Leaderboard

And here is the newest of those wax/oil sprays and one of the best I have used, none of the product comes out of the front of the tip of the clear plastic wand, only out of the sides so as you pull it out of the frame or channel all of the wax goes where you want it. Unlike the Eastwood frame spray you can easily do an entire car with one can, Eastwood takes 5-6 cans. Gotta love SEM products.

I was a Series I for a couple of years. Things changed now I'm a higher Series, a very higher Series.

Do both but a ceramic header from MSA.

Who knew Putin hated hybrid Z cars

Lots to love here!

An F54 that is in a kit car of some sort with a automatic trans. Maybe not abused. Seller has video of it running. https://seattle.craigslist.org/tac/pts/d/lakewood-datsun-280zx-f54-complete/7452089062.html

Ziebart uses a 'wax' application (parrafin?). A comparable treatment in England is called Waxoyl. Ziebart was the leading rustproofing treatment in Canada and the US back in the 1970's, but it's popularity became increasingly challenged by competitors using light oil products (Rust-Chek and Krown are two of the leading franchises). All require drilling access holes in strategic locations to permit the treatment to be sprayed into closed sections (typically, rocker panels, A-pillars, and B-pillars). Doors, on the other hand, are treated by inserting the wand into the door through the window opening. One good thing about Ziebart is that the treatment doesn't drip after it's been applied (the oil-type applications drip for 2 or 3 days). Ziebart had some issues when the treatment was (allegedly) found to crack after a few years, leading to water/salt entrapment and premature rusting. Not sure if this was true, although I think I recall a class-action lawsuit being launched. One thing's for sure: Ziebart was a lot better than the brush-on 'rubberized' undercoating that a lot of Z owners applied to the underside of their cars when they first noticed rust appearing. That stuff just accelerated the rust. And we all know what a b____ it is to remove 45 years later on.

I was making it WAY WAY WAY more complicated than it needed to be. The bushings are rubber so they’re pretty soft. Cleaning up the threads and two carpenter’s clamps did the trick. I’m going to wait until the engine is in to torque them. Right now they are just on to the nylon so I don’t have to worry about the single-use factor.

Well I have a forum thread for you! https://www.viczcar.com/forums/topic/18677-glovebox-inscriptions-on-s30zs/ A couple of the images look broken (I'll fix those later) but if you click on them the image should load (it's just the thumbnail that is broken). It also wasn't just the glove boxes, but original radio's also got markings!

It is for positive crankcase ventilation. There should be a hose going from that to the PCV valve at the balance tube. They are parts 3 & 5 on this page: https://www.carpartsmanual.com/datsun/Z-1969-1978/engine-240z-260z/emission-control-device. Hose: https://www.thezstore.com/page/TZS/PROD/15-6211 Valve: https://www.rockauto.com/en/catalog/nissan,1972,240z,2.4l+l6,1209169,exhaust+&+emission,positive+crankcase+ventilation+(pcv)+valve,5052 If you plug the PCV, you risk pressurizing your block and finding out how weak your oil seals are.

To wit:

Some of the details seen on artist Hosokawa san's cutaway are almost exactly the same as seen on '8D-420' for the Auto Sport January 1971 colour feature and fold-out poster. Note in particular the identical positioning of the wheel brace and jack spindle on top of the spare wheels, which seems unlikely to be replicated on a different day/car. Clearly Hosokawa san had access to the car, but also ended up having to 'guess' some of the details that he could not see/sketch/photograph, or which he perhaps forgot to note at the time. Myself and a couple of others have long scratched our heads about details like the missing/invisible exhaust manifold, the strange and truncated shape of the transmission, the too-square 100 litre fuel tank and the bizarre shape of the moustache bar, as well as what you have already pointed out. '985', being Aaltonen's car (their lead and star driver in the rally program) and also placing highest of the Works team cars in the '71 Monte, was an obvious choice to mock up for the magazine's cutaway poster. So, I think the cutaway is a composite of more than one car, with a few mistakes and omissions. There's a long thread on the Auto Sport (UK) Nostalgia Forum which documents and discusses the work of cutaway artists like Hosokawa san, and there are always many mistakes/omissions/anomalies to be pointed out. I think it is a hugely difficult task to draw one of these things and I'm in awe of the cutaway artists' skill, so I don't want to nitpick too much...

I originally posted on my build thread about the different NOS Frame rails i have here: @Patcon & @CanTechZ requested that i make a special thread for it, so you can discuss. so here is the same information again: @Namerow: Since you cought my interest on this, i decided to have a deeper look into this. I have two different sets of NOS frame rails, one is grey and the other one black. one set is already sold, one grey item has already been cut up by my previous bodyshop to fix my chassis: Here you can see the two sets with the partnumbers labelled on it. The main differences are the mounting brackets (see red circles), some "wings" which were added on the grey version (see blue marks), and the extended length of the tension rod mounting "buckets" (sees green circles) Otherwise the two are pretty much the same, aside from some small clamps and brackets which have been added: -E4150 is used up to June 1972 according the european microfiches. and it also seems to match with my late 1971 production chassis i have. -N4150 is not clear. i didn't find it in any of my parts list, it seems weither to be from the 2+2 nor any other model, but because of the part numbering system, i just think it's an July 1972+ item. I didn't measure every single part, but wherever i checked on approx. 5 random spots, it was always 1,5mm thickness of sheet metal: here are some additional photos, see additional cable clamp in the black version, Additional "Wing" is well visible here: extende shape of the inside reinforcment: slightly different shape of the inside mounting bracket / reinforcement (left edge): Here you can see the end "wings" on the grey one, but it seems like the "leftower" piece on t he black ones have just been bent up in the grey version. Small additional bracket on t he grey version (center) Here you can nicely see the different style of mounting brakets: (the center one of the grey one is bent, i t would look similar as the other ones on the grey one. the additional "holes" on the left side are because the bracket on t he inside has been drilled out by the bodyshop, these wouldn't usually be there: Here's a closeup: Here the overall sisize difference of the tension rod mounting bucket is well visible: From what i can see and what i've experienced so far, the KFvintagejdm parts (no advertizing here) come pretty close to the black ones from the picture. The only part missing here is the "bucket" for the tension rod: they currently sell them only in two pieces, but if you look at the photos and drawings in the parts manual exploded view, you can see even the original ones where produced like this and then welded together. so in my opinion this is the best you can get if you can't find OEM ones. It's not well visible in my photos above, but even the "teeth" visible on this one seem to be as on the original ones (the part where the upper and the lower part join). Look closely in the last photo which i posted above, then you can see the "teeth" on the original grey one from a side view):

Wouldn’t consider myself a model citizen, but I have an early Revell 240Z Peter Brock “46” 1/25 kit that I purchased from a guy off facebook a couple of years ago, and today found another for sale locally on Kijiji. Definitely a later version. Model #’s are H-1402 (early) and H-1422 (larger, later) The early box is shorter and has a different image on one side than on the later taller box. The image of Pete and John is only on the early box. Not the most flattering pose for John. Ha! Later taller box is also missing a strip. Dang it. At least the model parts are all there and un-assembled. My early version is partly assembled and several of the pieces are off of the frame. Previous owner started assembly. Haven’t search the inter webs for the part numbers to see how old they are, but pretty sure they would be 70’s. Now that I’ve searched a bit, the instruction sheet indicates 1972. Might part with the later one with the damaged box. Let me know if you’re interested This stamp is on the later taller box, definitely an inferior copy of a copy or such. This is on the earlier box. Much crisper.

He says it's a 280z engine but he is mistaken? that would be a N42 engineblock or so? the F54 was the later 280ZX after 1980 engineblock?

oh yeah! Still have plenty of those kicking around. Use them all the time.

Lots of great details in that cutaway. Also a few inaccuracies for car #62: brakes shown are vented disc with single piston calipers. And the period photos that I have of the doors do not show pockets, but that may have changed for race-time. And I'm not sure what that block hanging rear of the gas tank is supposed to be - a skid plate?. I find these changes curious, because so many other exact Works-specific details are shown correctly, which means to me that the drawer had access to accurate photographs, and perhaps the car itself. i wonder if these details are taken from 8D-420 (or similar), and they simply added the Monte Carlo plate for effect?