« Last post by dsrace on October 11, 2022, 11:34:31 AM »
Yes they do! In this case, with the same shocks same motion ratio and 500 lb lighter wet weight........ I thought surely they would be in the same ball park. Clearly an extra 4" of leverage makes a sizable difference! I say that based on. A 500 lb difference. Wonder how far thr spread would be if weight was equal?
so i still find this interesting and where i don't have all the data yet, we have enough to discuss it.
so while we re valved enemy's rear 2.5 shocks last sat, i noticed a few things. we slowed his comp down half a step to 90 and slowed the rebound down 1/2 a step to 2-1. now he didnt want to slow the rebound down but the board voted and voted against him
he asked what comp rate i run in my normal rail. i looked and i run a 50 comp rate in my rear 2.5's that is a faster comp rate then his by almost double the rate. my rebound is 2-1 in the rear and it was needed as it would buck in the whoops and that stopped the rear issue.
i run 385 to 400 psi in the rear and enemy i believe said 420 ish psi. my rail is 500 lbs heavier and definitely heavier in the rear. both have 24" wheel travel utilizing 14" stroke fox shocks. to be exact in my case i have 23.75" of actual wheel travel with 4" GC at full bump. enemy would need to chime in to be sure but i think he may tap out at the moment his shock bottoms out or right before. been so long i don't truly remember and have had a crap ton going on this year! both are a-arm rears roughly the same length a arm. he has joints so his may have an extra 2" stand off on each side.
so the question is, why does a 500 lb lighter rail need 40 psi more pressure and need to operate twice as slow on compression??
walked out and measured my lower rear shock mounts in relation to the wheel bearing carrier lower a arm bolting position. mine are 8.75" but lets call that 9" as i was using a tape measure and some cv grease leaped out and bit me. enemy measure his later that night and reported 13" so 4" farther up the a arm then mine. 4" seems to make quite a bit of difference! both with a stroke rate of 1.71:1 but due to frame packaging enemy is 4" higher up the a arm and a tad straighter then i am.
Smallish differences in angles and leverage ratios make big differences in shock/spring needs . Actually,if I read that right your differences are substantial.
« Last post by dsrace on October 10, 2022, 09:39:11 AM »
so nothing to do with your cooling system....yet
so i still find this interesting and where i don't have all the data yet, we have enough to discuss it.
so while we re valved enemy's rear 2.5 shocks last sat, i noticed a few things. we slowed his comp down half a step to 90 and slowed the rebound down 1/2 a step to 2-1. now he didnt want to slow the rebound down but the board voted and voted against him
he asked what comp rate i run in my normal rail. i looked and i run a 50 comp rate in my rear 2.5's that is a faster comp rate then his by almost double the rate. my rebound is 2-1 in the rear and it was needed as it would buck in the whoops and that stopped the rear issue.
i run 385 to 400 psi in the rear and enemy i believe said 420 ish psi. my rail is 500 lbs heavier and definitely heavier in the rear. both have 24" wheel travel utilizing 14" stroke fox shocks. to be exact in my case i have 23.75" of actual wheel travel with 4" GC at full bump. enemy would need to chime in to be sure but i think he may tap out at the moment his shock bottoms out or right before. been so long i don't truly remember and have had a crap ton going on this year! both are a-arm rears roughly the same length a arm. he has joints so his may have an extra 2" stand off on each side.
so the question is, why does a 500 lb lighter rail need 40 psi more pressure and need to operate twice as slow on compression??
walked out and measured my lower rear shock mounts in relation to the wheel bearing carrier lower a arm bolting position. mine are 8.75" but lets call that 9" as i was using a tape measure and some cv grease leaped out and bit me. enemy measure his later that night and reported 13" so 4" farther up the a arm then mine. 4" seems to make quite a bit of difference! both with a stroke rate of 1.71:1 but due to frame packaging enemy is 4" higher up the a arm and a tad straighter then i am.
« Last post by dsrace on April 02, 2022, 10:05:12 AM »
i was looking at those rear carriers and noticed that the rods don't pivot down the center of the u joint as they should/did. looks like someone has used a different stub shaft. would be interesting to know what they used. when i was building those they were type one stubs with 930 flanges in stock housings. i did so as it was easier and readily available parts as well as offered the 4 bolt flange for outboard brakes if one so chose. you can see the diff in these pics vs the one above. the silver rail had cv's as requested by the customer. they lined up very close with the same carriers and t1/930 stubs.
« Last post by dsrace on April 02, 2022, 09:11:40 AM »
sold this as a roller years ago or atleast i believe so. based on the pics it looks like it was a roller i sold waaaaay back when. not sure why they built the shock mounts that way and i have never heard of anyone using a nissan 200sx rear end. i asked if the seller on fb had any info on the rear end or if they built that themsleves. no response yet but i know i built those rear wheel bearing carriers and the front a arms look like mine as well as the main portion of the upper shock mounts. that's why i believe it was a roller and not a bare frame.
here i what the ad says......
Has a 2001 hayabusa 1300 engine and comes with another motor but needs to be fixed. Recently powder coated candy apple blue and gloss black,had the seats redone black and carbon fiber gray with new PRP harnesses. New power commander 5 and pro comp lights, replaced fuel pump,has fox shocks and Nissan 200 sx rear end,comes with extra set of paddles and other parts. $13,000 located in Bakersfield
« Last post by fabr on September 27, 2021, 08:41:12 PM »
I've had a small coolant leak into a cylinder in the second hand Nascar engine. It will leak about a cup over 5 months and then past the rings to the pan. Oil never milks up. Weird . I think the water just sits below the pan suction fittings since there is about 3/16" step down into pan. Oil heats up and then i get steam from the dry sump reservoir vent till it all boils out of pan.
Back to your issue. Yes seals can hold under pressure or vac but leak in the absence of either.
« Last post by Carlriddle on September 27, 2021, 07:19:19 PM »
Parts for water pump tomm, but I’m still scratch my head. Why would I have 1+ cup water in oil but rad held pressure so well? Could water pump shaft be ok under some pressure u til shaft spins,?
Recent Posts
