lumberjackj Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 I have already searched on this topic and cant find anything...so here we go.... I dont know what percentage of people replace the rubber strut mounting insulators on these lovely Z cars, but I have been trying to find other options as far as mounting, but almost every road seems to lead to camber plates.... Im not trying to cut up my Z for camber plates, and am planning on building it as a mild daily driver street/autoX car, so I dont feel the need to go "all out" but simply want stiffer bushings. As of now, the strut mounts on the rear (maybe the front too for all i know) make clicking noises and if you put a finger on the strut while driving, you can feel the movment of the strut independantly from the car/mount... NOW, instead of replacing these with stock mounts, i would like to replace them with stiffer units that wont allow the suspension to move around as much....and this is where I come to the problem....I have scoured the net looking for some kind of stiffer or aftermarket mounts but have had no luck.... And from the info I have gathered, not many people have this issue or maybe the part is good enough in its stock form?, "why fix it if its not broken" kind of thing... thats why im asking for other peoples opinions....what do YOU think. Honest opinions please. I would be looking to have the same mount style made, but with a stiffer (80 durometer) rubber, but of course to have these things made, I would need gauge the interest of such a part..... thanks!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cygnusx1 Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 I wonder if you could just mold a urethane part that could replace the rubber part. The old rubber would need to be cut or burned out similar to the mustache bar procedure, and then the urethane part could be installed. I haven't had one of these apart in quite a long time, so I don't have a handle on the function/construction of the beast. I will have my 240Z ones out in a few days though. I think there might be a problem with securing a urethane insert into the metal shell. Good idea though...with the price of the stock ones, it is time for a better one to come along at a lower cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 The problem is that the stiffer you make them the more they impart a side load onto the strut shaft. I haven't got any testing to say this stiffness is OK, but that one is unacceptably stiff, but my general impression is leave it alone or if you want something stiffer get a camber plate which has no give, but still allows free range of motion without binding or side loading the strut, via the monoball. John Coffey has posted about strut failure issues when using the MSA poly pieces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumberjackj Posted November 18, 2009 Author Share Posted November 18, 2009 Good idea though...with the price of the stock ones, it is time for a better one to come along at a lower cost. Yea, I was looking to buy a set for my car and at the tune of $200, I thought there would be a better option for that price. Also, the mount would be an ALL NEW piece, not a modified stock part, everything vulcanized together, not "filled" factory stuff. I will be coming across a few used mounts that I will be cutting up to see if the design can be improved at all. I can also post my pics up here. thanks for the feedback! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehelix112 Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 The reason its rubber is so that it does not resist the movement of the strut outwards during bump. A camber place, say from TTT, with a spherical bearing has even less resistance, and hopefully, a little more range. You want as little resistance to movement as possible I think. Its its superstiff you will just bend the dampers and wear them out awfully quickly. Dave Edit: Dammit, beaten to the punch but Jon. Unsurprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumberjackj Posted November 18, 2009 Author Share Posted November 18, 2009 The problem is that the stiffer you make them the more they impart a side load onto the strut shaft. I haven't got any testing to say this stiffness is OK, but that one is unacceptably stiff, but my general impression is leave it alone or if you want something stiffer get a camber plate which has no give, but still allows free range of motion without binding or side loading the strut, via the monoball. John Coffey has posted about strut failure issues when using the MSA poly pieces. Yea, I understand by making them too stiff, you cause failures in other places, but at what point if stiffer considered too stiff? I have not measured a new oem mount for density but I would ::GUESS:: it would be in the 40-50 durometer range... MSA makes?/made? poly strut mounts? I just did a quick search and didnt find much, but the dreaded 500 post Suspension FAQ came up, so it may be buried in there somewhere? thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 http://www.thezstore.com/page/TZS/CTGY/PSDC08 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumberjackj Posted November 18, 2009 Author Share Posted November 18, 2009 thanks for the link! So does anyone run a pretty wild setup with on stock insulators? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h4nsm0l3m4n Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 I actually did this very thing. I wanted to lower the nose of my car without cutting springs, or going to coilovers. So I decided to make new isolators instead. I used a piece of aluminum lathed into the shape of a hat, with a hole down the center and holes to bolt to the stock mounting holes in the chassis. I pressed a monoball bearing inside it to allow room for the strut to pivot during compression. The result basically works like a non-adjustable camber plate. I was a little uneasy about doing this since noone else had done it but I've taken the assembly apart a number of times to check for any noticable wear and haven't seen any areas of issue. Seems to work well enough until I get some coilovers. I can post pictures later if youre interested, I just dont have them now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 So does anyone run a pretty wild setup with on stock insulators? 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 I used a piece of aluminum lathed into the shape of a hat, with a hole down the center and holes to bolt to the stock mounting holes in the chassis. I pressed a monoball bearing inside it to allow room for the strut to pivot during compression. The result basically works like a non-adjustable camber plate. I was a little uneasy about doing this since noone else had done it but I've taken the assembly apart a number of times to check for any noticable wear and haven't seen any areas of issue. Seems to work well enough until I get some coilovers. I can post pictures later if youre interested, I just dont have them now. Sounds like Tom Holt's solution he fabbed up for his autox car: http://sth2.com/Z-car/rear-upper.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h4nsm0l3m4n Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Sounds like Tom Holt's solution he fabbed up for his autox car:http://sth2.com/Z-car/rear-upper.jpg Yeah thats very similar to mine, didn't know anyone else tried it. Now I feel better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumberjackj Posted November 19, 2009 Author Share Posted November 19, 2009 Yeah thats very similar to mine, didn't know anyone else tried it. Now I feel better. VERY NICE! Any other people interested in these things? We have a couple CNCs in house, and really like this design.... And Ill go even a step further and ask if anyone has drawn this up already in SolidWorks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cygnusx1 Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 You could even use a rubber "washer" in between the strut tower and the hat to absorb some NVH. BTW Yes, the eccentric LCA bushings give you about 1 degree negative camber. If you lower the car another 1/2" from stock, you pick up another 1/2 degree negative camber because the control arms extend outward as they get closer to horizontal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s!lvias30 Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 You could even use a rubber "washer" in between the strut tower and the hat to absorb some NVH. BTW Yes, the eccentric LCA bushings give you about 1 degree negative camber. If you lower the car another 1/2" from stock, you pick up another 1/2 degree negative camber because the control arms extend outward as they get closer to horizontal. so your saying there is now way of making your car lower and stiffer than that with out messing up the camber adjustment ??? cuz i have a 1978 280z with 240z front lowering springs and rear are 280z lowering springs and the smaller strut mountings all around . i i want to lowers the car much more without having to buy coilvers lol i know its not possible but how much lower can i go ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 so your saying there is now way of making your car lower and stiffer than that with out messing up the camber adjustment ??? cuz i have a 1978 280z with 240z front lowering springs and rear are 280z lowering springs and the smaller strut mountings all around . i i want to lowers the car much more without having to buy coilvers lol i know its not possible but how much lower can i go ??? Search please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shika805 Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 ^not much... your gonna mess with some "travel" issues with your struts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumberjackj Posted November 24, 2009 Author Share Posted November 24, 2009 I have got some great info from a few people on here, so I am going to see what I can do about getting these made. First I need to draw them up, and get a cost analysis figured out... about how much per pair.... I was also thinking about making them with optional "spacers" with longer bolts so you could use them to either lower your car, or OEM height, or 280z rear height, whatever you want to run....in 1/2 inch increments... what do you guys think....possible waste of time? Any other ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbore468 Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 I have got some great info from a few people on here, so I am going to see what I can do about getting these made.First I need to draw them up, and get a cost analysis figured out... about how much per pair.... I was also thinking about making them with optional "spacers" with longer bolts so you could use them to either lower your car, or OEM height, or 280z rear height, whatever you want to run....in 1/2 inch increments... what do you guys think....possible waste of time? Any other ideas? Would be interested in a pair of stock hight mounts for 280Z rear struts, with 1/8" - 1/4" longer mounting studs to accomodate a strut tower brace bracket. Let us know what you come up with. Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70 Cam Guy Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 The spacers might even be useful so you can set your preload/sag and adjust the ride height seperate from that. I am used to static sag from bikes, not sure if the same transfers to cars I am curious, I wasn't planning on cutting my towers yet for camber plates. This could be an interesting option 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.