tube80z Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Another option may be use strut tubes from a 240 for the top half of the shortened 280 strut assemblies. The guy who is going to do the welding for me says he can do it, in spite of the difference in diameters. This would allow me to use the beefier 280 hubs AND the Bilsteins with the 240 gland nuts. I will have to buy a new set of threaded collars, since the 280 collars will be too large. Can't you simply cut the top of the 240 and use the 280 bottom? If you ever do any compliance testing you will rethink the idea of using the smaller 240 diameter tubes. Cary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Can't you simply cut the top of the 240 and use the 280 bottom? If you ever do any compliance testing you will rethink the idea of using the smaller 240 diameter tubes. I'm confused. I thought that is what he said he was going to do. What's with the compliance testing bit? Fill us in please... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tube80z Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I'm confused. I thought that is what he said he was going to do. What's with the compliance testing bit? Fill us in please... I meant the just the threaded upper section leaving the majority of the 280 tube in place. The compliance testing bit is about what happens when you pull or push the struts together. In the motec seminar I took a few years back Claude showed us slides of a contraption that measured forces on wheel pairs. The idea was to push and pull across the axle and then the wheel base. You measure toe and camber changes based on this and can create force/deflection curves. I used my harbor freight porta power and a pull ram with a gauge. Not as high tech but it was enough to see that the 240 strut tubes deflected quite a bit. My guess is sticky tires on them can cause them to lose about half a degree of camber. The 280 tubes were less then a third of that. And simulated braking loads showed the TC boxes to move a lot on my car. A simple brace really made the car feel more stable. Anyway, that's the basic idea. The motec guys used a fancy load cell and hooked it all up to a computer to generate curves. The strut tube deflection was interesting for me to see. I'd guess similar results could be seen from different wheels with regards to camber loss. Something most of us don't think or worry about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I used my harbor freight porta power and a pull ram with a gauge. Not as high tech but it was enough to see that the 240 strut tubes deflected quite a bit. My guess is sticky tires on them can cause them to lose about half a degree of camber. The 280 tubes were less then a third of that. I had the idea that dave was going to do just what you said and use just the threaded portion of the 240 tube. Interesting bit about the 280Z struts. I don't suppose you tested any that had a gusset between the spindle and the strut tube... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preith Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Interesting bit about the 280Z struts. I don't suppose you tested any that had a gusset between the spindle and the strut tube... I was just going to ask the same. It wouldn't take much to weld a 1/8 x 3/4 rib the length of the strut, to the bottom of the spring perch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tube80z Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I don't suppose you tested any that had a gusset between the spindle and the strut tube... No these both were unmodified. Maybe the gusset will do the trick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehelix112 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Hey, I ordered mine from http://www.mjmautohaus.com/, and they have come with two things, B30-629-Q1 as mentioned, but also a female threaded thing into which the 629-Q1 screws with B30-627-B1 stamped on it. Here is a pic of the two. The 627-B1 also has the seal on the strut piston tube, however, surely two are not required? If only one is required, I will be drilling/grinding/whatevering out the centre of this one, and welding the B1 to the top of the cut down strut for the Q1 thread to screw into. Thoughts? Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 The one with the female threads is the correct nut for the intended application, VW Rabbit. Also, as explained on p13, it is the A1 that fits the 240Z housing. The Q1 doesn't fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehelix112 Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Jon, I have a 280z in the states. Really should update my signature. The female threaded carrier as a tapered end that goes down to 50mm. This bit will fit inside the top of a sectioned 280z strut, and with removing the inner bit such that the entire component can fit in and out, I plan on welding that carrier to the top of the strut, as opposed to ordering an A1 nut, and sourcing 240z tops. Would this be bad for any reason? Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tube80z Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 The female threaded carrier as a tapered end that goes down to 50mm. This bit will fit inside the top of a sectioned 280z strut, and with removing the inner bit such that the entire component can fit in and out, I plan on welding that carrier to the top of the strut, as opposed to ordering an A1 nut, and sourcing 240z tops. Would this be bad for any reason? We're looking to do the same thing. I don't see any issues with this. Cary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehelix112 Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Excellent. Thanks. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehelix112 Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Just wanted to let you guys know of a place to get the P30-0032 bilsteins: http://www.mjmautohaus.com/catalog/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=21&products_id=1995 They're not a technical shop workshop by any means, but they're the cheapest I found, and have good customer service. I brought 4 shocks from them, and upon delivery found one was missing its boot, the allen key on the end of the piston was corroded, no instructions etc etc. I shipped it back to them and they shipped me a new one no questions asked. Might be worth a shot for you guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 I used my harbor freight porta power and a pull ram with a gauge. Not as high tech but it was enough to see that the 240 strut tubes deflected quite a bit. My guess is sticky tires on them can cause them to lose about half a degree of camber. The 280 tubes were less then a third of that. And simulated braking loads showed the TC boxes to move a lot on my car. At what load did you start to see deflection? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tube80z Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 At what load did you start to see deflection? I used 200 pounds for pre-load and then went in 100 pound increments. I had envisioned going up to 1000 to 1200 pounds. I got chicken well before that. I did most of my measuring at about 600 pounds of load (800 actual). That 600 pounds is applied at the same level as the tire contact patch. Things moved much more than I would have thought. I could see changes at 300 pounds (500 total load) between the two struts. The suspension and wheel need to be constrained when doing this or the car will simply raise up as you pull the wheels together. Cary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EMWHYR0HEN Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 I couldn't find the exact info but, does anybody know the spring rate range when using the Bilstein P30-0032's? Also, anyone with these struts installed want to chime in on their performance?? Is the non- adjustable aspect a big downside? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katman Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 Well lessee, P30-0032's (revalved 70/30) were used on the ERadatz/Kemp Heuman EP 240Z that came in second at the RunOff's one year with Grayson Upchurch driving. Seemed to stick pretty good. Springs were in the 400 lb/in range. But that's revalved. Stock they fit a VM rabbit or something like that. I missed the last 10 or so pages of this thread, are you needing the shortened aspect of the P30-0032's? 'Cause Bilstein makes a shock for the stock strut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EMWHYR0HEN Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 That's good news i'm running spring rates in the lower 300's hoping maybe I wouldn't have to revalve. I'm replacing my blown older version 8610's and hoping that the Bilsteins have similar dimentions which means something around a 15'' body with 6'' stroke. Edit: I did some searching around in the VW rabbit forums for some specs on the Bilstein F4-P30-0032-MO and found some possible dimentions. Body length: 12.52'' Body diameter: 1.5'' Extended length: 20.12'' Compressed length: 13.86'' Stroke: 6.25'' Anyone want to confirm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rxsleeper Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 I can measure mine this evening if you can wait. Don't forget that the gland nut is different since the Bilstein shaft is larger diameter than OEM. This also changes how you attach the strut since the upper perch/isolator will need to accomadate the larger shaft as well. Hi Katman! Check your work email Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rxsleeper Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Cartridge is 12 1/4" long. Overall length is 21 1/2". I have been told you will want at least 4" of bump. YMMV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preith Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Well lessee, P30-0032's (revalved 70/30) were used on the ERadatz/Kemp Heuman EP 240Z that came in second at the RunOff's one year with Grayson Upchurch driving. Seemed to stick pretty good. Springs were in the 400 lb/in range. But that's revalved. Katman, I've been meaning to ask you about this. Not to put you on the spot, but you seem to have conflicting information regarding spring rates on the EP car. I Back in '05 you originally posted in response to JohnC's question about 500lb rates ont that car: Checked my notes and we ultimately ran lower spring rates on the EP car with the slicks than we had on the ITS car that won the ARRC twice, so I stand corrected. We had tried higher and didn't like it. 400F/350R on the ITS car, 'bout 100lb/in lower on the EP car. Before we got the ShockTek's we only went 325/285 on the ITS car. This would mean the rates were in the 300F/250R neighborhood for the EP car, is this correct, and if so, was again this with the 300/100 valving? What I find even more confusing is on page 6 someone asked you about this very setup and you suggested against it. Also 70/30 is a far cry from 300/100, please explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.