Alternate 240Z rear brakes...?

[acotyk]

For discussion:

I posted this request to the comp Board, Ref Letter #279:

Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 11:17 AM
To: Club Racing Board

Subject: Request for competition change - ITCS

Gentlemen,

Respectfully request your consideration of the attached
change to the ITCS. Reference (2009) GCR, page 349.

This request is being made due to NLA (No Longer Available)
status of the rear brake drums for these vehicles. Reference the
following from one of the primary suppliers of Nissan and Nissan Comp
parts in the US:

(Inserted link to Nissan Comp website where Datsun rear brake drums are shown as NLA)

What I requested was:

"Alternate Brakes are allowed (R) 258 or 269 Solid Disc and calipers from 280-ZX."

For all of the Datsun's with drum rear brakes.

This was the Comp Board's answer:


2. ITS – #279 Request for alternate rear brake assembly
This request is not within the IT philosophy.

For Reference, this is what was historically allowed for the Old Calais/Achieve/Pontiac Grand Am:

"Alternate rear bearing, flange, and disc brakes from (General Motors) Saturn are allowed. 16" wheel not allowed"

Does anyone know the history of this change that allowed the Olds/Pontiac's to change from rear drums to disc brakes?

I honestly felt that there would be no competitive advantage to this, only that the rear drums are out of production and that with the use of a stock Maxima rear bracket, the 280ZX discs fit the 240/260/280Z's.

Appreciate any comments and other viewpoints. What philosophy did this not follow? How was this different from the Olds allowable alternate?

Thanks!

A.

[Z3_GoCar]

If you search you may find the latest thread that brought the reason for this exception up. If I remember correctly it was less than 8 months ago. This exception followed the cars from Showroom Stock, where it was given. I'm sure it was a safety issue related to the rear bearings more than switching from drums to discs.

[Knestis]

I've been arguing for eliminating that GM exception for EVER, seems like. There should be no spec line exceptions. Anything that makes things easier provides a competitive advantage. I'd argue that the fact that you requested it is proof prima facie that it's an advantage. You wouldn't ask for it if it wasn't. :)

K

[Ron Earp]

The drums are still available. Now, I know that Brembo quit making the aluminum drum, but the steel one is available from numerous aftermarket suppliers, or at least it was last October when I checked.

We had the drums NLA discussion a few months back but I'm too lazy to dredge it up again.

Bottom line is that you can get drums that work (maybe not optimal, they weigh 11 lbs versus 6 lbs for the ally), and a change is against the core IT philosophy.

[JeffYoung]

I'm on the ITAC; we recommended to the CRB that they turn down this request. The reasons are:

1. Ron Earp is a racing buddy of mine; I work on and drive his 260z, and I also know several Z racers very well (Steve Parrish, David Spillman, Jay Miller, Mike Mackaman, etc.). The drums are still available, you can occasionally find an alum one on ebay etc. Steel drums are still available at your local parts counter. Plus, i think there is some discussion about having new ally ones machined.

2. IT class philosophy -- perhaps the strongest one we have -- is that we don't make line item exceptions for IT cars for parts that are NLA, or unsafe, etc. You choose your car and the warts that go with it (and I'm certainly in that boat with an ITS TR8). At some point, some cars naturally age out of IT due to lack of parts (I think RX2/3 rear brake parts are totally gone). At that point, you go vintage or build a newer IT car (I have a 300zx sitting in a shed waiting for the day the 8 can't run anymore).

3. As Kirk indicated that exception for the Calais/etc. is an anamoly. I'm not sure why it is there and it frankly should be removed. It is the ONLY exception like that and totallly contrary to class philosophy.

[LLoughman]

JeffYoung, thanks for sharing the insights on the logic behind this decision. I have been a long time follower of the IT forum and now think it’s time to give some feedback. Having run an ITS 240Z since 1997, about a year ago I noticed the standard aluminum rear drum was no longer available. While true you can find the steel version, there is a performance difference. As mentioned earlier there is an almost 50% weight penalty in rotating mass and the steel drums offer less heat dissipation (steel vs aluminum and cooling fins). Since I have experienced a rear shoe delaminating more than once, I will wait until some other fool runs the steel drums at Blackhawk (brake hawk) or Road America before I risk my fait at one of those venues with steel drums. If anyone has experience with the steel drum configuration at one of these tracks (and can run 1:22 at Blackhawk) please respond. Since we now have a known performance change running the 240Z without the available aluminum drums, what will be done to resolve this issue? Seems that acotyk has a point. Can someone explain the performance advantage of acotyk’s recommendation? Most of the braking (energy to heat transfer) is done by the front of the car and on all the Z cars this is done with a 2 piston caliper on a solid disk rotor up front. By the way using old parts like ebay aluminum drums is one of the reasons for a pedal to the floor failure that I had over the years and should be avoided at all cost.

As for the GM issue with the Olds/GA if JeffYoung’s comments are correct, than a safety issue as mentioned by Z3_GoCar does not make sense. If I recall correctly, the rule that allowed these GM cars to not only change from rear drum to disk but the bearings as well came long after their ITS classification. The argument here is simple, there is already precedence set to allow drum to disk conversions in ITS. I will be posting a notice to the comp board to either revoke the GM disk as stated in their reply to acotyk or to allow the drum to disk swap for the Z car or any other drum brake car. The board needs to be consistent on this “core philosophy” and in this case there is no sing of it.

Thank you acotyk for bringing up this issue.

JeffYoung or any of you other Z drivers, if you know of someone making the aluminum drums please post. By the way doesn’t a custom machined part by a non-oem type manufacturer for brake parts go against the “core philosophy”? Seems like a vintage concept.

If you were a lawyer, you could retire on arguing for/against inconsistent decisions by a governing body!

[Ron Earp]

Seems that acotyk has a point. Can someone explain the performance advantage of acotyk’s recommendation?

The ITAC and/or CRB doesn't have to explain the performance advantage of acotyk's recommendation. As I'm sure you are aware the GCR reads:

"To maintain the stock basis of Improved Touring.....No interchange of parts between assemblies is permitted, and all parts of an assembly shall be as originally produced for that assembly"
Their answer is pretty well spelled out in the introductory rules for Improved Touring.

Unfortunately the rear drums being no longer available forces the Z driver to make some choices. Race the car with available steel drums and accept the lower performance, or quit racing the car in Improved Touring.

I'll be cutting some holes in my backing plates and getting some air on those shoes and drums. I don't have rear brake ducting right now and race fine with the ally drums. I bet I can race fine with the steel drums using ducting.

[Knestis]

... If you were a lawyer, you could retire on arguing for/against inconsistent decisions by a governing body!

LMAO. Jeff's a lawyer.


...I will be posting a notice to the comp board to either revoke the GM disk as stated in their reply to acotyk or to allow the drum to disk swap for the Z car or any other drum brake car. ...Please DO ask that the GM exception be removed. It got poked into the ITCS long before recent efforts to be consistent on this and other issues, so it's time has come and gone.

EDIT - a little more history on the ITCS... The entire IT category suffered from a wicked case of benign neglect between its inception in the mid '80s and about 10 years ago. A lot of things have been fixed since then but this rear brake exception isn't one.

K

[GKR_17]

I suspect the drums are cast iron, not steel. Using iron instead of aluminum is not a safety issue. Sure it will run hotter, but iron will take it where aluminum will not. Aluminum is very rarely used in brakes, and for good reason.

If you really want to talk safety I move we ban the stock drums.

[JeffYoung]

L --

No problem on the info. I wish more detail was listed with the decisions in Fastrack.

I run steel drums (came stock so I have to) on the TR8 and I delaminate shoes and burn up wheel cylinders occasionally. I have on the list of things to do (as does Ron) to run ducting to the rear brakes. We have a very brake intensive track here (CMP -- I'll put it up against any track in the US for being hard on brakes) and we survive.

So, I think there are ways around this other than allowing alternate rear brakes. As you can see, the one time this was done (incorrectly) for the Olds, it opened a can of worms that could really do damage to the core philosophy of IT. It is critical, in my view, that we toe the line and not allow "safety" or "NLA" issues to cause us to allow alternate parts. If we start with that, THAT is the path to production and/or AS, etc.

If you write a request to have the Olds rear brake/hub allowance rescinded, I will support that 100%.

If you have any other questions, let me know, and thanks again for the polite and considered post. It is appreciated.

Jeff


JeffYoung, thanks for sharing the insights on the logic behind this decision. I have been a long time follower of the IT forum and now think it’s time to give some feedback. Having run an ITS 240Z since 1997, about a year ago I noticed the standard aluminum rear drum was no longer available. While true you can find the steel version, there is a performance difference. As mentioned earlier there is an almost 50% weight penalty in rotating mass and the steel drums offer less heat dissipation (steel vs aluminum and cooling fins). Since I have experienced a rear shoe delaminating more than once, I will wait until some other fool runs the steel drums at Blackhawk (brake hawk) or Road America before I risk my fait at one of those venues with steel drums. If anyone has experience with the steel drum configuration at one of these tracks (and can run 1:22 at Blackhawk) please respond. Since we now have a known performance change running the 240Z without the available aluminum drums, what will be done to resolve this issue? Seems that acotyk has a point. Can someone explain the performance advantage of acotyk’s recommendation? Most of the braking (energy to heat transfer) is done by the front of the car and on all the Z cars this is done with a 2 piston caliper on a solid disk rotor up front. By the way using old parts like ebay aluminum drums is one of the reasons for a pedal to the floor failure that I had over the years and should be avoided at all cost.

As for the GM issue with the Olds/GA if JeffYoung’s comments are correct, than a safety issue as mentioned by Z3_GoCar does not make sense. If I recall correctly, the rule that allowed these GM cars to not only change from rear drum to disk but the bearings as well came long after their ITS classification. The argument here is simple, there is already precedence set to allow drum to disk conversions in ITS. I will be posting a notice to the comp board to either revoke the GM disk as stated in their reply to acotyk or to allow the drum to disk swap for the Z car or any other drum brake car. The board needs to be consistent on this “core philosophy” and in this case there is no sing of it.

Thank you acotyk for bringing up this issue.

JeffYoung or any of you other Z drivers, if you know of someone making the aluminum drums please post. By the way doesn’t a custom machined part by a non-oem type manufacturer for brake parts go against the “core philosophy”? Seems like a vintage concept.

If you were a lawyer, you could retire on arguing for/against inconsistent decisions by a governing body!

[Xian]

While true you can find the steel version, there is a performance difference. As mentioned earlier there is an almost 50% weight penalty in rotating mass and the steel drums offer less heat dissipation (steel vs aluminum and cooling fins). Since I have experienced a rear shoe delaminating more than once,

OK, so steel drums are bad b/c of less heat dissipation. Nevermind that I'm sure you could have custom shoes whipped up that would work at the higher heat but I follow your train of thought.


Most of the braking (energy to heat transfer) is done by the front of the car


Uhhhh... so how much heat can the rear be making? :shrug:

Christian, who races a car with rear drums and will beat the "horses for courses" drum some other time.

[JLawton]

I will be posting a notice to the comp board to either revoke the GM disk as stated in their reply to acotyk


Man, that's REALLY gonna piss off all those Achieva racers............




.

[Ron Earp]

I suspect the drums are cast iron, not steel. Using iron instead of aluminum is not a safety issue. Sure it will run hotter, but iron will take it where aluminum will not. Aluminum is very rarely used in brakes, and for good reason.

If you really want to talk safety I move we ban the stock drums.

Yep, I think you're right on the cast iron. Been awhile since I looked though.

Now on the "ally drums" I'm pretty sure that is an ally drum, with fins cast in it, with a steel insert. Carbotechs can handle the heat and I was just talking with those guys a few weeks ago and they have a compound for shoes that can handle even more heat than the previous versions.

I'm not a Z historian but are these ally legal in the first place??? My 260Z shop manual doesn't show drawings of finned drums, but of round drums with no fins. Were the fins added by NIMSO for performance reasons and were they listed as an alternative part number by Datsun/Nissan?

I'm with you though. I'd like to ban the blasted things for selfish "don't want to ever work on a drum brake again" reasons, but I am logical enough to know that isn't something to pursue. Funny how one of my prime motivators for getting a new IT car is to get something that doesn't have drum brakes and carbs.

[dspillrat]

Every 240 I've ever pulled apart, had fins.......

Now I have seen 3 vented rotors as well....vented rotor caps that is.....

Didn't realize the olds came with drums.... I Need a letter penned Jeff...

David

[GKR_17]

I'm with you though. I'd like to ban the blasted things for selfish "don't want to ever work on a drum brake again" reasons, but I am logical enough to know that isn't something to pursue.

I was really kidding, but was trying to say that if safety is the arguement then make them run the iron drums. I vote a big no to the disc swap. Not sure how to handle the Olds, I'd rather it get pulled than be a precident further creep.

[JeffYoung]

Somebody send a letter in....we need to get that Olds exception deleted.

[John Herman]

Man, that's REALLY gonna piss off all those Achieva racers............




.
And the Calais drivers. :D BTW, this was a carryover from the late SS days, not an IT "derived" rule.

[Eagle7]

And the Calais drivers. :D
So when are you going to dust that thing off and drive it? :eclipsee_steering:

[pballance]

Yep, I think you're right on the cast iron. Been awhile since I looked though.

Now on the "ally drums" I'm pretty sure that is an ally drum, with fins cast in it, with a steel insert. ................

I'm not a Z historian but are these ally legal in the first place??? My 260Z shop manual doesn't show drawings of finned drums, but of round drums with no fins. Were the fins added by NIMSO for performance reasons and were they listed as an alternative part number by Datsun/Nissan?

...............

They were all finned Ron. Aluminum drum with steel insert. They can be re-sleeved if you will. Not cheap but it can be done. I think JohnC at Betamotorsports was looking into that for one of his customers. Also, the new aftermarket's are cast and are without fins.

My drum backing plates are vented and there was evidence of a rear ducting system being attached to the rear control arms at one time. One of the previous owners of my car ran it in enduros on the west coast.

While I agree it would be nice to do away with the drums, as a Z racer I wll argue that it is against the class philosophy and an allowance should not be made. Like Jeff, I have another Z waiting in the wings that actually has discs all the way around :)

BTW, I will try to get a picture or two up for the Nissan fans. I have a buddy that has a Nissan IMSA GTP in his shop. Pretty neat car.....

[spawpoet]

"My drum backing plates are vented and there was evidence of a rear ducting system being attached to the rear control arms at one time. One of the previous owners of my car ran it in enduros on the west coast."



It was always my understanding that the cast drums were preferred on z's for enduros anyways. I don't know from personal experience, and have no idea if it's true, but the internet lore was always use the alloy drums for auto-x and sprint races, and the cast for the long races because they dealt with extended periods at high temp better.

[John Herman]

So when are you going to dust that thing off and drive it? :eclipsee_steering:
Once I get just a little bit farther in this school thing which has forced me into retirement, I hope to get back out there. Hopefully, maybe, I'll get it out to Grattan to do a couple of test days this summer, but I still need to but the engine back together.

[Eagle7]

They were all finned Ron. Aluminum drum with steel insert.
If that's the case, then how can a steel aftermarket drum be considered a legal equivalent?

[Eagle7]

...Hopefully, maybe, I'll get it out to Grattan to do a couple of test days this summer, but I still need to but the engine back together.
Wohoo! I'll try not to hit you. :happy204:

[JeffYoung]

It's unclear if the cars ever came with steel drums. If not, I agree, it's technically illegal.

But, I sure wouldn't want to be the guy who protested that.....


If that's the case, then how can a steel aftermarket drum be considered a legal equivalent?

[Ron Earp]

If that's the case, then how can a steel aftermarket drum be considered a legal equivalent?

It wouldn't be.

I just spoke with Riley at Lynchburg Nissan, probably the best Z parts man in the country. He says that Z cars came ONLY with finned aluminum drums. The 510s used steel drums, and of course those guys switched to Z drums for the competition setup.

So, steel aftermarket drums are technically illegal as no Z car was ever equipped with them. Since the aluminum drums are NLA (even Ebay only pulls up one drum right now) we are in sort of a pickle.

Riley also passed on other information about the drums. They were produced for Brembo/Nissan from a company in Italy. Brembo owns molds, but the other company does the production and they pulled the plug on production with only a few 100 orders for year. The molds are tied up at the company and it'll take a 1000+ unit order for them to do another run of them, which isn't going to happen.

Now, switching a 240/260/280 to disc rears isn't as easy at it sounds. According to Riley the 280ZX stuff does not bolt up, but, other OEM parts do. One is supposed to use a Maxima caliper bracket from 83/84 and 200sx calipers/rotors, from 82/83, mounted upside down to pull it off.

So, 240/260/280 drum brake racers might need to consider lobbying for some sort of rule change because racing with steel drums is technically illegal.

[lateapex911]

Regarding the GM issue, if the ITAC were to get a letter asking for the removal of the exception, I think it would be seen as a reasonable request, and we'd discuss the merits. IF we supported the removal, we'd add a "sunset clause" of a year or two for the Calais nation to source the parts.

FWIW, 1st gen RX-7s face a similar issue. Engine parts are NLA. There is a plating system available aftermarket, but the finished plating differs from stock in material, but not performance, and is therefor illegal.

[Greg Amy]

So, 240/260/280 drum brake racers might need to consider lobbying for some sort of rule change because racing with steel drums is technically illegal.

GCR/ITCS 9.1.3.C says, in part:
"Documentation of the superseding parts or assemblies must be supplied to the Club Racing Department and the appropriate part numbers listed on that particular model’s specification line."
If you saunter down to your local Nissan dealership and order a pair of rear drums for a Z-car, what will you get? I'll wager a dollar you'll get a pair of steel drums. As such, the steel ones are not only legal, they're the only legal new part for the car. So, no lobbying needed, all one needs to do is provide the Club Racing Department with valid documentation that the aluminum parts are no longer available, and ask them to spec on the line that steel equivalents are expressly legal (although I can't imagine anyone dropping the money and effort to protest you for that). Contact Paul St. Clair at NisMo; I bet he can provide that to you same-day via FAX or email.

On the other hand, if you guys really think you'll get rear discs approved for the car simply because the aluminum drums are no longer available, well you're smokin' the funny stuff -- and this month's Fastrack should have put that idea to bed pretty quickly... - GA

[spawpoet]

Anyone have a clue how much it would cost to have warn out drums re-lined?

[Ron Earp]

On the other hand, if you guys really think you'll get rear discs approved for the car simply because the aluminum drums are no longer available, well you're smokin' the funny stuff -- and this month's Fastrack should have put that idea to bed pretty quickly... - GA

No Greg, I think if you read what I and others have written nobody here (except for the thread starter) is going to ask for disc rear allowance. I simply wrote what Riley passed on to me so that folks could see what was involved with putting drums on the rear of a Z car. It isn't a simple swap over from a 280zx.

My mistake in my post was writing "lobbying for a rule change" when I meant lobbying to have steel drums approved. I had forgotten about the part supercede pathway and I'm sure that Lynchburg Nissan/Riley will provide this documentation.

[betamotorsports]

Anyone have a clue how much it would cost to have warn out drums re-lined?

I talked with a couple plasma spray companies and it can be done for about $175 per drum (shipping, core charges, etc. would be extra) in a quantity of 50. The existing steel surface needs to be machined flat, the surface prepped and then sprayed, and then the surface needs to be machined to the correct dimension. There is some concern about an out-of-round condition due to the different materials so I was planning on a test run.

But... a couple west coast Z racers told me they are working with Brembo to do a new production run of some kind for the drums. I put my efforts on hold until i see the results of their efforts.

[acotyk]

Thanks to everyone that has responded, there’s a lot to digest here on the subject.

First-off, I want to make a plea to everyone, not to mount a campaign to rescind the rear bearings (and brakes) from the Olds and Pontiac guys. In my opinion this would be a terrible thing to do to them, essentially legislating dangerous parts back onto their cars, inviting much anger among their ranks, and possibly losing some great competitors within a club that desperately needs them. It’s an unwarranted vengeance. This was not my intention with the request.

I do though find myself questioning this particular premise of the class. I question that it is outdated to reject some wider updating of parts for limited reasons, in the same manner that the original IT premise of a “dual purpose” vehicle became outdated. (the concept of a class where its competitors desired to drive to the track, put numbers on the car and race, then drive home and use their cars as a family vehicle, has surely passed, and that verbiage and concept are therefore no longer cited in the rules). So too may the strict concept of updating and backdating of parts only within a single specification line, be outdated, and that no allowances for NLA parts be a premise of the class.

I have built and raced Datsun 240Z’s for 20+ years now. The true situation with the cars as they sit, is that because of improvements in tires and brake pad materials through the years, the cars when driven hard surely have some brake limitations. I no longer for instance, race at Blackhawk farms, Road America, or Summit Point because of this. This is primarily as Lance Loughman outlined, because the front solid rotor no matter how well ducted or what brake fluid or pads you are using, cannot reject the heat under some conditions. This is of course a limitation on a lot of racecars, but it’s pretty severe on the 240’s.

In this particular Comp board request case we are hitting another kind of limitation that is pretty real. If I cannot get a rear brake drum, then I cannot race the car. My opinion is that the cast iron drums would be less able (than a finned aluminum drum with steel insert), to dissipate the heat from the latest brake pad friction coefficient capability. And there seemed to be a reasonably simple configuration available from the same type car, that would alleviate the problem.

I fight the concept in this class, that I need to simply move over, build another car, go vintage, quit racing, or move to another class , when a key consumable becomes NLA, without questioning the current IT class philosophy.

Before I get flamed here, I’ll submit that I hadn’t planned on becoming an old racing fart, but that seems to have occurred, and I want to keep racing the old car that I have. It’s just something I want, a desire. If I request for my club to do something that makes this possible for me and those like me, and it is rejected by the persons who represent the collective will of the club in making the rules, then so be it I’ll move on. I want as much possibility as I can have, to continue to race this ITS classified vehicle. That’s my club member input/request.

Maybe an answer to the problem here, with respect to the situation we have with the one rogue alternate drum-to-disc rule that exists, and with the situation with older cars with drums, would be to permit any drum brake to be replaced with a disc brake. Possibly the Committee could draft a rule that globally permitted this within some guidelines that would suit the concept.

I think that I request from the Committee, that wider considerations be given to updating of parts where NLA situations can be reasonably demonstrated, and/or where safety can be improved, without significant alteration of a car’s competitive capability (as was surely the case with the Olds/Pontiac SS ruling). To not simply invoke the “beyond class philosophy” verbiage, for all such requested changes.

[lateapex911]

You mention "modern brake pad materials", inferring that they create more heat than the parts are capable of accepting. But, there are many brake pad materials, some equvilent, or the same as, the old compounds. So, that's a solvable issue.

The issue with exceptions becomes, where to draw the line.

Witness this by the ONE exception, left over from who knows when (there were others, but we've stricken them) is being used as justification for this. We get letters regularly like "My car can't make the weight you set with me in it, I need an alternate body part allowance for the Humpback GT", Or, "the hubs fail on the car if we race them too often, please allow upgraded hubs"..and on and on.

I'm in the same boat, my car can not get engine parts. But, I've raced it for 10 years, it's set a lot of records and won some races. It's a tool, and tools wear out. Time to move on. keeps you young!

[Ron Earp]

It's a tool, and tools wear out. Time to move on. keeps you young!

Are you saying my tool is worn out? :o

Hell no my Z isn't worn out. Jeff and I obtained some good finishes with it in 09 and it seems to be racing just fine. Yes, brakes are a challenge at CMP (and I agree with Jeff, I'd put that track up against any other track around for "brake challenging") and require a lot of maintenance. They do work and in my opinion, and obviously the opinion of many other Z racers who are also racing, is that there isn't a safety concern.

It is unfortunate that in the future Z racers might be forced to use heavier steel drums. On the upside they are far cheaper than the Brembo ally drums. However I don't think there is a need to quit racing a Z, go vintage, or move classes unless that is your desire.

[JLawton]

Serious question. Do the Z cars really create that much heat in the rears? I can understand the fronts. I use the cheapest NAPA pads I can find for the rears, run them down very low and have no problem with heat.

[Ron Earp]

Serious question. Do the Z cars really create that much heat in the rears? I can understand the fronts. I use the cheapest NAPA pads I can find for the rears, run them down very low and have no problem with heat.


Yes they do. When the Z rears are adjusted up properly the drums will be blue from heat and stock shoes will crumble and can catch fire. Carbotech (and other) shoes will take the heat. To keep the rears working like they should requires adjusting the drum/shoe relationship about every 30 mins of hard operating time.

[pballance]

Thanks to everyone that has responded, there’s a lot to digest here on the subject.
................
.

Acotyk, Your well reasoned, respectful manner in which you have responded is to be commended :happy204:. I may be taking your comments the wrong way but I feel like you are attempting to make the "club" work for its members which has not always been the case. Even though I may disagree with you , I applaud your efforts and it has made me reconsider some of my opinions about racing an older car. I look forward to racing alongside of you in a Z and sharing a beverage in the paddock after the race.

I also ask the entire group, how do we age out a car in IT? Seriously, I don't want to stop racing my Z and I am sure there are some 510, RX7, Borgward, etc. drivers that want to continue, but how do we limit when a car must stop racing? Do we simply make concessions, such as discussed here when parts are NLA, to keep them racing? Can we create a "process" by which a car should be aged out? Is it even in the best interest of the club to consider aging out cars? Just thinking out loud, Can you tell it is the silly season??:blink:

BTW, I don't like the idea that "we should just go find something else to race" mentatlity but that certainly is one solution.

Paul

[lateapex911]

Paul, opinions on this vary.

It's really rather personal. Some see race cars as tools. Pro racers especially. Some see them as old dear friends. I race to win. I pat my car on the dash when I do. So I guess I'm a bit of both!

But, pragmatically, I understand that core philosophies exist to serve a group at large. So, I understand when my little 'issue' might need to just be dealt with by me, as opposed to changing the entire groups methods.

So, in your case, you can deal with the issue by running a setup that will generate less heat, or deal with it better. pads/shoes are free. Fabricate custom internal shoe finning and run multiple ducts. How would the F1 engineers handle the limitations? Think out of the box. Often we can be surprised when we see solutions we didn't think of. They DO exist sometimes!

Or, accept the limitation and adapt the driving etc. When the RX-7 was an obvious non runner in ITA, we in the New England Region bought a trophy and gave it to the guy who won that race in an RX-7. It was fun!.

Not the answers you want, just some thoughts.

[LLoughman]

Remember when Spock did the Vulkan mind meld with Uhura and he almost died. Kirk had to pull him away, when asked if he was ok he replied with “a mass of conflicting emotion”. I am having this same Spock moment trying to understand the logic behind these rules. By the way they don’t show this episode on TV anymore, I’m sure you can figure out why! Suppose this is why there are so many issues with the ITAC!

Hi John Herman, good to know your still out there. If John is right about the SS changes that then became part of IT for the GM rear disks, then why would the SS rules carry over to IT in violation of base IT rules Specification section 9.1.3.c. Could it be that safety really was the reason as stated would be allowed in section 9.1.3.b to “construct a safe race car”. If so, then what are the rules for determining safety? Since dual purpose no longer applies and “we will give you a place to race your car and have fun” is still in play, I would argue that with the tire, shock brake compound and other technology improvements over the years allowing for overall faster lap times these days that constantly driving around the brake technology of the early Z cars is not fun! A Z driven at 10/10th will have brake issues at all the tracks in my area, Chicago, other than Nelson Ledges and only 7/10th at some tracks will cause problems. I have had rear shoes delaminate, wheel cylinders freeze and seal blow outs that caused fluid fires. What are the requirement to determine a safe race car? Not being able to get the aluminum drums that were stock on these (I called Courtesy Nissan in TX and they have no rear drums for the 240z iron or aluminum) and looking at using remanufacture replacements or an iron after market drum (Can't post the web link but go to the Courtesy Nissan Part site)
I would also argue that if the GM exception was for rule 9.1.3.a, “opportunity to compete in low cost cars with limited modifications, suitable for racing competition” that this would apply to the Z (or maybe any other car with rear drums). Race cars with drum brakes! Boy let’s make that a rule in the pro ranks and then you will have a show!

Bottom line for me: The GM exception has opened the door. It should not be the only set of cars allowed to enter that door. I, like Andy, don’t want to see any cars leave IT so requiring a retrofit to the GM cars does not seem fair. SM has done a good enough job of that already let alone the economy. I would like to continue to race my Z in the SCCA and running iron drums does not seem to be within the rules. Simple answer > apply the rules equally and allow the disk conversion of an alternate model Nissan as was done with the GM cars.

[Greg Amy]

I would like to continue to race my Z in the SCCA and running iron drums does not seem to be within the rules. Simple answer > apply the rules equally and allow the disk conversion of an alternate model Nissan as was done with the GM cars.
That's quite the gargantuan leap of logic there...

Get a Nissan dealer to write you a note that steel/iron drums are the Nissan superceded parts for aluminum drums.

Easy peasy...sans leaps.

[Knestis]

... Simple answer > apply the rules equally and allow all cars to run the same GM rear brakes as the Oldsmobiles.

Ta-da!

:)

K

[Steve Barth]

I have been racing 240Z's since 1990 and have owned them even longer. The aluminum finned drum brakes are shown/pictured in several places in the original shop manual, they are also noted in the factory sales brochures I have. They are original equipment. Since the factory aluminum units are no longer available I feel changing over to the later 280ZX rear disc would be ok. Yes, I know it pushes the upadate back date rule. But SCCA "let the horse out of the barn" twenty years ago when they allowed the General Motors guys to change over from rear drums and bearings and axle assembly on the Olds Calais and Acheivea to disc. So a precedent has been set. I do not want to reverse that decision because it would take out many needed competitors and participatants in the club. I we should look forward and as any of these vehicles age and parts are no longer avaliable. I feel an update is neccessary to keep grassroots motorsports alive and going forward.
Thanks
Steve Barth Ann Arbor,Mi - Detroit/GreatLakes Region
ITS Datsun 240Z

[lateapex911]

Just curious, when was the last time one of the Olds was seen racing?

[Tom Donnelly]

Just curious, when was the last time one of the Olds was seen racing?

There was one at Road Atlanta in ITS this summer. Didn't see it at the ARRC though.

[Knestis]

I have been racing 240Z's since 1990 and have owned them even longer. The aluminum finned drum brakes are shown/pictured in several places in the original shop manual, they are also noted in the factory sales brochures I have. They are original equipment. Since the factory aluminum units are no longer available I feel changing over to the later 280ZX rear disc would be ok. Yes, I know it pushes the upadate back date rule. But SCCA "let the horse out of the barn" twenty years ago when they allowed the General Motors guys to change over from rear drums and bearings and axle assembly on the Olds Calais and Acheivea to disc. So a precedent has been set. I do not want to reverse that decision because it would take out many needed competitors and participatants in the club. I we should look forward and as any of these vehicles age and parts are no longer avaliable. I feel an update is neccessary to keep grassroots motorsports alive and going forward.
Thanks
Steve Barth Ann Arbor,Mi - Detroit/GreatLakes Region
ITS Datsun 240Z

Mark that down as another unintended vote for writing out the GM exception. We can NOT allow one stupid non-decision somewhere back in the dark ages of IT to establish a precedent that dramatically alters a major first principle of the category.

K

[lateapex911]

Mark that down as another unintended vote for writing out the GM exception. We can NOT allow one stupid non-decision somewhere back in the dark ages of IT to establish a precedent that dramatically alters a major first principle of the category.

K

Agreed.

If I were on the ITAC, I'd sponsor that, and I'd suggest a sunset clause.

[JeffYoung]

There are 3-4 around, more than you would think. John Herman was fast as stink in his in the Midwest. Buras built one (and Larry Stepp?)? There is one in Florida with Castrol decals, and then one that I think a Mark Cash drives?

[Bill Miller]

I've been asking about the Quad4 brake swap for years. I sent a letter in several years ago (2001 IIRC), and got a 'tabled for further research' response. Never heard anything more. Jeff, Is there any reason that you have to wait for a letter? Why, as a member of the ITAC, can't you take a pro-active approach with this? I think this will be an interesting situation to watch. I'm curious as to how it will be handled by the CRB.

[JeffYoung]

Good point and not sure Bill. The "conventional wisdom" is that we have to wait for a letter, but then again, ITAC members have written in letters to start a decision making process on a car/issue.

I should do that. I think I will.

[lateapex911]

Oh, they have a letter on it. It's on the ITAC agenda. Number 639.

I think it reads something like this:


Sirs,
The line item exception allowing the olds in ITS to use alternate brakes in the rear dates back to it's days in SS, and it carried the exception into IT from SS. It creates a situation where it sets a precedent for other exceptions. Z car drivers want to be allowed alternative brakes to help avoid issues with getting the preferred aluminum drums, RX-7 drivers want a new plating process to help continue now unavailable rotor engine parts. Once the barn doors are open, and all that.

I suggest the exception be stricken with the Olds. A sunset clause should be added should there actually BE any racing anymore.

[MIKEL]

Sorry for jumping in but I was talking to my dad who raced back in the 50s He said that rellinng the brakes was common. Most of the euro cars ran allum. drums, and I think that is where Nissan got the designs from. I looked at an old set and they dont look that hard to do. I think some people need to look for some of the old school or vintage people to see if anyone would still be able to do this. He noted that there was a lot of crative materials used back then to "improve" the drums. Remember they ran drums on the F1 cars at close to 200mph and they worked just fine. As long as SCCA allows you to refurbish them I see an opertunity to improve the originals. While it may not be the most inexpensive route if you can inprove the performane of you old drums it might be worth the cost??? If someone came out with a "HOT" drum setup for the Z car it might sell to the steet guys also this might get some people intrested in a larger production run and lower cost? Just a thought.:shrug:

[CPLUCKER]

Guys

Finally got registered from lurker mode.. I am talking to my machine shop buddy about re-buildeing the pile of cracked drums I have. My thought is to machine out the existing steel/ iron ring, and theremal press in a replacement ring. would you guys be interested in such a service ? I am shooting to do a first prototype pair and run them this spring. what would be an acceptable target price ?

Thanks
Chris Plucker

[LLoughman]

what were the results of your drum rebuild? I have found a source for re-lining al drums but he does not have the tooling setup for the 240z and would like to know the potential market. Send them a note to give them an idea how big this market could be.
J&G Drum Relining
Aluminum Brake Drum Repairs
McHenry, IL.
815-276-2578
Don Booker
[email protected]

[CPLUCKER]

earlier this spring I talked about doing some re-built drums

I finally got them from my machine shop source, he machined new steel rings, machined the ould rings out of the drums and pressed them in with .006 of interference.

I am going to test them this weekend at gobblins Go and make
sure they work o.k.

is there still an interest in the drums ?

I was going to see if we could get together and make a batch of maybe 5 sets for th inital production run

I will get the final run price from my buddy

Thanks
Chris Plucker

[betamotorsports]

Plasma spray.

[Greg Amy]

what were the results of your drum rebuild?
http://www.improvedtouring.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28436

If you want these topics combined (a good idea) let me know.

GA

[240zdave]

I might be interested, depending on price.

[JeffYoung]

Combine away..makes sense to me.

[Greg Amy]

Done...with adjusted topic subject. - GA

[LLoughman]

CPLUCKER > what were the results from gobblins go with the machined drums, or did you not survive? So, will I be protested next year for running iron drums since they were not OEM on a 240Z?

[CPLUCKER]

I used the drums at gobblins go, The results are pretty good, They did some "hot spot" bluing , but I have trouble with my brembo drums doing this anyway ( 2700 lb 280z ) but the press fit was really good and everything else seemed to work fine. we are making two small changes to the production run. The way the process to re-build them works we end up with a thicker steel liner so the weight is slightly higer, but the should be theoretically more heat tolerent.

So I am trying to get a run together of about 10 drums, the price will be $200 each plus return shipping to you. we only a few drums so you need to send a core drum to be rebuilt. The steel can be cracked or worn but the aluminum should be in good shape

so if you are interested

e-mail me at Chris.plucker at Areva.com

or contact Ross Schultz
at Titan Machine and Design

e-mail titan machine at yahoo.com
or call him 254-773-1110

send the cores to
Titan Machine and Design
2507 West Adams Avanue
Temple TX, 76504-3924