Jump to content

Due to a hardware failure on the hosts systems, all posts and messages created between May 26th and Jan 13th have been lost. Additionally, if you joined the NPORA Forums community during that time, you'll need to re-register. -NPORA Mod Team *Updated: 05/19/2022 12:15AM PST


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


1994SEV6 last won the day on June 19 2016

1994SEV6 had the most liked content!

About 1994SEV6

  • Birthday 10/30/1994

Previous Fields

  • Your Pathfinder Info
    Burgundy 4x4 SE Hardbody with 129k miles. Plenty of problems, but I love it.
  • Place of Residence
    Silver Spring, Maryland
  • Mechanical Skill Level
    Wrench And Socket Set Mechanic
  • Your Age
  • What do you consider yourself?
    Rarely Go Off-Road
  • Model
  • Year

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland
  • Country
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

5,768 profile views

1994SEV6's Achievements

NPORA Old-Timer

NPORA Old-Timer (5/5)



  1. That's a good looking truck! So you're saying my current ride height is normal? I could swear it looked much more level when I got it 2 years ago. I never noticed that my cab sat lower than the bed. It took me a second to even see what you were talking about. What causes this?? Is the mount fatiguing or something??
  2. My adjustment bolts have not run out of threads. I am still able to crank them up more, but I feel this will make my front camber problem worse, at the expense of little ride height gain.
  3. Reindex? I read a thread on here about re-indexing the front torsion bars, but just to make sure: You recommend completely un-tensioning the torsion bars, and re-adjusting the anchor that they sit in?
  4. uhh...I don't think so. I think I need to adjust something in the front suspension. Maybe I need to add a shim where the front upper control arm meets the frame?
  5. As some of you may know, I did an A/T to M/T swap on my 1994 D21 in Dec of 2011. Ever since then, I've felt that my front end has been lower than it should be. I just chucked it to me not having cranked the Torsion bars enough. I finally got around to cranking them up some more. I can't remember, but I think I tried to crank them up significantly. The front end barely came up any, but now my front wheels are positively cambered pretty badly. Like, you can see it with the eye. My front wheels are like \ / but not so intense as the diagram (lol) suggests. I would like to have the front end raised up a bit, and get my front wheels back to their positive camber. Also, my rear end is sagging. The leaf springs have lost their curved shape when not-under-load. I plan on removing the leaf springs to get them re-arc'd. There is a shop in my area that does suspension for all of the big dump trucks and all that, and they will re-arc leaf springs for like $45 a side. (on a side note, is this a good idea at all? Or do leaf springs not take well to this type of treatment?) I'm mentioning this because when I re-arc my rear leafs, the rear will be even higher. I already don't like how the rear is higher than the front, and re-arc'ing the leafs will make the rake even more intense. I don't want my truck to have the ass end in the air. I think the front sagging makes it look like a 2wd, and I hate hate hate hate that. I bought a 4x4 truck, I want it to look like one dammit. Here is my truck currently: I would love it to look more like this, but I understand this is likely the work of a body lift at least. But even so, you can clearly see that the wheelwell gap in the front and the rear is equal. Actually, the gap in the front might even be a bit more.
  6. The link to "Brent's website" doesn't exist anymore. Does anyone know how difficult of a project this is? How long it would take, how intuitive you have to be? I know I have an LSD, but I don't think it's working at all
  7. Why are you guys saying a bunch of dumb stuff? "a 350 out of a TRUCK/VAN won't make 300hp" Why the hell would you ever do an engine swap out of a truck??? Truck engines are tuned completely differently. not for performance "oh well, yeah, of course the camaros and corvettes and CARS will make 300hp+" NO @!*%!!!!!!!! That's why you want an engine out of one of the CARS because it's tuned for PERFORMANCE
  8. Yeah, I know. I installed a set of Nissan OEM manual locking hubs on my truck. They are definitely robust to say the least. For most people, autos are fine in the snow. Even light wheeling. Then some people upgrade to manual hubs. 90% of 4x4 vehicles with manual hubs have warns. With that being said, I'm not going to spend $200-300 or whatever Warn wants for some manual hubs. Not when I can wait it out a few months and snag some Nissan OEMs from a JY for like $20 a piece at most. Well, this strategy doesn't seem to work for Trogdor. http://www.ebay.com/...r#ht_500wt_1198 This guy wants $77 for very clean hubs. That's a bit less than what I paid for mine.
  9. except Ford engines are some terrible-ness. When Tungsten said "I doubt a stock 350 engine could put out 300hp", I was about to say "this ain't no Ford BS" Even Ford's modern 5.0 (except new Mustangs, which they must have done some spooky magic on) only make like 230hp. Just last year, 2011 Lincolns with the 5.0 only had 230hp. Talk about some junk engines. Not even to mention the fact that reliability doesn't exist. And then the new Toyota CAMRY (yes, the 4-door family car), can put out 270hp with an itty bitty V6. A family car. Must I forget, that in 2003, Honda was pumping 240hp out of a 2.3l inline4? So...Honda = 240hp with 4 cylinders... Ford=230hp with 8 cylinders. Ford, you're doing it wrong.
  10. Holley is worth it. P.S. to the OP, go with carbureted. Don't mess around with fuel injected swaps. That's a pain! It also costs a whole bunch more.
  11. "780 CFM Holley four-barrel CARBURETOR on a special aluminum intake"..."rated at 370 bhp in early Corvette sales literature, but actually only sold as 360 bhp version at 6000 rpm and 380 lb-ft at 4000[7] (the NHRA rated it at 425 hp for classification purposes). Just stop now. Please, for your own good. You're very wrong about this. I know older GM engines very well.
  12. jeez..you called 40 different junkyards and had them check for manual hubs? Y U so butthurt over some manual hubs?
  13. 1967–1969 L48 SS350 350 cu in (5.7 L) V8 295 hp (220 kW) (1969 300 hp (224 kW)) @ 4800 rpm, 380 lb·ft (515 N·m) @ 3200 rpm http://en.wikipedia....rst_generation) Are you sure you know anything about cars? They were pumping out 300hp from 350s over 40 years ago. Did you even read the page that you linked above? In 1970 the 350 was "rated at 370 bhp in early Corvette sales literature, but actually only sold as 360 bhp version at 6000 rpm and 380 lb-ft at 4000[7] (the NHRA rated it at 425 hp for classification purposes). " My friend has a 1975 Chevy Vega with a 327 swap (that's LESS displacement for those people who don't know how engines work) and it easily puts out 350hp on stock internals. It's some engine from the 70s. carbureted, naturally aspirated, etc.
  14. So the fact that one car was beat and abused, that makes all of them crappy? I mentioned this to a friend whose parents had one for a few months. He said it handled amazingly (the CTS mind you, not the CTSV), and even the larger of the V6s had enough power to get it to move. Of course, Cadillacs have nice interiors, but for this car, "nice interior" kinda means some nice leather seats but a bunch of plastic dash pieces. You might want to pony up and get a 1st gen CTSV. At this point, it's probably good performance for your dollar. The 2nd gen CTSV is where it's at though.

Welcome to NPORA Forums


Please register to gain full access to the forum.

Make sure you read the Forum Guidelines and don't forget to post a new intro in the New People Start Here! section, to say hi too everyone.



  • Create New...