johnc

Just got an e-mail back from Gordon Benson with a mixed dyno chart of the 8610-1149 and the 8611-1257. He says: So, that means the rebound valving on the 8610 was changed to match the rebound valving on the 8611 double. That is a big change from 8610-1149: 1. The 8610-1149 rebound full hard is about 1600nm at velocity .330mps while the 1257 rebound full ahrd is about 2400nm at velocity .330mps. That's 33% stiffer rebound at full hard. 2. The 8601-1149 rebound at full soft is about 600nm at velocity .330mps while the 1257 at full soft is about 1250nm at velocity .330mps. So, that means the rebound valving range on the 8610-1437RACE has been moved up about 33% compared to the 1149. That's probably fine and would allow contorl of higher rate springs but it also means that it probably won't work for springs rates any less then about 300 lb. in. From this we can assume that the compression did not change on the 8610-1437RACE from what was on the 8610-1149. Checking the dyno charts confirms that there really isn't any change in compression damping for the 8610-1437RACE compared with the 1149. Its still a bit low (around 250 to 500nm in the .132 to .198mps range where cars usually work) so revalving to around 750nm is still a good idea. A minor change but one to keep in mind when sourcing camber plates.

Just got an e-mail back from Gordon Benson with a mixed dyno chart of the 8610-1149 and the 8611-1257. He says: So, that means the rebound valving on the 8610 was changed to match the rebound valving on the 8611 double. That is a big change from 8610-1149: 1. The 8610-1149 rebound full hard is about 1600nm at velocity .330mps while the 1257 rebound full ahrd is about 2400nm at velocity .330mps. That's 33% stiffer rebound at full hard. 2. The 8601-1149 rebound at full soft is about 600nm at velocity .330mps while the 1257 at full soft is about 1250nm at velocity .330mps. So, that means the rebound valving range on the 8610-1437RACE has been moved up about 33% compared to the 1149. That's probably fine and would allow contorl of higher rate springs but it also means that it probably won't work for springs rates any less then about 300 lb. in. From this we can assume that the compression did not change on the 8610-1437RACE from what was on the 8610-1149. Checking the dyno charts confirms that there really isn't any change in compression damping for the 8610-1437RACE compared with the 1149. Its still a bit low (around 250 to 500nm in the .132 to .198mps range where cars usually work) so revalving to around 750nm is still a good idea. A minor change but one to keep in mind when sourcing camber plates.

If anyone has the skills to pull an image out of a PDF file, I'll send the dyno graph for the 1149. Send me back the image and I'll host/post it here.

If anyone has the skills to pull an image out of a PDF file, I'll send the dyno graph for the 1149. Send me back the image and I'll host/post it here.

And Gordon told Bryan Lampe early this year that compression damping had been increased. Doug from Koni told Erik Messley that Koni changed both rebound and comrpession damping on the 8610-1149 to better meet the needs of the biggest market for those inserts (European VW racers). I have a shock dyno graph for the 1149. I'm going to try and get one for the 1437RACE.

And Gordon told Bryan Lampe early this year that compression damping had been increased. Doug from Koni told Erik Messley that Koni changed both rebound and comrpession damping on the 8610-1149 to better meet the needs of the biggest market for those inserts (European VW racers). I have a shock dyno graph for the 1149. I'm going to try and get one for the 1437RACE.

Yup, you are correct in all of your assumptions. If you shake the booster you might hear it bounce around inside. Get a small flashlight and a small part gripper thingy and you should be able to fish it out of the booster.

Ya never know... Actually, I just wanted to drive a Hybrid vehicle - one that burns both gasoline and rubber (credit Dodge adverising for that one).

I have little hope. Dodge screwed up the Charger (4 frickin' doors, JFC!) and given another two years they are bound to screw this one up too. Probably come in at 4,200 lbs, will only be available with an automatic, and the traction control, skid control, ABD, etc. won't allow a burnout.

One word - Hummer... You folks should be aware of how Motor Trend's Car/Truck of the Year Award is rumored to work (as told to me by an ex-editor): 1. The Editors pick the top few candiates from the list of eligable vehicles based on the criteria the Editors establish. 2. Each of those top vehicle manufacturers are contact by Primedia and asked to submit detailed proposals on how they plan to market the whole "Car/Truck of the Year" thing if they win the award. This includes manufacturer/vehicle print advertising in the periodicals owned by Primedia, excluding Motor Trend itself. By excluding Motor Trend from the marketing effort the Editors can claim editorial independence. 3. The winner is generally the manufacturer with the best marketing plan that promotes Motor Trend and the whole "Car/Truck of the Year" thing. If Primedia does not like the marketing plans submitted they will ask the winning manufacturer to resubmit before announcing the award. Again, that is the rumored process as told to me by an ex-Motor Trend editor. Maybe its all made up.

I've only welded AL with a MIG machine at the Lincoln Electric school and for one custom who wanted me to repair the AL bed on his tow truck. Follow all the advice listed above and make sure the AL is physically and chemically cleaned just before you start welding. Also: 1. Make a few practice passes without pulling the trigger. As said above, once you start you'll really be moving so you need to know where you're going. 2. The splatter spray/gel helps but after you dip or spray, weld on a scrap piece for a second or two. Sometimes the startup is a little funky until the splatter stuff gets off the wire. 3. Keep your head out of the fumes. MIG welding AL generates a lot of fumes and that stuff can't be good for you.

Stock pressure plate with a Nissan Comp 99996-E3040 225mm race clutch disc (solid 4 puck).

I've done a lot of instructing too. And the students that have the most fun are the ones who show up knwoing they suck. Every minute of the day they see themselves getting better and better and some even picture themselves, at least for a few weeks after the event, as the next Senna. The students that come in knowing they are the next Senna spend the next fews hours realizing they are the next Elmer Fudd and they spend the next weeks after the event knowing they are Elmer Fudd. See a pattern here?

Ack! Bolts for spacers? Ack!

I recently got in an e-mail discussion with a potential customer and I was reminded how people who have only driven on the street don't realize that driving at 10/10s on a race track is nothing like what they are used to. A quote from Stirling Moss: I guess the highlighted part is what most road drivers don't understand about driving a car at its limit on a race track. When you come off the brakes and turn-in to a corner, where you are going to exit the corner (and in what attitude) is pre-ordained. If the car is at the limit, you can not lift off the throttle, you can only apply so much throttle, and you can only steer a very little bit. If it could be physically possible, a person standing next to your car as it passes through the corner could, with one hand, probably shove the car off the outside of track.

There's an effort to reclassify the 240/260/280Z from BSP to DSP. The 240Z is completely outclassed at the national level in BSP and with the speed and power of the E36 325i in DSP the 240Z looks like a good match.

Now here is where I would heartily recommend a brake upgrade over the stock components!

I suggest you contact the guy that had the most success here in the US racing the 710: http://www.datsun.org/fairlady/DaveFrellsen.htm

A half-shaft is a half-shaft. Use whatever works with the diff you plan to install (stub axle or circlip).

OK, I'll calm down now and go back to working on a 240Z.

I'm not comparing stock for stock or anything else. I'm just listing the competition record for the 280ZX as I've been able to research it via the Internet. I'm disagreeing with people who say the 280ZX did not have good competition record. It had a frickin' outstanding competition record for the 9 years it was raced. The record was pretty much equal to the 240Zs competition record and to try and minimize or downplay it because the 280ZXs were build to different (and faster) class rules over the years is nuts. Look at the 280ZX's competition - Porsche 935s, Mazda RX7s, Trans-Am Mustangs, etc. A national championship in any racing class with any sanctioning body is a significant accomplishment whether there was one or one-hundred people on the team.

I don't understand why folks think the S130 didn't have a good competition record. 1. Is was the C Production national champ in 1979 (giving Nissan its 10th consecutive CP title) beating ALL the 240Zs entered. 2. It won IMSA GTU in 1979. 3. It won IMSA GTO in 1982. 4. It was the SCCA GT1 national champ in 1985, 1986, 1987 and 1988. 5. It was the SCCA GT2 national champ in 1984 and 1987. That's 9 national championships which I think is equal to the championships won by the 240Z.

BTW... the 1987 GT2 national championship winning 280ZX is for sale on eBay. SCCA GT@ CHamp 280ZX

Maybe not in SCCA, they sure cleaned up for 5 years straight in IMSA GTU and GTO: I would say the 280ZX's success in racing was very close to what the 240Z achieved.

An air bag is just another spring. Your car already rides around on four of them with a rate of about 40 lb. in. per psi. Increasing or decreasing pressure in the bag changes the spring rate and, surprisingly enough, affects ride height and response. One unfortunate side affects of this is: lowering the air pressure reduces ride height but it also reduces the spring rate - which is exactly what you don't want to happen as the car gets lower to the ground.