2ManyZs

Cutting the bump stop on the top insulator only does one thing. It increases the amount of suspension travel available. When you put on lowering springs such as these, you only reduce the distance between the spring perches with a shorter spring, therefore you have less available travel. By cutting a small amount of the bump stop on the top, you increase the distance the strut cartridge can compress before the strut housing hits the bump stop. It has nothing to do with the amount of lowering you get, that is all dependant on the type of spring you choose. The only other way to increase the amount of wheel travel is to shorten the strut housing and use a shorter strut insert and move the lower spring perch upwards or use coil-overs. The bottom bump steer spacer may not be as critical with a small 1 inch lowering as it is with a large amount of lowering such as you would get from other lowering springs or coil-overs. I believe since the tie rods and rack are in front of the control arm it affects the Z more than cars where the tie rods or rack are behind the control arm. hmsports is correct in his assessment of why you need to use the bump steer spacers. You could try a one inch lowering without them to see if the handling is affected in such a way as to make the car a handful. The understeer problem will be exxagerated by the sway bars you choose also, so with or without the bump steer spacers is likely to need two totally different sway bar set ups. Unfortunately after an hour of searching I still can't find the drawing of the suspension geometry and how it is affected by lowering. I think it may have been in an old parts catalog, perhaps one of MSA's old catalogs.

You have a good start on what you need to do to as far as solving the problem. Couple other things to check would be the wheel bearings, are they tightened correctly? You could also have a warped rotor or dragging caliper that is exaggerating a slight looseness in the wheel bearing. The inner tie rod ends could be suspect. Or the amount of play in the rack itself. The T/C rod bushings shouldn't be doing this during cornering since the forces of cornering are being put on the new bushings (ie. the control arm is pushed back towards the mount) so if the bushings are tightened correctly this probably isn't the problem. If you have the same tire and wheel combo front and rear you could try swapping them front to back just to see if there is any difference. If the steering wheel doesn't shake under braking, it isn't the caliper rotor problem. During braking is when you would also see the T/C rod bushing question answered. Most likely it is either wheel bearing torque or possibly condition if they are not new, or it's in the steering rack inner tie rod ends or rack itself.

I had a set many years ago, so if my memory serves me I believe it's 1 3/4 pipe.

The bumpsteer spacers are for regaining the proper geometry in the front suspension but its not the camber, it's the roll center. They do decrease the bumpsteer also but at the same time the move the roll center of the car back into its proper place. Lowering the center of gravity that much puts the roll center of the car below ground. The spacers bring it back above ground where it is supposed to be. The stock suspension has a very low CG to begin with and lowering the suspension will lower it too much. Wish I could find the diagram I had that explains it. Have to look around here and see if I can post it.

If the intake you have from the 72 is complete with all the linkages and hoses you won't need to leave anything behind from the 73 manifold. Just unhook the carb linkage at the clevis where it connects to the long shaft from the firewall and use the linkage form the 72. The only thing that might possiby be a little different is the water hose that goes from the front of the intake to the thermostat housing and perhaps the short rubber hose that connects to the transfer pipe around the back of the head. You should be able to use the 72 hoses with no problem if you have them, if not you can get them from MSA for a reasonable price. I would suggest using new ones anyway as they can be a PITA to replace when the itake and all its hardware is on the car, especially the front one. Of course you'll need a new intake gasket, and some new vacuum hoses but that should be about all you need.

These mirrors may have been on a Toyota 2000GT but they definately aren't the original style for the Z. The Z mirrors had a solid stalk with no holes. :disappoin They would probably still look good on a Z, but if you are trying to re-create the original style or look, these won't do it.

Not only has he put a lot of work into his car just so he could show it at the National Convention. He has worked on getting us as a group a lot of really great pics of the cars at the show. The best part of the pics is the fact he took the time to include the year of the car and the owners name. It's great to be able to put a persons name to the cars we all want to drool over. Good job Ken! :classic:

If you are ging to use the earlier 72 carbs, I would suggest using the 72 intake with it. I believe the 73 intake is close to the same but the 72 will have less ports to plug off. Not sure, but I think since it was an automatic car it will also have a dual point distributor(or did all the 73's have dual points). You might want to swap that out for an earlier single point out of a manual trans car. The second set of points were used to retard the timing if my memory is correct. All the intake parts from the 72 should bolt right up to the engine with no problem.

Sounds like you just may have the contacts to solve part of the mystery here. I'm 95% sure the unit that is in my R-200 was from a Subaru. I know that some models of Subaru's did have the R-200 in them, but have never been able to track which ones it may have been that got the Torson unit from the factory. Perhaps with your contacts, you could find out by researching possible Subaru cars that came with the Torson, and then which ones came with the R-200 rear differential. If it proves to be correct they may already have a Torson unit we can get to put in the R-200's, but I am quite certain there is not enough room in the R-180 case for the Torson unit.

You think your picture looked bad? You should have seen mine!:devious: I'm gonna get somebody for this!

You better check and see if you are in there, I was.

I don't know about anyone else, but this is going too far. Is there no privacy in this world anymore? What were these politicians thinking when they allowed this? Go to http://www.license.shorturl.com This must be stopped!!!!

I agree, you definately need a little restriction to allow for the heat transfer in the radiator. Maybe with an aluminum radiator you could get away with not using a thermostat since the aluminum would allow faster transfer of heat than the stock radiator core. It could be possible you need to run an elctrice fan that kicks in at a slightly lower temperature also. Double check the temp gauge, and maybe replace the temp. sensor to be sure of what the actual temperature is. Especially if you are still using the stock electrical gauge. A mechanical gauge on a temporary hook-up would be an ideal way to get to the root of the problem.

Ya gotta like a problem that is easily fixed and not too complicated. Turn a couple screws and unhook a couple wires and its done. Glad it turned out the way it did. It could have been a "head-scratcher" that took a while.

I believe all you need to remove them from the case is a slide hammer on the flange. As fas as the bearing being pressed on, that part I'm not sure about. I know the bearing is pressed on the pinion shaft, it would seem these would be too.

First off, the 240 tach is the more innacurate of the tachs in the early cars. That's one reason most people update to a 280 tach as its a bit more accurate. The regulator may be making the difference in the gauge reading. It is trying to make up for the weak alternator. I'm not sure about that, but it seems logical. A 50 amp alternator should be OK, since the factory rating is 45 and it's possible you won't get the full 50 anymore than you might get the full 45 out of a factory replacement. They are rated at that, they may not always provide that rating.

The factory rating for the alternator is 45 amps, so if your is only putting out 30 it is a bit weak. So being that it isn't supposed to be 50 at least you know yours is not as bad as you thought. I'd change the voltage regulator first, check to see what the gauge does then, and if it still acts up then change the alternator.

Well, it definately sounds like the side bearings and races are the cause of most of the problem. However, if it has been like this for any lenght of time I would definately check it out. It may have caused some problems in the spyder gears. If the ring gear and pinion don't show any abnormal wear you may be OK there, but the spyder gears may have taken a beating. I'm not trying to be the bearer of bad news, only trying to make sure you check more than the obvious problem so you don't have more in the future. No sense in spending money to fix one problem and have damage that will end up defeating what you are doing now.

Tell her we are dying to know so we can find out if there are anymore available. Please?:cheeky: Tell her we won't tell you where she got it.

Before you pull it apart to change the side bearings, you might want to take off the back cover to check to see if it may be the ring and pinion itself that is causing the clunking. It is entirely possible this could be the problem and the noise is just being transferred to the side of the case. Or it could be worn spyder gears which would transfer directly to the axle shaft. It might even be a pinion bearing. A little more investigation would be a good idea before you disassemble it, just to be sure you have the right parts to repair it. I haven't changed the output shaft bearings, but if I'm not mistaken I believe you would need to remove the flange retaining bolts and use a slide hammer to pull them. Shouldn't be too difficult, but to be safe you should at least pull the rear cover to look inside and see if the problem goes any deeper into the diff, if they have been bad for a long period of time they could have caused other damages inside.

Guess that all depends on who you work with!:cross-eye

Hmm, is right, this is an odd problem to say the least. Well, I guess we can rule out the ignition control module. Now what is going through my mind is a short of some type either in the tach itself, or in the wiring off the coil. Seems very odd the tach acts that way just when the engine develops a problem. I would suggest a thorough check of all the wiring form the coil to the tach and perhaps even trying it with the tach unhooked. I've never heard of one having this problem before but I guess there is always one to be the first. Might want to double check the charging system just to be sure there isn't more than one thing that is contributing to the problem. I'm not as good on electrical problems as some of the other members, so somewhere we'll find the answer. :stupid: After reading his instructions on the site I'm wondering about another thing, is it possible your coil is one that is designed for the ballast resistor? If you have taken out the ballast resistor and used a coil that is designed for one that will foul the coil and cause it to burn out. I'm not sure what you have done so I'm just asking to get all the answers to questions that are running around in my semi-empty skull. Another question that may not be anything, but where did you connect the tach lead to? It should run off the + side of the coil if my memory is correct. If it is anywhere else this could be where the problem lies. It should have it own separate wire and not be piggy-backed to anything.

MSA's order number is 800-633-6331 Tech help line is 714-639-2620

Well, the front toe-in is really the only thing that is adjustable on a stock Z. It should be somewhere between 2-5 mm toe -in, or .08-.20 in. The front camber and caster are non-adjustable as are the rears unless you have installed the concentric camber bushings. You might be able to change the front caster slightly by tightening or loosening the mount on the T/C rod, but the results would probably be negligible. My old Haynes manual gives the camber settings for the front as 50' + or - 30', and the castor as 2degrees 55' plus or minus 30'.

Since Jegs is mostly into NHRA and drag racing I would say their cage kits are not SCCA approved. I doubt for the price they are asking if they are even DOM tubing. Not only that, but a 12 point cage wouldn't be legal in SCCA unless you were going to run EP or GT class. I only say this because there is no sense in buying something only to find out that it isn't legal to use even in an SCCA sponsored autocross if that is your intention. If all you want is a roll bar in a street car it might be OK, but I would recommend DOM tubing for the strength even for just a roll bar. Beware of buying from someone that is not in the business of selling parts for the type of racing or whatever you planning to do.