Sorry for bringing this up so late, but mine has the exact sag, and before i buy anything I wanna make sure its that. How did you figure out its that panel?
UPDATE: Sag!
So close yet so far away. I guess I can't complain. I'm getting older and starting to sag. Why can't my car have some sagging? Yes, it's the dreaded foxbody front end sag (rear has it too, but not as bad).
Observed how the gaps between hood & lights increase..
Up Close
Observed how the hood is all the way down, yet does not contact the bumper. Also, observe how its fwd of the bumper. The bumper has actually sunken in & is sagging in the middle.
After one of the techs observed that the adjusment for this condition were already maxed I ordered a header panel and hardware kit from LMR in order to correct the issue. So, maybe its like getting a chin lift?
I kinda cheated. I work at a shop and had my tech tell me that was the problem. I fixed the issue 85%. It's at the body shop right now and they will fix the rest. Hit me back in a week or so and I'll tell you what they did.Sorry for bringing this up so late, but mine has the exact sag, and before i buy anything I wanna make sure its that. How did you figure out its that panel?
SOOOO long. Much pain I endured. The interior is next.That car has come a long way. Good job!
Re: lift, yes, you would add the 172s to the total lift.I assume that lift number you posted is with 1.6 rockers? Not lobe lift numbers. Why not more cam? That's pretty conservative even with emissions. I know you're not looking for every last hp but I would think you could gain 20-25hp especially in the top 1/3 of the powerband.
Can you give me a comparison of the two as far as cam behavior?Lots of duration and overlap. The cam I'm putting in has 276/282 w/ 112 LSA and it has a lumpy idle.
No, sorry. I have a very shaky understanding of cam science. You have a lot more duration and a wider LSA than I do, but I'm not sure how they correlate in comparison to what I have. Mine's just an off the shelf cam that works very well with the GT-40P heads that I have.Can you give me a comparison of the two as far as cam behavior?
It was sold with the rebuilt short block. I specified that I wanted a stock HO cam. Once we heard it idle we thought there's no way it is a stock cam. The builder assures me that it is a "ZE," or stock HO cam. Yet, the numbers he gave me (posted above) do not match a stock cam (except for lift...and maybe LS). The builder stated that if the cam is lopey (which it totally is), then maybe we have a wrong firing order, or fuel system issue.What led you to choose that cam? Seems like a lot for some mid-level heads.
Thanks! When I get the car back I can easily check the timing at home. My tech checked for a vacuum leak, but it is possible he missed one, or a new one has developed.Also a vacuum leak can make it "lope" at idle. Nothing wrong with your reasons/thoughts on the cam. With 1.72 RR's you're close to .480 lift. If the lobe profile was .4xx you would end up with .7xx lift with the 1.72's lol. Those specs you posted are similar to stock and shouldn't have a considerable lope. I suspect the vacuum leak or a timing issue.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?