direct Current Volts and DC Amps) will be the two settings you'll use for testing. Never use the DCA unless you know the current or amps flowing through the circuit is less than the limit of the meter, or meter setting (one way to blow a fuse or kill the meter). On the DV, place the red (+ or positive lead, making sure it is correctly plugged into your meter) on the battery side of the circuit you are testing. If you are unsure of what is the positive or negative side, place the meter setting to the highest voltage setting prior to testing. This way if the leads are reversed, the meter movement will not take as bad a "hit" as if it was on a lower (e.g 12volt) setting. If everything looks good (slight meter movement) go ahead and place the voltage setting back to one that is close to the voltage being measured (e.g 12 vdc). Testing from the battery up to a switch verifies the wire is good, then across the closed switch verifies the switch is good, and so on, for each circuit. Any breaks will result in no voltage being shown when you get on the load side of the break.

Good, then threaded tube simply slips onto the strut tube until it rests on top of the ring with was welded at an appropriate height on the strut tube. I did not weld my threaded tube to the strut tube (but mine was aluminum) and wouldn't suggest it even if it were made of steel. If your tube happens to fit rather loosely over the strut tube, you can weld some tiny knobs in a 3 or 4 point pattern at the top and bottom area of the strut tube where the threaded tube rides. This will allow the tube to stay in place without any side movements.

If I understand this, then the spacer is used to support the threaded tube. When I did mine, I sectioned the strut tube up high, so that the threaded tube (which ultimately supports the weight of the car) support, or the "spacer" as you call it (I just used a section of Sch40 pipe about 3/8" thick), is below the section that was welded together. This way all the weight of the car is on an otherwise, unmodified, or un-cut portion of the strut tube. Note: I know some of these strut tubes are made so that the upper portion steps down in thickness near the very top, so you may want to look inside the tube to find this step prior to cutting to avoid welding the two different gauges (or the thinner part of the tube) of metal together. What are you defining as "sleeve"? (I assume you are NOT making reference to the threaded tube).

I'm not sure you are doing anything wrong, but I will mention that I believe the general consensus on this forum is that the plates are not necessary, and will go un-noticed if you leave them off the car.

Your query has not gone un-noticed, but I may not be able to answer your question. You ask about how much to section the tube by? This depends on the length of the cartridge being placed into the tube. I determined this by inserting the cartridge into the tube, and measuring how much the cartridge slides up and down the tube with the gland nut screwed onto the tube all the way down with the exception of perhaps a couple of turns of the nut (to allow a good tight fit when you are finished). If the insert has 2" of movement up and down the tube (again, with the nut on), then this is the length of the section that must be removed (keeping in mind the width of the cut if sawn). I sectioned my struts from scratch, so I have no idea what is meant by your "spacer" other than perhaps a plug that I placed in the bottom of the rear tubes to push the insert up higher in the tube. I've not seen this kit or its instructions, so I hope this helps whilst you await another reply.

Exactly, and the shaft inside the columns outer casing slides in and out on splines. Not a lot of travel, but better than none.

axis control reversal was a common problem when breaking mach1 was first experimented with on the very earliest experiments. With the improved frabrication techniques, materials and design, the reversal problem was eliminated on the production fighters.

Some of the early jets are becoming more commonplace now. At the last show I went to, I became overly engrossed (according to my spouse) talking to a MIG-15 owner about his plane. Most interesting topic: he had to add 700lbs of lead ballast in the intake splitter to offset the removal of the cannons.

I've always thought about building the 3/4 scale warbird replicas that use the detroit V8 automotive engines for a powerplant. I've seen a P-51 made from these kits, and they are sweet (did I just say "sweet"?)

My conversion is a little more competition oriented (solid mounting of the drive train). The link will show the engine plates used to solidly mount everything up to the chassis, but again, no kits here.

I'm embarrassed to say that I've never seen the movie, but this is true on any movie that I know a lot about the subject, e.g. movies about auto racing, etc. I see so much masculine bovine feces in these movies that I cannot pass it off as artistic license to enjoy the movie. I will say that even though pilots can be a PITA sometimes, they are also our best friends other times. You know, the guys that will give me a tight downwind and base in his little ol' 172 so that I can beat the DC9 on a long final.

Monroe LA, and Tulsa (short stint there). LIT was my next bid, but by that time the PATCO strike took place, and my career took at turn (and so far, for the best). ATC is a young man's game, so I'm sure I would not be real happy with it at this point in my life. I saw some neat stuff, and saw some things that were disturbing, so I wouldn't say I regreted the years I devoted to it.

I had my private ticket back in '76, and had passed the instrument written, and then gave it all up when I became an Air Traffic Controller (yeah, go figure!). I've not put one single hour under my belt since then.

I'm guessing this is the part of the quarterpanel the brakes over and turns into the C pillar. These kinds of areas are tough to do because the more layers of mat that are placed in the area like this, the more apt these layers are to fall away from the surface due to their weight. I'm not an expert on this, but I'd handle it this way: I would coat the entire area you need to place adjacent to the sheet metal with a thin "starting" layer. Depending on the weight of the mat (or cloth) depends on how many layers this will entail. 2-ounce mat will be marginal at 2 layers max, but thinner mat or cloth could include more layers. The less resin you use to "wet" this, the lighter, it will be, but the mat will need to stick to the metal, so this is where the resin will need to be, not on the outside (not on the inside of the speaker box). One characteristic I've found about resin is that it will not bond to the metal surface until about the last 25% of its kicking time. In other words, if a glob of resin were put onto a piece of metal (or any substrate), and it takes 20 minutes for the resin to get glassy hard, then the bond is not created to the metal until the last 5 minutes or so. At this point in the "kicking" process, the resin gets firm and almost like a hard rubber, and can be easily popped off the metal surface without distorting the shape of the blob. The blob could then be replaced back onto the same area it was just removed from, and the blob will continue to harden, but will not be bonded to the metal, and can thus be removed easily when needed. This same idea can apply to resin soaked mat. Allowing the mat to firm up on the sheet metal, and then CAREFULLY pulling it off to prevent permanent bonding, will allow you to maintain the shape you want, and after a thorough cleaning of any "wet" resin between the mat and the metal is quickly cleaned up (with acetone or lacquer thinner), you can then place the soft, removed part (still firm, but not glassy hard), back into the contoured metal quarterpanel (to keep the shape accurate for final hardening), for final hardening. When it is finally hard, pull it back out, rough up the surface (speaker side only) with 30 grit paper, apply more layers of mat, place back into the quarterpanel area (again to maintain the accuracy of the shape) until it is fully hard. This takes more time to do, but will provide a firm shape for more reinforcement at a later time. Don't forget to keep this simple in shape so that the part can be pulled off without distortion. This may require multiple pieces to be made, and then bonded together later. I would STRONGLY suggest you experiment with a narrow strip of mat that crosses the area you want to cover, and do the above procedure, and get a "feel" for when the strip should be pulled off. Pulling it early will cause a distortion of the shape, and attempting to pull it late may make it extremely difficult to pull it off at all without destroying the part. Experimenting with the timing (using the corners of the experimental strip to gauge when the strip should be pulled off) will pay big dividends in the final part. Waxing the area, or spraying with WD-40 has also helped in releasing the part without causing the mat to separate while still wet, but with the part hanging like you suggest in your post, I would experiment on this first to see if its a viable option.

I guess I'm getting too old. All I could see in this impressive video was about $300 in rubber blowing in the wind

My wife still reminds me of the time I passed out due to working on the BlueOvalZ. I had the jack tubes in place (each one sticking out of the rocker panel by about 18") and the car was sitting on top of jack stands using these tubes. I was engrossed in a brake MC in my hand as I was walking along the side of the car, and bam, I hit my kneecap squarely on the jack tube. The $300 spent in etiquette training was immediately thrown away as the verbiage, normally heard only on a battleship, rolled off the tongue as if it had been well rehearsed. Then I noticed that my vision was getting dark from the outside of my field of view, moving inward, and I knew I was in trouble. I immediately turned toward the front door of the house in a futile effort to find a comfortable place to fall, but instead the concrete sidewalk ended up putting a knot on my head that Tarzan couldn't swing over. When I woke up, with blood in my hair, the first thing I did was look around to see if anybody saw this pathetic example of "gearheaditis" at its finest hour.

I wont laugh (I've got a '92 240SX that is near and dear to me). There are a very few of the members (myself included) here on the forum that have considered the same modification you are asking about, but none that have actually done the conversion, and none that are even poised to start it. My motor is at 180K and is starting to show signs of age, but I am not ready for the swap yet. If you were to go ahead and do this swap, please let me know, document all the things you did to complete the job, and take lots of pictures.

I can't help but wonder if 1) the driver of the police car did not see the oncoming 911 before making a left turn, 2) if he did see him, did he not have the capability to correctly judge the speed of the 911, and 3) perhaps the policeman did see the 911, and correctly judged the speed, and decided to make a point in a dramatic manner.

Tom is using the ZX calipers which are one piece castings.

These little NAPA brake hones may save the day here. I've used them before and they will work. They come in sizes from about 1" bores on up to about a 3" bore. It will probably be the cheapest part you've bought for the brakes so far.

With all that said about the squatting factor, I did raise the differential up over an inch on both my Z cars simply to straighten out the shafts. As far as a parts source for the shafts, I'd recommend finding a place (I used the internet and found a reasonably priced place in FL, but I do not recall the name of the business) that rebuilds the shafts and send your shafts to them, with a note explaining the situation, with a follow-up phone call to insure no screw-ups.

I cannot address claims made on the forum here that the ride is smoother with the CV joints verses the U-joints (a string on this appeared several months ago). There also has been augments about whether the CV jointed shafts are indeed any stronger than the U-jointed shafts. High HP numbers have been put on both successfully, and both have had failures. My take on all this: U-joints will work if the geometry on the shafts is ideal (straight out the diff to the axles with little to no angularity in the joints), especially in the application of torque. Squatting, lowered cars, and cornering changes all of this, and unless taken into account, the U-joint is going to be punished, even behind a weak V8. The CV joint will handle the angularity much better. I've disassembled the CV joints, and they are efficient in that no more material has been used in the "shell" that the tripod bearings thrust against, than is needed to keep them alive. Personally, I'd say "no doubt about it, the CV is stronger" (they were a factory upgrade to the U-joint on the Turbo cars), and I agree, the "feel" may be improved in driving over the U-jointed shafts. If you plan on the LT1, and the shafts are not straight out (especially in a squatting hole shot), then I'd highly recommend the CV joint set-up, regardless of how strong you make your V-8. If you have any more questions, feel free to start a new string about the shafts to assist future searches on the subject of the CV joints rather than carry this string in a different direction

I know the hood is a tad shorter on the ZX, but other than that, I see no significant problems that would make this SBF swap any different than in the Z. The rack may become an issue (is the ZX a "rear steer" set-up?).

I bought the British Victoria boot kits and swapped the inboard CV joints, and put it all up under the car, and everything works well now (1/2" of end-to-end play on both shafts at full droop). I did notice that to buy a rebuilt CV jointed 280ZX Turbo shaft, the parts houses (all of them that I asked) only listed one side, and NOT both sides, in their part number references. Thus there is no distinction between left and right sides in their references (which is short sighted on their behalf).