johnc

Harness bars in the main hoop are not required by SCCA or NASA. Harness mounting is a separate item from roll cage construction.

Drop the rear Illumina settings to 3. Your car as setup will be more neutral then the cars you compared yourself to. You will drive it differently to get faster lap times and focus more on corner exit speed then corner entry speed. Focus on smooth braking, steering, and throttle inputs to keep from upsetting the car in transitions. If you're coming out of the corner 5 mph faster then the 350Z that's much more important then entering the corner 5 mph faster. Try to get more negative camber in front and back. See my suggestions in another post. Also, more spring on the car will help. If you're running the 240Z Tokico HP springs try upgrading to the 280Z Tokico HP springs. They have a 185F and a 200R rate which will work better. I would also swap out the rear anti-roll bar for the Suspension techniques 3/4" bar that mounts behind the diff.

Its not a battle at all. Tony and I don't know the real story. As he posted above, we're just trying to draw out information. Maybe one season all the engines were tuned down because they were having problems the previous season with he higher horsepower levels - bad batch of pistons, poor tune, budget constraints,...? Maybe they were running away from the other competitors and needed to slow the driver's down (asking a driver to slow down is pointless) to minimize the restrictive rule changes IMSA was threatening? I spent some time at Caldwell's in the eary 2000s when I was crew on an ALMS GTS Viper team and had a chance to talk with John about building L6 engines (he's the one that recommended Jim Thompson at Sunbelt). He said that they (Electramotive) could basically get whatever horsepower numbers they wanted out of the turbocharged engines. He and my friend who was the dyno operator gave me the "typical" numbers I posted above but the engine power on any given day could be varied based on tune. FYI... John Caldwell had two complete Electramotive lay down L6 turbo engines (I mean COMPLETE) at his shop when I was there. I tried to get one of them when they closed down but they were already spoken for.

OK, my point is: The additional weight of the second intake manifold, exhaust header, and related plumbing (probably 40 lbs total) will offset any unproven horsepower gains by the this double crossflow design over a regular crossflow cylinder head.

Yes, I think we're talking about a straight 6 engine per the picture in the first post. I'm not comparing this double cross flow design to a V8 engine because that's a completely different topic.

Qualifying engines. Race engines were in the low 700hp range - at least that's what the guy who ran their dyno said to me.

That would put the rear suspension in a bind and you wouldn't get any travel.

Parts are the least of your concerns when doing a restoration. Most of then already come with the car so your purchased parts expenses should be about 25% of your total restoration costs. Stripping the car down, putting it on a rotisserie and getting it media blasted will set you back $1,500 to $2,500. From this point, you can now evaluate the work that needs to be done. Getting the chassis clean with no bondo, rust free, and all the body panels straight will be your biggest expense.

IMHO, the added weight of the complex intake and exhaust plumbing would likely negate any horsepower or torque benefits. Fun to build and look at but no faster on the street or the track.

Exactly! I just finished cutting up a 280Z with a Husqvarna 100cc 14" cutoff saw. My big problem was the numerous fires I started when the shower of sparks lit something else up. Its kinda fun though when the first cut is right down the middle of the car and it falls into two longitudinal sections. I stopped and thought for about 10 minutes about what I could do with 1/2 a Z... then I came to my senses and fired the saw back up.

Everyone please take note. No racing shock lasts forever and they are the first item to check when suspension behavior changes.

Heh... always happens. The dreaded "While I'm At It" Troll got another Z owner.

No. Yes for the rears only. Can't drill the front hubs for 8 stubs. Look at the back of one and see. And remember, each hole you drill weakens the part.

At the top levels of the sport (autocross and road racing) the Hoosier A6 is currently the faster tire. None of that applies to anyone here on this message board because our ham fisted driving masks the lap time difference. The V710 is a better choice for us for the value reasons Tom lists above.

Here's a thought... buy the right header!

And you were shopping for a new 240Z back in 1972? The original good stuff and even better good stuff is all available right now in the aftermarket and from Nissan. It doesn't matter what was available on the car 39 years ago unless you're doing an original restoration. If you're building the car the way you want it then lots of suspension parts are available to build it anyway you want.

For autocross use on a typical street driven car a rear ARB is a must. You need the more neutral handling that the rear bar brings to get the car around the low speed corners at a typical autocross.

Search please.

I use these two items to protect car surfaces when I'm doing fabrication and welding. Both have paid for themselves by keeping windows and paint jobs scratch and burn free. http://wurthindustry.thomasnet.com/viewitems/mask-cloth-bags/wurth-wreck-wrap?&plpver=1003&forward=1 http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/3MAutomotive/Aftermarket/Products/Product-Catalog/?PC_7_RJH9U5230GE3E02LECFTDQCEK3_nid=GSMMTWQGDZgs8H32N3CD4SglRJXVD6KWQ6bl

Go to ups.com, fedex.com, or usps.com and go through their shipping estimate wizards.

Something like this makes loading vans and pickup trucks very easy. http://www.cargobed.com/

Rear anti-roll bars were factory installed on the 260Z but the late 1973 240Zs had the brackets on the chassis, just no bar installed. There are two styles of aftermarket rear ARBs for the S30. The first attaches to the factory brackets and only work on the late '73 and later cars. The other made by Suspension Techniques (and Design Products), which is a better design, uses modified transverse link braces to mount the bar behind the diff. Picture below of the ST install:

Lowering the S30 two inches pretty much kills the handling unless you're willing to shorten the struts. Cutting progressive springs is basically an exercise in futility because you don't really know what you're going to end up with. I've cut linear rate springs without any issues but the one set of progressive springs I tried cutting ended up with spring rate variance of over 15% from spring to spring. Its a dumb idea, but hey, its your car.

Its a diminishing return thing. The higher the spring rate and larger the lateral load the more deflection you get in stock rubber insulators. That negates, to some increasing degree, the benefits of the higher spring rates and more lateral grip. The stock rubber insulators are fine for a street car with spring rates up to about 200 lb. in. You can go with higher rates but why? To take advantage of those higher rates (assuming you're doing this for better handling) you'll need more negative camber. To get that a camber plate is the best option; although offset bushing help to the tune of about 1 degree. If you keep the springs rates relatively soft and use anti-roll bars and good shocks you can build a nice handling street car and use the stock rubber insulators.