Jeffrey

no doubt my car needs to be lowered. This will be my winter project.

1974 260Z - Stock suspension that needs some work. 16x7 with 225/50/16 tires. Tires are too wide and rub in front when turning while backing up and on hard cornering in the rear.

Wow what a piece of crap article. Writting skills are lacking there not to mention research skills.

There is a connector under the steering wheel that comes from the switch. I lost my headlights this week and Blue "AKA Philip Pilgrim" checked the connector and my lights started working again. Check the connectors under the steering wheel.

Enigma I just checked into this and I'm sure my logic is correct. In tandem springs (side by side) they would each carry half the load. But when stacked together they each carry the same load of 448 lbs. There is no way around this. If I stack two books one atop the other and stand on the top book. The books are not sharing half my weight they are bearing all of my weight with the bottom book actually carrying a little more because it carries the weight of the top book as well. If I place them side by side and stand with one foot on each book then they share half my weight between them. The formula for stacked springs would be something like this. K combined=1/(1/k1 + 1/k2) where k1 is the spring rate of the first spring and k2 is the spring rate of the second spring. So K = 1/(1/448 + 1/448) = 224 lbs/in If you had two springs with differing rate say 500 lb/in and 225 lb/in you would get an actual assembly spring rate of: K=1/(1/500 + 1/225) = 155 lbs/in This would be the rate of the assembly until the 225 lbs/in spring bottoms out them the rate jumps to 500 lbs/in. So you can see the Cosmo dual spring set-up shouldn't really have an actual 448 lbs/in spring rate but a more sensible 224 lbs/in spring rate. They also seem to offer 280 lbs/in rate which in a dual spring set-up would equal a 140 lbs/in spring.

Interesting project Derek. We have a thread going about an L28 intake design on our club site. Stop in an have a look. I think you could model it after an RB26 design and end up with a great performing intake. I'm sure the Nissan engineers did plenty of design work while producing it. http://atlanticz.ca/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=98&board=25.0

There is no question the ground Control set is a known quality set-up. If money is tight and you want to experiment (be a guinea pig) go with the 280lbs/in set-up from Cosmo. I think I'm ordering a set to trial and review. If they suck I'll be brutally honest. I'll post the findings and a tech tip in Blue's Tech tips.

I was looking into the cosmo set-up as well. I've been talking with one of the cosmo reps and they are now offering 280lbs springs for there kits. One thing I realized while reading the posts here is that while 448 rates would be extremely high for a single spring set-up doesn't having a dual spring set-up affectively cut the spring rate in half? So the 448 lbs spring rate for each spring would feel more like a 224 lbs for the total assembly? If you have two 448 lbs/in spring sitting on top of each other and apply 448 lbs to the top one it will compress by one inch. The bottom one will also compress by one inch as it is also under the same 448 lb force. So now 448 lbs compresses the assembly by two inches and gives you a usable 224 lb/in spring rate. Make sense? So their new 280 lbs/in springs would act like a comfortable 140 lbs/in spring rate?? I may get a set just to look them over. I'd get the 280 lbs/in kit though.