Smoke them tyres

modifying and wear/failures...... http://www.willallra...sion.htm#wr35rr Hmmm......then there's the price list for all this stuff: http://www.willallracing.com.au/pricelist.htm

interesting tech photos....... http://www.importtun...r/photo_20.html http://www.importtuner.com/tech/impp_1011_sp_engineering_nissan_r35_gtr/index.html

Thinking of getting an aluminium bellhousing made to replace the std cast iron one in an old Falcon of mine. Will be to fit a 4.1 and TR3550 Tremec. Concentric hydraulic will be used so mechanical actuation not important. Anyone had any recent experiences of their product quality and service? Good, bad, or ok? Also, Castlemaine Rod Shop any good after Rod Hadfield sold it a few years back? Seems to be my only 2 choices unfortunately....unless someone can suggest otherwise?????

Swaybar stiffness table.......

An 044 IN THE TANK? The 044 is a noisy pump, and they seem to get even louder when they or things get hot. They would have to be the noisiest fuel pump I have ever known. Buy a Pierburg and you will wonder why the 044's are just so damn noisy.

This is why I have just pulled the rear bar off and left the std springs in there. .........and a tuning aid in an ideal world of helping to control the transition via rear damper compression adjustment...with a 4 way damper (which we would all like), by slightly increasing high speed compression. Interesting note here also from Dazz.....http://www.fordxr6turbo.com/forum/topic/68519-what-to-spend-my-suspension-on/page__st__54

Hi Dazz, Yep, supple is the go IMO. Rear wheel drive cars respond best in the real world to the setup you described for your rotary. I would try to get as much initial camber in the front as you can get into it. Then a reasonable amount of caster. The reason I say that is.....in most cornering situations, not enough cornering lock is put into the car for the caster to be of full benefit.......it arrives "too late" I suppose you could say. The other issue with too much caster is that you will get to a point where adding more caster will start to lose (decrease) initial neg camber. Just the mechanics of how the shimming on the UCA works. The centering is definitely nice, but in power steering cars, there is the hydraulics to overcome, not simply pure mechanical ratio. I can vouch for this after converting one of my old Falcons from manual to power steer. I still miss it. Yep, I would DEFINETELY replace the bushes with poly ones....this will make a significant increase in how the car feels and responds. The other thing it will do is make sure the fronts don't wear unevenly on the inside due to toe out under braking. Unfortunately, ALL manufacturers are at the NVH thing by fitting "quiet" (read sloppy) rubber bushes. Not optimum for sustaining wheel alignment under dynamic loads.

I like how methodically you are tackling this....not a black art at all. Knowledge, a plan, some thought and reflection. I think that the std height that Ford sets these at are as low as one should go for proper handling. Any lower reduces available suspension travel to what I feel is insufficient for suitable spring selection and damper control of the wheel. The lower ride height also increases the leverage that the c of g has on the instantaneous centre of the upper and lower control arms, promoting more spring rate/sway bar rate to be run that the front doesn't necessarily need. I think that the c of g in our cars is somewhat high.......the engine is quite tall with all that DOHC gear. My experience has been that the 520's seem to be made as an all rounder and really suit the heavier V8.....at least that is how my car feels with them currently fitted. At maximum cornering, there seems to be a degree of insufficient transfer and tyre slip is a little more than I would like. I am going to opt for a custom rate inbetween of around the 460in/lb. That would be a 23% increase over std (460-375/375).....which I think will be what the car needs (within 20lb/in or so). Just have to get off my arse, order and fit them. The 520's will demand a suitably sufficient increase in low speed rebound. The 520's would be a 39% increase over std..... The rear will feel like it squats/sits down on the rear somewhat when turned in. Yes, it does feel different initially. I think that is because most people are only used to the front doing something and the rear being completely passive. The real test with any of this is in SUSTAINED corner grip and repeatability. Why not use a bit of squat there? The control arm geometry on the rear is quite/very good and will give some real benefits in dynamic camber gain as the suspension compresses. This will offset the UCA pivot point moving out with body roll. In the end, the tyre will end up at the angle it needs to deliver maximum grip. This should help it stay in line when the extra grip is added to the front.

Other points to consider; -that a car can be "balanced" slow or fast -the rear end geometry is much better than the front. Combined with the less weight makes it the end with the most grip available I have always gone for the maximum grip at whichever end of the car I can get it at, and then get the other end to keep up with it, not de-tune the good end.

Disagree (politely) that the sway bar is an aid. All cars need some form of lateral control, whether the c of g is above or below the roll centre (the lever moment still exists). To me, it is extra spring rate in roll and only roll. Why add spring rate and destroy ride quality when it is not needed???? (ie. in a straight line). It is a natural balance to the (extra) loads applied by cornering. The reason why it should be taken off at the rear IMO is that with the fuel tank now being within the wheelbase, there is not much weight both over/beyond the axle and above the c of g to generate significant amounts of load transfer. A soft spring and no swaybar will work with these fixed factors in the car (especially when considering the exact opposite situation that the front has to deal with). Additionally, overly stiff spring rate will have an effect in the fore-aft plane by reducing that load transfer (and thus traction) during braking and acceleration, reducing the traction available for both of those phases. Weather factors such as overly hot, cold or wet will also be adversely affected as the tyre needs to be in it's temp window to generate sufficient grip to make the stiffer springs work in this narrower window. The tyre will not generate the grip it can if left to it's own devices. Less speed, more slip angle and more tyre wear will be the result. The golden rule is....the softest suspension necessary to do the job. If a wheel is verified to be coming off the ground with these overly heavy and under-tyred cars, I would suggest that something is wrong with setup. The V'8s can corner at much higher levels with more tyre and less weight and only go on 2 wheels with the aid of some corner edging...... Some of the camber figures quoted also have me somewhat perplexed. With or without with the camber kits (unless the car is ridiculously low) the max negative camber achievable is usually about 2 to 2.5 degrees with NO shims fitted. 4 degrees would need about/at least another cm of inward movement by the upper control arm in the static position. The corresponding toe in is also a good indicator of the camber being run. 3mm (1/8") of toe in per side will make a tyre wear evenly for -2.5 degrees of camber. I don't know that these cars will ever be "pointy" in the front end considering their weight and tyre width. The job is to get the maximum from the front and to help "unload" it with some weight transfer to the rear, not pile it back to the front with a stiff rear bar. It has enough to deal with.

Hi XR, The vid and the photo are very helpful. Looks like the Z only had the benefit of initial turn in. Looking at them, it confirms to me it needs some more front to rear transfer. The understeer after a few laps is also a good pointer of the front still carrying too much load.......it starts somewhere in the window, and then it gradually goes out of "balance"....ie the grip does not sustain itself equally at both ends of the car. It should maintain balance pretty well over a run if all tyres are seeing similar loads. Through the driver's seat when correctly set up, you should feel it squat somewhat in the rear when cornering load is applied. I say that because rear wheel drive passenger based cars basically corner on the outside rear with the front end left to induce cornering yaw. The rear pad situation....hmmm....not good at all. Those belong in the nearest lake.

Mine has had no filter for a long time. All my turbo cars have never had a filter in the line to the turbo. Haven't lost a turbo yet. No issues other than normal operation in the current vehicle as well. The oil is going through the main filter anyway, why filter it again? The screens are a built in failure point. The question is how many turbos have been saved and how many have been lost due to the screen? It would be a pretty high ratio that the screen HAS CAUSED turbo failure. I'll go with the odds in my favour. The usual failure sequence would be........The feed pipes coke up because the flow is already restricted by the filter. The low flow combined with the added heat from going over the exhaust manifold is too much for the oil to take, and it is then that it carbons/cokes up. From that point, turbo failure from lack of lubrication is inevitable. What I would hate is to pay a couple of grand just to fix a stock car back to stock

I believe there are some people around who will do car locks/ignition locks....google "car locksmiths". Don't think an ordinary locksmith would do it though. It probably just needs a $2 spring replaced in it. Got to be better than removing & replacing a steering column!

........too Hollywood

Love those 2 stroke engines......that inline four had some serious stoke for it's day. I just wish that the Japanese were still producing 500cc 2 stroke road bikes.......I would buy one tomorrow.

The front lower control arm bushes are shot, particularly the front ones. Replace them with poly ones. The wear is caused by the std rubber bushes compressing under braking load. The inevitable toe out under braking will wear the tyres like this in short order. I would also get the upper control arm bushes replaced whilst you are there. Careful what oil and quantity you put in the ZF....Castrol Transmax Z is the go. Power steering....Mobil 454 is the correct oil. Castrol SAF-XA is what I would be running in the diff. I also add some Nulon auto treatment (G60) in there to give it some extra shear strength. The auto treatment will not hurt the clutch pack inside the diff and will eliminate 2 things: -any chatter on tight turns -the need to buy the overpriced Lubrizol additive from Ford that they say these diffs should run

How long has it been tramping??? I would also look into getting the leaves re-arched the opposite way so that the leaf eyes pass over the top of their pivot bolts. This way they get less leverage and also maintain their arch better. Poly bushes will also help by minimising bush crush under load/unload. Tramp I suppose could be defined as many quick successive clutch "in/outs". It will always find the weakest link. The repeated impact of loading and unloading....you may as well hit it repeatedly with a hammer. Don't know why the manufacturers (like Dana) make these diffs with such open areas in their cases. Not surprised it broke there as on one side has full support and the far side only has 2 bridges to carry the load, and a bending load exerted by the pin in the middle. Quite a difference in strength/load capacity of the carrier from one side to the other. I would have a close look at the mating faces of the break. Beach or lap marks indicate initial failure point. Can you post some pictures of that? It may be harder to identify though, as it is a casting. Give me a beefed up 9 inch any day. They have their problems also, but their is meat in all the right areas in the basic design.

Bummer, bugger and . Bigger power is just so easily accessible in 4 valve engines. I can understand the angst. They can probably handle some more timing than std off boost to sharpen up response. Manufacturers typically take out a bit of timing down low to reduce combustion temperatures, and therefore lessen nitrous oxides. This helps them pass the emissions and drive by noise testing. But beware.....when modified, some people just don't realise how well these engines breath with the std head. The timing may even/probably will decrease as it comes on boost, even though the revs may have only increased by 2-4oo rpm or so. On boost, due to more power, they simply need less rate and total timing than a normally aspirated engine. Any turbo/supercharged engine should be considered a variable compression engine. A good rule of thumb I always use is this; Fueling and ignition timing follows the airflow curve (and therefore the torque curve) up to peak torque in the low and mid ranges, and then follows rpm to max revs. I ALWAYS turn the radio/stereo down when I stick it to a modified turbocharged engine. Listen to/for messages from the engine.

If I was a postie and forced to deliver that crap, I would overload one of those little Honda's as much as I could (the 90cc 'small block' would be too gutless....boys, crack out the 110cc 'big block' for a load like that) and then find the nearest dumpster out of sight.... Farkin hate 'em and their :spam: bullsh*t

Got my Juliar socialist propaganda money go round scam mail out today. Decided that I will send it back to another truth denier........

Arron, I would suggest that the loosening of the bolt is only the SYMPTOM of what you are experiencing......insufficiently controlled harmonics. If it has come loose, check for fretting and the keyway opening up in the bore of the balancer. Just doing the bolt up to the required torque, loctiting it or doing it tighter will not solve this issue. If it has, this will also damage and open up the mating crank keyway. The balancer is easily replaceable. The crank is not. Woodruff keys are just hopeless items. They break every sensible engineering rule.....(and should have stayed in bicycles IMO) as they are poor at side loads and also create stress risers with their square groove sharp edged form. A truly dumb device, yet the auto industry still use them en mass. A better way would be to use a round groove and matching pin like small outboards do to mount the prop. That way, the more load that is placed on it, the harder it is driven into the slot. Not trying to peel it out. A woodruff key just leans over and "opens" the slot in the crank snout. I would SERIOUSLY get a balancer that has more mass in the outer ring. My old alloy head turbo crossflow in my other car actually split the balancer up the keyway from the key leaning over and the repeated hammering from the harmonics.....balancer was too light and not capable of damping all loads it should. It was split that much, you could put it on and off the crank by hand. At the same time, the flywheel bolts also came loose about one turn each....and they were loctited in. I would also not be surprised that if driven hard, the timing chain may not last the full life that it should, as it will also suffer. Harmonics in an engine are not to be taken lightly. Once it gets to the stage where the slots have opened up, stopping it from repeatedly doing it is a losing and futile battle.

Who are the so called "deeeeeeniers" now???? How stupid of them to think that the sun would not have a major impact? I mean, where do they think the heat comes from in the first place? They have not even contemplated that a far more dangerous condition would be severe global cooling. I am happy to see that China is telling the UN to bugger off. The UN now have a history of going from subject to subject, inducing hysteria and manipulation where ever they go.....whilst they ignore their original charter to actually help the world with it's international issues. Probably why KRudd wants a position there...he'll fit right in. They themselves, have completely destroyed their own credibility. Thank christ for the internet. If we were left with the rubbish that we are fed from the mainstream media If only the socialists would finally admit that their goal of thought control for the masses will ALWAYS lead to failure. Human nature will simply not let it. Pride cometh before the fall.

Some years ago, they only used to have the magnets inside glued to the case. Mine was one of those, and when the thing disbonded, it stuffed the armature, smashed that magnet and left me stranded. I believe they are now bonded AND riveted. Can't beat that old fashioned method for long term durability. I was very cranky at the time as it was not a cheap pump, and it stuffed it so much I just threw the thing away.

And NOT the hyperbole of those who stand to make the most from it. Labor and particularly the Greens are only playing wedge politics with this issue. If someone says $10, the Greens (and Labor who has moronically placed themselves in this position), will say $20, and if the first person then said $30, the Greens would say $40 etc etc. Those Greens will NEVER be satisfied with anything other than complete compliance with their nutbag ideas.

We now have people who have come through the so called education system that have "received an indoctrination and not an education". The correct thinkers like to get them young. The sad thing is that we are at the current zenith of man's overall knowledge, and yet we have some who have little or no idea of what a scientific process is, and how to mentally form correct conclusions from that. Sure, have a position for this proposed tax, but for god's sake, base it on the science.