Brian Peters STR 350Z
#181
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
these are the ET15s. This is just the prealignment corner balance pics. I have to finish up the fronts this weekend and sometime next week ill have actual specs for you. These are not SBC or black they are actual gunmetal. I did roll the fenders right after I test fit the wheels earlier this month. I don't think you can avoid not to with this setup
I'm looking forward to the final alignment vs wheel-well-fit, and don't mind rolling the fenders on the rear if needed.
#182
Super Moderator
MY350Z.COM
MY350Z.COM
iTrader: (8)
Looking at your installed at full droop pic, it seems like the helper is fully compressed. If so, you could have just run an inch longer spring.
#183
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Wausau, WI
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was wondering the same thing. Looks like there is nearly 2" of room on the threaded perch yet for a longer spring as well, plus some adjustment
Last edited by SnoXRacer183; 04-28-2014 at 01:09 PM.
#185
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Just as an FYI for anyone ordering a rear spring setup from BC Racing, the parts you need are:
High/Low Kit - $85
Spring Bucket Adapters - $85
I ordered just the high/low kit thinking it had what i needed, but had to call back and order the spring bucket adapters. If you need wrenches too, a set will run you $25.
High/Low Kit - $85
Spring Bucket Adapters - $85
I ordered just the high/low kit thinking it had what i needed, but had to call back and order the spring bucket adapters. If you need wrenches too, a set will run you $25.
#186
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
car went on its maiden test voyage to the office in STU trim today.
I have an appointment on wednesday next week for some suspension tuning. I have the car setup right now by eye. Toe seems to be close to zero in front rears have slight toe in(from lowering the car). Definitely have more static camber in the rear right now just from lowering the car about an inch. I have the kinetic ball joints as far as i could go negative (still not as much camber as in the rear). We will be fabricating some offset bushing wednesday to get more camber. with the 285s and rolled fenders i do not seem to have any rubbing and I was slaloming down the street at a good clip. Also the 1000lb springs with the revalved shocks I was surprised that the ride quality seem fairly compliant on regular roads.
Last edited by Glenn350zHR; 05-02-2014 at 08:52 AM.
#189
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Palm Coast, FL
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
J.G. Pasterjak
Production Manager/Art Director
Grassroots Motorsport magazine
Classic Motorsports magazine
#193
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
I have a question for those tracking 1k springs:
I am running 345# F and 410# rear ATM and my car's balance feels great. It seems counter intuitive to invert the front/rear relationship if I expect to maintain the balance I really like now. (by going with 1k F and 800 R)
I understand how bypassing the rear sway will help my Quaife work better, but that also further softens the rear's roll stiffness relative to the front's, and theoretically alters the front/rear balance farther away from what I currently enjoy.
It's not the idea of generally stiffening the springs that I'm asking about. It's changing the balance (front to rear) that seems odd to me.
I am running 345# F and 410# rear ATM and my car's balance feels great. It seems counter intuitive to invert the front/rear relationship if I expect to maintain the balance I really like now. (by going with 1k F and 800 R)
I understand how bypassing the rear sway will help my Quaife work better, but that also further softens the rear's roll stiffness relative to the front's, and theoretically alters the front/rear balance farther away from what I currently enjoy.
It's not the idea of generally stiffening the springs that I'm asking about. It's changing the balance (front to rear) that seems odd to me.
#194
New Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thinking of upgrading, need some advice.
I currently run Truechoice Koni Phase IVs w/ spring rates of 500/425. Was thinking of making the switch to the ProParts USA setup (want some of that magic).
I'm wondering if they are built/tested specifically for the demands of autox and maybe not ideal for the track duty (TT)?
My Z's competition weight (w/ driver) would be in the 3000-3100lbs range, running 275 R6s, 4.08 gears, and OS Giken LSD.....would it make sense to run the ProParts setup w/ 1000/850 rates for my track only car? Benefits vs lower rates?
Thanks
I currently run Truechoice Koni Phase IVs w/ spring rates of 500/425. Was thinking of making the switch to the ProParts USA setup (want some of that magic).
I'm wondering if they are built/tested specifically for the demands of autox and maybe not ideal for the track duty (TT)?
My Z's competition weight (w/ driver) would be in the 3000-3100lbs range, running 275 R6s, 4.08 gears, and OS Giken LSD.....would it make sense to run the ProParts setup w/ 1000/850 rates for my track only car? Benefits vs lower rates?
Thanks
Last edited by l30thelion; 05-23-2014 at 08:00 AM. Reason: gears
#195
I have a question for those tracking 1k springs:
I am running 345# F and 410# rear ATM and my car's balance feels great. It seems counter intuitive to invert the front/rear relationship if I expect to maintain the balance I really like now. (by going with 1k F and 800 R)
I understand how bypassing the rear sway will help my Quaife work better, but that also further softens the rear's roll stiffness relative to the front's, and theoretically alters the front/rear balance farther away from what I currently enjoy.
It's not the idea of generally stiffening the springs that I'm asking about. It's changing the balance (front to rear) that seems odd to me.
I am running 345# F and 410# rear ATM and my car's balance feels great. It seems counter intuitive to invert the front/rear relationship if I expect to maintain the balance I really like now. (by going with 1k F and 800 R)
I understand how bypassing the rear sway will help my Quaife work better, but that also further softens the rear's roll stiffness relative to the front's, and theoretically alters the front/rear balance farther away from what I currently enjoy.
It's not the idea of generally stiffening the springs that I'm asking about. It's changing the balance (front to rear) that seems odd to me.
#197
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
I'm considering going with a fixed height in the rear and just using front spring perches to alter the rake. Is this a viable option and if so, about how low should I take the rear down when I get springs? ( I was thinking somewhere between 3/4 inch and 1 inch lower than stock)
#199
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
I'm considering going with a fixed height in the rear and just using front spring perches to alter the rake. Is this a viable option and if so, about how low should I take the rear down when I get springs? ( I was thinking somewhere between 3/4 inch and 1 inch lower than stock)
#200
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
I found a subframe at ZDayZ, so that's next. I should have the A-arms on by then too. My car should be ST legal in the next month or so. -Then I can get to work on actually making it faster.
The shocks have some turn-around time involved, so I'm trying to make up my mind in the next week or two and send them out.
Last edited by Z1NONLY; 05-27-2014 at 05:15 PM.