Another Hydroholics install, this time a 2007 Altima

that car is badass. the setup is too clean. at ride height it probably looks stock with rims.

I agree.  We could go on and on about hydralics this and air bags that.  At the end of the day....They both suck.  Just leave your stock suspension in if your scared.  Or go to church!

---------------------------------------------Originally posted by ahabI agree.  We could go on and on about hydralics this and air bags that.  At the end of the day....They both suck.  Just leave your stock suspension in if your scared.  Or go to church!

---------------------------------------------I agree.

---------------------------------------------Originally posted by ahabI agree.  We could go on and on about hydralics this and air bags that.  At the end of the day....They both suck.  Just leave your stock suspension in if your scared.  Or go to church!

---------------------------------------------AMEN!!!

Come on. What are you guys thinking? No pissing matches about hydraulics vs. air. I am thinking about starting a thread about it..........

Well personally I'm a huge fan of juice. I love what your doing, and total dig the cylinders for the front, but I too would like to see some type of jam nut to give a brother some peace of mind. I was working on a design so you can use a bearing up front.  So it would be a straight bolt on set up and the shaft wouldn't turn inside the cylinder, saving seals. All and al lwhat your doing is dope and I'll be hitting you up when I re do my next set up for sure!

The bearing at the top would be a spherical ball, or "power ball". I have used them several times. They have pros and cons, and sometimes can not be avoided, and sometimes can not be used. On this car the strut is perfectly up and down, so I didn't need to use them. Also, if I would have used them, it would have not let the car lay out as far as it does. Unlike the 08 Impala I did not too long ago, the power ball could not come through the strut tower, the hole was too small to allow it. I have already exhausted the jamB nut thing 100 times. So I am not going to address it again.

It's Jam Nut.  No B. http://www.mcmaster.com/param/asp/PSearch2.asp?reqTyp=parametric&act=psearch&FAM=nuts&FT_153=60602&session=desc=Nuts;nuts;153=60602&sesnextrep=762325353080963&ScreenWidth=1024&McMMainWidth=810 http://www.pegasusautoracing.com/productselection.asp?Product=AN316 http://secure.chassisshop.com/categories/5933/ http://store.summitracing.com/egnsearch.asp?N=700+4294886010+115+4294886004 It is kinematically impossible for that upper mount not to bend while the car goes through suspension travel.  If the balljoint isn't exactly in-line with the strut axis (cylinder axis) then it will also bend the top mount when you steer.  Yeah it's not much - maybe only a few degrees - but metal must bend  in order for you to steer or compress the cylinder.  It doesn't matter how straight the strut is, the top must move. 

OK, you are correct. I stand corrected on the JAM nut. My mistake sorry. It's the way everyone I know spells it, so I always spelled it that way as well.  As far as the top moving... say whatever you want in your fancy words, it works. We have done it like this plenty of times.  Thanks for chiming in with you first post.

^^