Jolane

While the four bolts should handle the torque (shear loads), since after all they can certainly hold with the original axles, I think the issue you might have is making sure everything runs true and the assembly is balanced. I don't think that the 4 bolts will not align your adapters with the stub axles. You could always true this using a dial indicator after installation, and tap them into place before final tightening, but I am not sure how well this would hold after accel and decel loads run through the setup. This is my take on it. It may not be a problem, who knows? Joshua

I hope this image works. Otherwise, I am talking about an Autometer Cluster as seen on http://www.summitracing.com, P/N ATM-7001. I thought this might look really cool, and be easy to use in a custom dash. http://static.summitracing.com/global/images/prod/large/atm-7001.jpg Joshua

Mike, Why do you need to return your bellhousing? I thought the T-5 and the TKO600 used the same bellhousing, a 4-bolt Muncie pattern? You should be fine on the bellhousing, unless you have one that is drilled rotated. There must be someone out there building G-Force T-5's who you can use. Even if they deal with Mustang's every day, there shouldn't be a problem building it into a Chevy case, right? Good Luck in any case, what a hassle if nothing more! Joshua

Maybe your transmission is slipping due to low fluid level or band adjustment. I would definitely check the fluid level in the tranny to start. Joshua

Mike, That sucks! I am not sure I mentioned it before (I think I did for others to know), and I am not trying to rub salt in the wound, but I specifically did not go with G-Force because of my conversation with Bubba. I was NOT confident in him and company. With that said, I am not sure what you are looking for. A T-5? Just any other 5 speed that will work with your bellhousing? Maybe you remember, but I got a TKO-600 from Keisler Engineering. Just a thought, although I do know they are supposedly notchy (I don't know yet since my car is down to the shell). Good Luck, Joshua

Dale, That is the method I took when making my differential mount ( which I will end up redoing because I want it to look better). I started with a suspension bushing (poly, of course) and cut DOM tubing to fit. Then I fabriacted a mount that put the poly bushing behind the stock crossmember, about the same height. The bushing goes across the car from side to side. This allows me to drop the nose of the diff until it is very close to the cross member. It coulds even be lower if the cross member was modified. The advantage is that now above the diff is completely clear other than parking brake stuff. It is also cheap, and should be (I haven't tested it yet, won't be on the road for ~1 yr probably) very effective. It also does not change ground clearance as all of this is above the bottom of the frame rails by a good bit. Now, with this said, I am going to look into making mounts like the R230 uses. Basically make a bracket to hold two bushings on either side of the diff, and run bolts up from the bottom to attack to ears on the crossmember. There may not be quite enough room though...need to look at this more someday. Anyways, I also like Cliftons approach. I really like suspension bushings too, very useful. Joshua

Oh, Pete, I meant to also add that I think you can get some flowtech (holley brand, cheap line) headers for the SBC for ~$90 from Autozone. I have never used them, but maybe that would be a good start for the flanges and collector? Joshua

Pete, I understand what it is like to be an anal ME. Others around me usually don't though. Alwell. I have done some research on headers in the past, and the result was basically that many people don't agree on what optimal is. I just want a good clean way to the exhaust from my heads to the mufflers. Without significant work and dyno testing I feel like I may leave a few horses behind, but that is the price I am willing to pay. Yes, I have a lot of money in my engine, and would like to get out as much as I can, but I also realize that there are tradeoffs. Personally, I would rather mine left 5 Hp behind and looks great instead. That is just me though. I would love to see an excellently designed header though! My truck headers primaries are 1 5/8" I believe. They are for an 81 Chevy 4x4 SBC. I used them on my 400 when I had the ruck with 2 1/2" dual to flowmasters. While maybe not optimal, they were a lot better than the stock iron manifolds. I am looking at using 1 5/8" or 1 3/4" for my headers. The diameter should affect Torque a little, and of course top end HP. I would rather have better lower end torque though, plus these should be easier to route and possibly look better. I also plan to use 2 1/2" for the rest of the system, possibly 2 into 1 behind the tranny. I will have to work on that setup though. Jody, Those look great! Looks like they fit real nice. Do you have to take the engine out to install them, or can you get them in with everything mounted? Also, how much lower than the frame rails do they hang? Do you think that the clearance will be a problem? Joshua

Very Nice Terry! I also like the texture! Joshua

I got that message the other day when I was trying to reply to an add also. I figured I had done something wrong, so I simply cut and paste the address into Outlook and used that. I did try a few times before giving up though. Maybe I should have said something then... Joshua

Sounds like you have your answer already...but I will say that in the industry (at least the industry I am in) "B" size is 11x17 (as mentioned), and the orientation depends on what you want. If the drawing sheet is setup for one orientation or the other, that is what you use. In other words, we use different drawing sheet templates, one ladscape, one portrait. If the drawing is better shown on one versus the other, that is what we use (for instance, if you where drawing a skyscaper, you would use Portrait). Typically we specify "DO NOT SCALE DRAWING" on our drawings. This way, you can show the details you want without worry that someone will interprete the part wrong (use the wrong scale). The parts are fully dimensioned anyways. Just another point of reference. Joshua

Pete, Thanks for the contact of "Headers by Ed". They certainly carry a lot exhaust parts. I almost fel on the floor though when I saw the price of their header kit. Wow are they expensive (at least it seems like it to me). The header flanges that come stock are 1/4" also unless you upgrade. Would it be better to buy a premade header (Possibly Hedman, Hooker, etc) and modify them. I am thinking about cutting the headers apart to recover the flange with prewelded stubs. Then most of the tubing can probably be reused also. Same with the collectors. I am sure that the need to purchase additional J and U bends will arise, but maybe by only purchasing one of two, it will work. I put my Hedman Chevy Truck headers in my engine bay (with the engine mounted of course) and it looks like they are very cose to fitting. It appears that the interference problem is with the collector/one tube to T/C rod mount (of course). Maybe the collector can be rotated with a little cutting, rewelding and made to fit. The Hedmans were only ~$120. Seems like for ~$200-250, the work would be minimized (over a full header kit with unwelded stubs) as would the cost. Maybe the results are not what you are looking for though... Just some thoughts, Joshua

I am not sure wat you mean by trying the stray on instructions with the brush kind. It does say that you can spray it on using a paint gun (I assume that's what I would use), but I really don't want to get that stuff everywhere, and make a mess. Sorry, but I don't think I will be trying that. I think the better option is to brush it on and cover it, as mentioned previously. I will try that sometime soon. I had a hard time finding enough of the stray type Mar-Hyde. Ends up, it seems that nobody around here except Checker carries the stuff, and each Check store only carries 2 cans at a time. What a hassle. They wouldn't order a full case for me either. Finally, I had THEM round up all the cans they could from the various stores and I just stopped by and bought all of it. VERY god stuff indeed. I have found that allowing the spray kind to dry completely works very well. What seems to happen is: 1. It gets to work as well as it possibly can 2. It lifts the paint off extremely well, and them dries. This makes scrapping cleaner, and the mess can simply be vacuumed up off the floor without staining. It looks like a bunch of leaves on the floor. 3. You don't have to worry about the fumes, or when the right time to scrap it is. 4. You can use a wire brush (I put a cup wheel on a drill) to get in the corners without just making a mess. I can highly recommend using the stuff in this fashion, and it seems to be safer too (less exposer to the fumes). Joshua

Excellent Feedback Terry! Thank you very much. I was very curious about the foam. If it does such a good job at baffling, how does the fuel drain out. Sounds like you answered the question. I started (designing in SolidWorks really) by trying to baffle much as you described. It seems like it should work well for EFI. My concern though was refilling the walled area. If the car was to be in a turn for a decent amount of time, will the walled area become completely drained? I don't know. I guess that is where the flappers come in. I was really hoping to find more information about aircraft tank baffling. I assume they really need good baffling in their tanks. What I came across though is Racetronix. They seem to be a popular company for LS1 and C5 fuel tanks. They have a good decription on how the plastic tanked F-body Camaro's fuel pickup works. Ends up, a lot (if not all) late model GM's use this type of system. I would love to get my hands on the pickup assembly to either use as is or modify to fit my tank. They don't even baffle the tanks. Does anyone have any information on the Mustang tanks? Maybe Ford's method would be better/easier/? Thanks Again, Joshua

Why not use a dry sump system and pump on this engine then, if these pumps are a problem? Also, mabe instead of a big low oil pressure light, how about an ignition kill oil pressure switch? Joshua

That has been my experience too! Joshua

Jeez! It really is getting out of hand! Same with Health Insurance... something needs to give! Joshua

Over 9 days left still!!! Wow! Think of the Hybrid Z could be built with that money! Joshua

Thanks John for clarifying that. I wasn't sure if they were like a regular hydraulic lifter or not. Joshua

Another point of reference...I just bought a Vortec 350 (1997 I think) with all fuel injection (minus computer) components for $50. It spun a rod bearing, so add a few hundred for machining and it is not very expensive. No doubt that a rebuilt 350 is better, but if the price is right on the 305... Joshua

Thanks Datsunan! I was afraid that the foam was not enough. I noticed that ATL uses a baffled area with the foam. I can see how a square sump would be better do to forward slooshing. I wonder though, does the tank really need a sump area, or just a baffled area? A sump area gives a place for the fuel to collect, but the fuel needs to get in that area first. A baffled area just slows the fuel movement down... I would really like a "flat bottom" without a sump sticking out. Joshua

Thank You ZThis! Joshua

I also vote for AVG Free Edition. I use that at home and really like it. Very good free software for personal use! Joshua

David, Well, I play an engineer in real life...but may not be able to help with this. I will give it a shot though. I am not familiar enough with the P90A heads, I have a P90. The spring that you are referring to, does that somehow hold the "lifter/valve adjuster" open so oil can get inside and pressurize the chamber, thus eliminating lash? If this is the case, I believe that the oil pressure is what supports the load of the cam, not the spring. Replacing the spring will probably not have any effect on the whether or not a more aggressive cam can be run, only the oil pressure. Perhaps though the spring plays a role in the valving of the oil flow, I don't know. My gut feeling though is that changing this spring will not change how a more radical cam will run. Just a feeling. So, to answer your real question though, you can find precision springs in McMaster Carr. go to http://www.mcmaster.com and search for precision springs. For a stiffer spring, increase the wire diameter. You will have to balance this though with compression height, paying careful attention so that the spring does not bind. If you don't find the spring you need at McMaster, I would recommend Century Spring Co (http://www.centuryspring.com/). I don't know if they have a minimum though. Hopefully this information will help. Joshua

Pop n Wood, I came by Tim'z surge tank, the bong looking thing as someone mentioned in that thread. I would like to use that as a last resort though for a couple reasons. First, I need a new tank anyways. The one I have is dented pretty good. I also need the additional baffling anyways for my EFI conversion. Finally, because mine will be a street car, I really need a spare tire, and one of my big goals is to keep some sort of spare tire well (it may end up being shallower, perhaps to fit a narrower spare). So, this kind of rules out modifying the existing tank. So if I am going to builb one anyways, why not baffle it correctly. As for the fiberglass, I have no intention (right now anyways) of using Fiberglass. I just thought it was very curious, and never knew fiberglass could even be used, much less in aircraft! I would worry that, much like a fiberglass air dam breaks when you hit a parking block, so would a fiberglass gas tank! Thanks for the surge tank suggestion. I would much rather just build the tank correctly to begin with (I am not implying that the surge tank is a bad idea or that others who have surge tanks did not build a correct gas tank). I would rather only use one pump, have many less connections, take up less space, etc... Joshua