We have just acquired a 1987 Coupe with the Doug Nash gearbox. Unfortunately, the car came with exactly ZERO history or documentation. We understand this car could have one of three possible suspension packages - the Z51, the Z52, or the "standard".

What is the best (quickest, easiest) and most definitive way to determine which suspension our new acquisition has?

Thanks in advance!
Ed LoPresti
607-535-4237

 

Ed,

Check the springs themselves. I don't know the codes off hand, but there should be a three letter code. For example, the base suspension in some years used "NYR" or something like that.

Once you find the code, you can then post it.

Another way is to turn the steering wheel. If it takes only 2.5 turns lock-to-lock, that is either a Z51 or Z52.

Is the center console cover intact? If so, there is a sticker with all the RPO codes on it.

If you are working on this car, the build sheet should be with the gas tank.

Finally, you can pay the museum to send you the build sheet per the vin.

hope this helps.

 

Bogus,

Thanks for the super quick reply! We will check the steering lock-to-lock initially, but also retrieve the spring Codes and post them here.

I am a little unclear about the connection between the gas tank and build sheet. As you suspected, we are "going through" the entire car, bit-by-bit. Perhaps when we get to the fuel tank, it will become clear?

Thanks again,
Ed

 

To correct some bad info from "Mr. Information", the "quick" steering is 1.96 (2) turns, lock to lock. The standard steering is 2.36 (2 1/3) turns, lock to lock, according to specs. The Z51, "Performance Handling Package", includes several listed items, including the FE7, "Suspension System, Front and Rear, Heavy Duty.". My listing of the Z52 package merely says, "Sport Handling Package (Merchandising Option)" with no listing of included options or features. The 1987 carries the following coded springs:

Standard Suspension:
Coupe, front: HKX or HMP
Convt, front: HMN

Coupe, Rear: NYR
Convt, Rear: RCA


FE7: Suspension System, Front and Rear, Heavy Duty.
Coupe, front: HMR or HLA
Coupe, Rear: NYU



As the chassis progressed down the assembly line, a build sheet was glued or otherwise stuck to the gas tank, with all the RPOs and other pertinent "build" data on it, before the body was lowered into place.

RACE ON!!!

 

CFI-EFI,

Thanks for the clarification, and the detailed explanation of codes to which bogus referred. As soon as I have an opportunity to get into the car again, I shall post whatever I find there if it does not match those which you have above.

Thanks again,
Ed

 

Whatcha gonna do with the car?

.

 

 

Slalom,

This car is headed for the track eventually - road racing. It is essentially bone-stock, so we have a very long way to go! We are well aquainted with prepping 911es, but this is new (and so far VERY PLEASANT) territory for us.

Ed LoPresti

 

The lower control arms will also have Z51 cast into them, and the base model 87 came with 8.5" wide wheels.

 

CentralCoaster,

Thank you for the tip on the lower control arms - we shall check there next. The wheels which came on the car are 9½" x 16" on a four corners, but they are after-market, so we can not tell much by that.

Ed

 

The casting is just inboard of the lower balljoint, underneath.

 

Really? Damn, I might just have to go take a look at that tomorrow. Where is it sitting? At the top of the tank?

 

Glued to the top/front of the gas tank. Don't bother unless you've got the tank out, you'll just destroy it.

 

Interesting. What's with the talk about something else inside the front crossmember? For what years was that?

 

Dunno exactly when, but those 3 braces became standard real quick.

 

gotta get your digs in, eh? makes you feel like a real man, eh? congrats. you are such a stud.

Oh, "Mr. Information", I think you will find that the body wasn't "lowered" onto the C4 chassis... more like attached in pieces and assembled onto the chassis. It is NOT a body on frame construction. It's a strange semi-monocoque.

The build sheet would have ridden with the VIN, the chassis skeleton, and once the tank was ready for installation, the sheet applied.

 

That's what she said.

 

Just like you insisting on posting fiction in a non-fiction section. It doesn't so much make me "feel like a real man", as it does make me feel like a useful contributor, dispelling, wrong information for the sake of a factual answer for the inquirer. Why don't you restrict your incorrect, wrong, and misleading information, to the "Off Topic Forum", where you are less likely to be taken seriously. People ask serious questions here, and a certain amount of people are going to believe and rely on your gibberish, which COULD cost them much time, trouble, and money. At the least, your misinformation will be retained and repeated, by innocent, clueless, parrots, in subsequent threads, thereby spreading the poison. Which is probably, exactly how and why you post your falsehoods. I can't get my "digs in" if I'm not given a target, and you seem to be the bigger contributor of targets, lately. Have I twisted your words again? I can't "dig" what isn't dig-able. Cut off my supply of wrong info, please.

RACE ON!!!

 

Here in lies the problem. The real crux. It's not so much I am wrong or right, it's that people listen to me.

And that, apparently, bothers you. A lot.

It also makes me wonder why they don't listen to you? Could it be your cold, sarcastic, holier than thou presentation? No way. Not in a million years.

I have NEVER professed perfection, and I will be the first to admit that my posts may not be 100% dead nuts on, but they start a dialog. And most of the time, dialog is the key.

What I post isn't gibberish. It isn't false. It is an honest attempt to help. And I suspect that if you poll the members, you will find that I have saved them many times more than cost them.

You, on the other hand, help, and yes, you are a wealth of knowledge. But you do it with a dagger placed firmly in the back of the reader. That's why everyone is jumping into your ****. They're tired, like I am, of getting smacked everytime we make a mistake.

I don't mind being corrected. I do mind getting is shoved in my face like I am a 2-year-old. We are all adults here. A little civility goes a long way.

In my initial post, there were statements of absolute fact. Statement's of error and statements of lack of knowledge. But those errors do not invalidate the entire post. I didn't know all the codes on the springs... so I told him to post them, and hopefully someone who knew would translate them, which you did. But the smartassed cracks in your reply were totally unnecessary.

If there is one thing we should learn here is this:

When you find an error in my posts, you swoop down on it like some kinda vulture in search of carion. When I find you in error, you attack me again.

It's tragic. If your delivery was kinder and less accusitory, I think people would pay more attention... but so many folks are tired of reading you insult someone. I know I am. I suspect that a lot of forum members have blocked you. Simply because they are tired of seeing you reem people out for no real good reason.

That's my diatribe, "Mr. Perfection."

 

How about we start over and leave anything not directly related to teh question at hand out of it?