johnc

First, start using proper punctuation and capitalization in your posts. Run on sentences are a pain to read and will be deleted. Thanks.

Bullshit. Cryogenic treatment is a stress relieving process (primarily for steel) which further transforms a percentage of retained austenite into martensite. This increases the abrasion and chipping resistance of the steel and increases its toughness (ductility). But the 400% claim is complete crap.

Sell it or don't sell it.

The big issue with 100% camber recovery is when the suspension moves in bump when the car is not in a corner. Huge camber gains in ride led to directional instability and really crappy braking. Imaging braking in a straight line at 1G and then hitting a bump with one wheel that uses 1" of available travel. In my example above that would be 1 degree of negative camber gain and would instantly lock up that wheel. If its a rear wheel, you're going sideways. Adding anti-dive to control this increases bind in the suspension and is a catch 22. Do we increase anti-dive (and reduce bump compliance) to reduce gamber gain in bump so we can get better braking?

Think about what a 100% camber recovery suspension would do in ride, not roll.

The question is more fundamental then what you guys are asking about. Is designing a suspension to achieve 100% camber recovery in roll a good idea? Is so, why? If not, why? For example: if the car rolls 3 degrees in a corner and uses 2.5" of bump travel, is having the suspension gain 3 degrees of negative camber in 2.5" of bump travel (100% camber recovery) a good thing?

Take a shop vac and stuff the nozzle into the clutch fork opening as best you can. Try to suck out as much of the crap as possible. It probably won't hurt anything but if you have the time, try to vacuum it out.

Is it a good idea when designing a suspension to shoot for 100% camber recovery in roll? What is camber recovery you ask?: Talk amongst yourselves...

The CF hoods I sell come primed. I don't make then clear unless someone special orders it.

Devious marketing tactics have existed since time immemorial. Things are no worse now then when Kings claimed they were ruling by divine guidance. Engine oils are so good now that engine damage as a result of oil failure is basically non-existent. I have never, in 31 years of racing, ever heard or seen an engine that was damaged as a result of oil failure. I've seen engine damage where the oil got too hot, oil loss, oil starvation, too much oil, and too little oil, but never from oil "breakdown." Oils have gotten so good at protecting engines that the oil manufacturers can focus on side benefits like fuel mileage and horsepower gains.

No, I just think the test was focused on extreme pressure loads (gears, roller bearings) and RP does better under those circumstances then the other engine oils in the test. The bearings within an engine (rod, crank, cam, etc.) receive oil under pressure and rely on a oil film or wave to separate the parts from contact. That requires a different kind of performance then a GL4 or GL5. I'm not saying RP or Eneos is a good or bad engine oil, just that test quoted had some flaws in it and is pretty much invalid from an engine bearing perspective. EDIT: I was mistaken when I said Timken disavowed the test. They were not part of the actual test. The magazine used a Timken testing standard to compare the engine oils, which was designed to test GL4 and GL5 lubricants.

That Timken test from 2 years ago was invalidated by the magazine and Timken. The testing procedures used were for GL4 and GL5 type lubricants, not engine oil and both Timken and the magazine admit their mistake. Its not surprising that a test designed by Timken would be specific to GL4 and GL5 lubricants. When was the last time anyone put Timken bearings in their engine?

I guess everything wasn't fine.

Everything's fine I guess. Good luck.

Tie rod ends, steering rack bushings, steering coupler, wheel bearings, front end alignment. Check all of those.

At speeds somewhere above 100 mph sand traps are ineffective; the vehicle just skips across the surface. The FIA has been eliminating sand traps at all F1 certified race tracks and replacing them with asphalt or concrete. This gives the driver more runoff area and the ability to regain control or get the car slowed down a lot more before impact. Unfortunately, if the driver is incapacitated, the accidents can be much worse.

On any type of dedicated race car, you need to get to the battery a lot. Don't ask me why, that's just the way it is. If you put it behind the passenger seat, make sure you can fold the seat forward easily to get at the battery. If you put it in the rear of the car, make sure its not too buried in the rear 1/4 panels. And remember, battery cables, in the size needed for the lengths we're talking about, negate any weight savings from a smaller battery.

Don't get yourself hung up on weight distribution and cg. That's one of those finer points of making a car handle and with most production based vehicles you can only change, at most, 5% which isn't that big a deal. A stock Integra Type R (63% F/ 47% rear) on sticky tires will beat 90% of the 240Zs here on this site at an autocross.

Which tranny; TH400, Glide, R154, Getrag 6 Speed, Lenco 4 speed? Is the exhaust going down the driver or passenger side of the car? 3", 3.5", 4", or 5" exhaust? As you can see, there are a lot of variables to include in the design of the transmission mount. My answer to your question is: no.

You will need to do a lot of work to the rear suspension to make this car work. Aftermarket LCAs, lots of reinforcement to the LCA inner mounting, reinforced diff mounting... pretty much every part in the rear suspension needs to be modified and reinforced.

Mild steel, TIG welded, 3", true mandrel bends, merge collector, two O2 sensor bungs, straight through or Borla muffler, tight fit and no banging. About $1,100.00 installed.

Buy new shoes. The aluminum hubs are fine from a strength standpoint. Nothing to worry about.

99% sure its a linkage problem. Check the linkage at the transmission and work your way back up the steerring column to the shifter.

That's more like it.

Actually, it looks like those tires were run severely under inflated and are about to have a tread separation. The 5th picture down on the right side really shows it.