johnc

Yes, the R200 and R180 both tend to puke oil out the breather. Even the R200 in my 350Z does it. Remove the plastic breather cap, thread the hole for the appropriate NPT thread, put a brass barbed fitting, and run a hose to a catch can. Some people just run a long loop of hose instead of a catch can.

I would be more selective about where I cut to widen the car. 1. Core support and firewall cut down the middle, add material to widen. 2. Leave the greenhouse, floor pans, and trans tunnel alone. 3. Cut the rocker panels and rear bulkhead at the floor pan and add material to widen. 4. Cut the top of the rear 1/4 panels and add material. 5. Cut the rear floor down the middle and add material to widen. 6. Cut the rear finisher panel and add material to widen.

Yes, just don't clamp them so tight it damages the hose. You should not see the hose squeezing through the slots or bulging up the sides of the clamp. The idea behind the clamps is that if there's sharp tug on the hose there's an extra margin of safety.

Parker's recommendations are for industrial applications. A clamp will help reduce the chances of the hose pulling off the fitting in event of an accident or component failure. XRP, Goodrich, etc. all recommend a clamp for push lock hose use in automotive applications

Except for weight and chassis balance in the S30. Going fast around a race track has more to do with driver skill and chassis/suspension setup then horsepower. Its so common to see big horsepower cars get passed by car's with less then half the power that its a running joke with racers. Geez! How much do you weigh?

175 or 200 lb. into 500 lb. in within a 6" (typical) stack height is a pretty steep rise.

I would depend on the displacement/stroke limitations imposed by the rules.

Don't just push the hose on the fitting. Add a clamp. I always use an XRP Push-On clamp and sometimes use their flat wound internal spring to prevent collapsing. http://www.xrp.com/XRPCatalog.pdf

Sandpaper on a stick. Wiping cloths on a stick.

They would be nice but they don't exist here in the US and I haven't heard of an importer making them available.

Because 99.9% of the street/track car owners never, ever adjust anything on their suspension. They generally want one setting that works perfect on the street and perfect on the track. What they settle on is something that works OK on the street and keeps them out of trouble on the track.

I kinda covered it above. In the Formula 1 world everything in the combustion process is optimized to the point that any bore size over 98mm doesn't produce any more power (IMP) and reduces thermal efficiency (more fuel, not more power). The reason is that there isn't enough time (10,000 to 18,000 rpm) for the flame front to complete its job if it has to travel through a larger combustion chamber. NASCAR ran into similar issues with their 10,000+ rpm engines. More fuel but not much (if any) more power. This also translates into lower rpms if the combustion process is highly optimized and is true for very large diesel engines (MTU and MAN).

In the context of Formula 1, its true. I just checked another related article in Race Tech and it comes to some similar conclusions. There are negatives associated with a V12 layout (length of the engine, additional weight) that sometimes offset the additional power provided.

Its 52mm. The confusion comes from me by way of Koni where they list it as M51 but its really M52.

Given equal technology, there's not a significant difference in IMP (indicated mean pressure) based on bore size. IMP is strictly related to volumetric and thermodynamic efficiency. Larger bores lead to reduction in thermodynamic efficiencies as mentioned above. Larger bores do increase volumetric efficiency (larger valves and ports) but the thermodynamic difficulties tend to trade off the VE gains. FYI... I'm pulling my discussion points from a great article in Racecar Engineering covering the design of Formula 1 engines. These engines have a bore/stroke ratio of .4 - typically a 98mm bore and a 40mm stroke for a V12. A V8 using the same bore/stroke ratio would need even larger bores. FYI2... I'm assuming equal rpm, but if we don't assume that, then more cylinders have an even greater advantage.

Its real simple guys: two (or four) more cylinders providing power during the 720 degrees of crank revolution needed to complete one Otto cycle. Friction losses from rings and cylinder walls are basically the same (a 4" bore 8 cylinder has 100.66" of cylinder wall/ring circumference and a 2.67" bore 12 cylinder has 100.53" of cylinder wall/ring circumference assuming same stroke - if we assume same bore then stroke is reduced which still gives equal friction due to stroke distance differences).

OK, here's where you're going to have a problem. Competitive where? What rule set are you building the car to? That decision will, more then anything else, determine what changes you can make and whether the car will be competitive. HPDE and Open Track days are not competition and you can't use them to compare with any other car. You have no idea how hard the other drivers are pushing their cars or their skill level. Passing a brand new ZR1 Corvette or even lapping during one open track session is completely meaningless. Are you serious about "Competition" or do you just want to brag to your buddies about passing that ZR1 Corvette?

Current F1 engine technology has hit a bore size limit of about 98mm (3.89") where anything more decreases thermodynamic efficiency. The combustion process is very time based and a larger bore requires more crank angle to achieve a complete and efficient burn. Power and fuel economy falls off beyond 98mm with the current ignition and fuel delivery technology available in F1. But this isn't the "And...?" I'm looking for.

And... ?

Given the same displacement and the same levels of technology, why would a V12 engine make more power then a V10 or a V8 engine?

Sunrise Z in Glendale. 818-240-1594

Its like the old joke about a group of guys being chased by the bear. You don't have to outrun the bear, you just have to outrun at least one other guy. Unfortunately, in this case, you can't actually see who is closest to the bear. What's worse is when the ******* is one of the driver's on your team and he won't listen. Almost got sucked into a LeMons team that had one big roaring ******* on it (the money man). Did a test at Streets and quickly learned that this team wasn't going to complete the race with the money man in the driver's seat. I withdrew from the team (for that reason and because I was the only one that knew how to turn a wrench) and they didn't last past the money man's first stint behind the wheel. My first clue should have been when the money man said, "We're doing this for my wife's charity (CHOC) and we're hoping you could donate a full roll cage, all the maintenance and work on the car, and tow it to the track for us." My reply ("No!") seemed to really piss him off.

These are some cars that I know use gland nuts: Toyota AE86 Corolla Toyota MR2 Nissan Sentra/240SX BMW 320is Scion Xd Most Rabbits, Golfs, Scirrocos, Polos, etc. Gland nuts are common on Mac and Chapman strut cars.

Yes, but you will need to inspect them regularly. Regarding the R180, it will work fine at around 300 ft. lbs. of torque if you install a good LSD and change the fluid frequently. A diff cooler helps.

Just noticed this. Be careful about ride height with floating side axles. Its common for swing arm cars that are run very low to pull out an axle that's not retained