Camber adjustment 300zx

lateapex911 said:
Ding ding ding!!

And now, for the $64,000 question...

"But everyone's doing it, and it's been this way for years...it should be legal!"

And slipparooni, down the slope we go.
Click to expand...

Wow you guys don't know what the hell you are talking about. First off, as a former 240sx racer, I replaced all the rubber suspension bushings with spherical bushings (bearings). There is still a ball joint on the lower control arm that is stock. Completely in compliance with the rules. And all of the 240 guys I know did the same thing.
The reason spherical bearings are used is because as the suspension moves through it's arc, the bushings twist in two planes. Usually this is accomplished with the rubber compressing or flexing. Now if you were to replace these bushings with say solid material, like delrin, then the suspension would bind.
As far as I know there is no issues with the ball joints binding. And if there was, more than likely you have lowered the car so much that your roll center is 6 inches underground anyway.

Trust me, if there was an easier, cheaper way to fix that issue, I would be all over it.
 
lateapex911 said:
HuH???

Fist, where does that first quote from Tristan come from?? Not this thread that I can find. And Kirk (Knestis) the fellow referenced in the quote in the "Bite me" section.. (?!?!?!?!?) hasn't even posted on this thread.

So, I fail to see how this particular item has been protested and or upheld. Can we see proof?
Click to expand...


Wow that is digging up the past. And Jake you are right, it has nothing to do with this conversation. This was taken from the debate many years ago about whether spherical bearings could be used as a "bushing material" substitute.

And it's moot these days. As long as it is used in the proper rule set, spherical bearings have been approved by the rules. You can even tack weld them in.

There is no doubt that there are a lot of really smart people on this website. I always learn something in these debates. Sometimes it's only that logical, smart, well versed people come to completely different conclusions. But thats why we have the ability to protest folks.

Now lets not dig up anymore old threads. ha
 
ekim952522000 said:
So what about the RSX...would it be legal to replace the RSX strut with one ... with a adjustable height steering arm?
Click to expand...
Absolutely, just as you can in the RX-7: struts are free. In that case the bump steer can easily be corrected, but roll center cannot (except by spherical/eccentric at the inboard control arm, assuming bushings are there, and it isn't going to be a whole lot of correction.)

This one gets filed under the "warts and all, pick your car carefully" category.


On edit: I wanted to clarify this position above; I got a PM pointing out some confusion..

On the first-gen RX-7, the ball joint attaches directly to the strut, but the steering arm is on the knuckle/hub assembly. So, on the RX-7, roll centers can be adjusted, either via spacers and/or a strut with a custom-located ball joint attachment (using the stock ball joint only). But, bump steer cannot be adjusted.

On the RSX illustrated above, the tie rod end attaches to the strut, but the ball joint attaches to the knuckle. So, on the RSX, bump steer can be adjusted via spacers and/or a strut with a custom-located steering arm (using a stock tie rod end!). Bump, roll centers cannot be adjusted (except via eccentrics used in place of suspension bushings.)

On the Audi Coupe both the ball joints and the steering arm are part of the strut, thus both bump steer and roll centers can be adjusted (using stock ball joints and tie rod ends!)

Sorry for the confusion. - GA
 
Last edited:
Tristan Smith said:
Wow you guys don't know what the hell you are talking about. First off, as a former 240sx racer, I replaced all the rubber suspension bushings with spherical bushings (bearings). There is still a ball joint on the lower control arm that is stock. Completely in compliance with the rules. And all of the 240 guys I know did the same thing.
Click to expand...

Read back carefully Tristan. We made those statements in reaction to the claim that the lower ball joint WAS replaced, therefor the "Ball joint is a bushing" rule was 'sound', and that "If you can do it in the back you can do it in the front" logic was getting trotted out.

Our comments were, IF that's actually what is going on under those cars, then, the next argument would be: "But it's been done this way for years..." bla bla bla.

Our point was ...tough sh!t.
 
Jake, I'm pretty sure Tristan was referring to the guy who said "All 240sx guys are doing this" when (and he should know) Tristan makes it clear they are not.

It still boggles my mind that anyone would consider a ball joint a "bushing" that is free, and really disappointing that this seems to be an accepted "fix" on those 325s that were already kicking my ass a few years back.
 
Z3_GoCar said:
Here's one upside down:
02_G.jpg


Notice the ball joint on the lower a-arm, that's what binds when the 240sx gets lowered, that's why they need spherical bearings. Since this ball joint can be swaped out for a spherical bearing, why not the front one?
Click to expand...

Tristan,

Here is the quote to suport Jake's post. It was posted as fact that this is what was needed for the 240SX to be effective and what guys are doing. I did some research and pointed out that the replacement of the ball joint was NOT part of the typical spherical replacement job.

We all know 'sphericals as bushings' are now legal per the ITCS but the assertion that ball joints are suspension bushings is just not so.
 
Who's the guy half cropped in the picture? he looks pissed!

"They won't let me replace these ball joints with titanium sphericals!?!?! Bastards!"

And further, whats the black cylinder in the center, with the shiny silver label and the two "steering links" projecting out? is that some sort of rear steer thing?
 
Last edited:
Sorry guys if I was unclear. I was responding to the implication, like Jeff stated, that somehow it was "only legal cause everybody was doing" statement. So never mind....since you all know what I meant...I think.
 
lateapex911 said:
Who's the guy half cropped in the picture? he looks pissed!

"They won't let me replace these ball joints with titanium sphericals!?!?! Bastards!"

And further, whats the black cylinder in the center, with the shiny silver label and the two "steering links" projecting out? is that some sort of rear steer thing?
Click to expand...


Probably the HICAS system. Yes, essentially rear steering. Factory option on Nissans in the 90's. Don't think they use the system nowadays.
 
Greg -

At the risk of me possibly misunderstanding what you said in describing RX7 struts -

The ball joint on the 1st gen RX7 is bolted to the steering arm, not the strut directly. The steering arm is then bolted to the strut, which includes the stub axle and attached hub, strut tube, etc. This arrangement is used on (I think) all RWD Nissan/Datsuns until the 240SX (510s, Zs and ZXs thru '89, 200SX for sure). Plus 1st Gen RX7s and I'm sure several others.

Unlike a strut which bolts directly to the ball joint, adjusting the roll center on the RX7 through adding a spacer at the bottom of the standard strut is very simple. The one piece strut I have (on a 1974 Capri) is a much trickier thing to modify, because the ball joint hole is part of the stub axle forging. I've never been brave enough to try welding an extension to that part and, fortunately, it isn't much needed on the Capri.
 
TomL said:
The ball joint on the 1st gen RX7 is bolted to the steering arm, not the strut directly....
Click to expand...
Ugh.

OK, Tom, then let's go at this generically. Struts are free. As such, anything that is part of the strut - not bolted to it, but physically welded to the strut, such as a steering arm or a ball joint mounting location - is also free. If the steering arm is part of the strut, it can be relocated (and, thus, bump steer can be adjusted). If the ball joint mounting location is part of the strit, it can be relocated (and, thus, roll center can be adjusted).

If, however, The steering arm and/or the ball joint mounting location is NOT part of the strut, then you CANNOT relocate their position, neither via modifications or via spacers.

Said really generically: struts are free. Have at it.

How's that?

GA, done (I hope)....
 
Last edited:
All I said was that, on the RX7, the ball joint doesn't attach to the strut as you stated earlier. See Jeff Young's attachment in #28 for a picture. Now I'm not sure if you think I can legally use the spacers for roll center correction or not. :shrug: (BTW, I can.) But you're right -it's pointless to continue this conversation. I'm out, too.
 
Tristan Smith said:
Probably the HICAS system. Yes, essentially rear steering. Factory option on Nissans in the 90's. Don't think they use the system nowadays.
Click to expand...
HICAS was on the twin-turbos. I don't think it was even an option on the NAs. I don't think anybody who tracks the car leaves it operational. They might have used a version of it on the Skylines as well.

David
 
Yes you could. I think it was even standard on the top of the line model 240SX.

The 240SX and 300ZX rear suspension is the exact same and a bolt for bolt swap from what I have learned. I think the comment was about the picture and the picture was of a 240?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top