LeonV

No, it will simply be sucked out into the engine and be burned off.

I don't know if that picture you posted of the engine bay is current or not, but your vac advance hose is disconnected causing a vacuum leak. It may not be the issue but it is something that would make the car run poorly.

Damper fluid does not affect the steady state mixture whatsoever, what it affects is transients (acceleration). If you read the link I posted, you would see that the lower the piston is, the smaller the cross sectional area, therefore the higher the velocity is at the venturi. Higher velocity equals higher pressure drop, so more fuel is draw out and your mixture is richer. A lightweight oil will let the piston move quicker, thus it will tend to lean out transients. Thus, a more viscous (thicker) oil will richen transient mixtures. If your oil is too light it may cause piston flutter which leads to an unsteady mixture. RacerZ says a lighter oil will make for "crisper response." I don't buy that generalization because the only way response will improve by going to a lighter oil is if your transient mixtures are too rich. That's like saying that decreasing the size of the pump jet on a typical carb will improve response.

Looks like they tried to cover up rust with paint, there is much more lurking underneath. I would not touch that car at the asking price.

To experiment, try to lean it out enough to make the smell go away and then drive it. Also make sure that your ignition system is in proper tune: clean plugs, timed correctly, cap is seated on the dizzy (yes that was a problem for me before), etc. An 02 sensor or gas analyzer will tell all.

There is no emulsion tube or anything else besides one orifice, which you can call a jet, and a tapered needle. The needle adjusts orifice area when engine vacuum causes the piston holding the needle to move in its bore. You can't "change the jet" on SUs unless you want to get into major (unneeded) modifications. What you can change is the needle geometry. A narrower needle equals a richer mixture. There are different needle profiles available to fine tune SUs. I don't think this is necessary in this case. The round tops also don't have a dedicated idle and low speed circuit as "typical" carburetors would. It's all one circuit, so if you richen up the low end, you are richening up the high end as well. Vice-versa for leaning the mixture. My hypothesis is that there is a vacuum leak, likely in the throttle bushings which tend to wear out and leak. Since there is a vacuum leak, the tuner compensates by making the mixture richer. This causes idle and low speed cruise AFR to be richer than it needs to be and there's your smell. You won't see black smoke until 10:1 AFR. Here is an explanation of SU functionality: SU Principles of Operation

To be blunt, you don't understand the fundamentals of SU carbs. Racer88, use a sniffer or WB02 to really see what's going on. I've been fairly certain the you're running rich. Follow the suggestions on Hybridz. You either have leaky, mal-adjusted carbs, or one (or both) of the jets is stuck in the down position.

I'm not buying that argument either. Considering there is a balance tube connecting the carbs this "pulse" explanation is, for all intents and purposes, a moot point. Seems like it should work just fine, and it's not like the twin SUs don't have mixture distribution problems either. A triple, twin-choke (DCOE, PHH, etc.) setup will inherently out-perform any combination of SUs given a proper setup and would be more cost-effective than a triple SU setup because of the custom work required.

I've dealt with registering out of state cars in CA. At this point, you need to take it to the DMV for an "inspection" (all they do is match up the VINs like you allude to). I did it through the DMV, maybe CHP does the same thing. I'd go to the DMV and do all the registration and inspection in one fell swoop.

Just go to the DMV and register the car. If it was previously registered in CA, all you have to do is pay the fees. No smog or VIN checks necessary.

If you loop the hoses to drive home, that's fine. However, do not keep the heater hoses looped! That creates a path of least resistance for the coolant which bypasses the radiator and will overheat your engine when driving hard. TonyD has engine dyno evidence of this over on HybridZ. When you get home either (1) put in new heater hoses, I've done this but it was a PITA or (2) plug the heater hoses/connections at both ends.

Rockauto has a lot of quality parts for typically decent prices.

Research engine dieseling or run-on. Could be a few things like excessive carbon deposits or engine overheating, for example. I'd check your coolant first and flush it if it hasn't been done in a long time.

Recently sold my 3/71 240Z HLS30-24940 Have 2/71 240Z HLS30-22344 and 9/73 260Z RLS30-4406

I'd like some more info. If the 260Z is reliable by then, I may consider it.

If I read that right, your rear wheels lock before your fronts do. This is not good for braking stability nor for maximum braking performance. Your brake balance is off. The fronts should lock first in the highest grip situation that you plan on driving in (dry pavement, stickies tires you will use). Then they will definitely lock first in lower grip situations. Just FYI...

Took the rears apart today and measured. Thankfully, my rear 9/73 260Z struts essentially match up to 1/71 240Z struts. Here are the numbers (240Z/260Z): Inner Overall Height: 16.6875"/16.75" Spring Perch to strut top: 13cm/13cm ID: 46mm/46mm When I install those back onto the car I'll update this thread.

Thanks John, I've read that thread already in preparation for what may be inevitable. I'll have to bust out my spring formulas and do some calcs to really nail down the height and spring rate I want. I'll see what the rears look like today, and shave my front bumpstops before I take it on a test drive. What I'm putting in will definitely be better than the cut stock springs that were in there.

Yeah, I noticed that too. Our springs are definitely different, visually and part-number wise. Mine are from a 240Z, are your springs the 280Z ones? I'm thinking that if I don't have enough bump travel that I'll just get the 280Z Tokico springs and cut them. The rear suspension is off the car, so tomorrow I will hopefully get the spindle pins out and work on the rear struts. I'll be sure to measure and note any differences between my early 260Z and '71 240Z struts.

Do they? Where can I get these early-260Z specific shocks/springs?

Yeah, that's what I figured. Nobody wants to make springs/shocks specifically for the early 260Z, which have different strut tubes than the 240Z and late 260Z/280Z as we've shown. Early 260Z owners just have to adapt to what is out there.

Dave, Your post is very much appreciated, especially the strut differences. That's why the gland nut almost bottomed... The difference I see is in the springs you're using. My springs are the 240Z PN and your's are the 280Z ones I believe, maybe I'm wrong. As you can see, my front springs needed a spring compressor to install. Your springs also look different, as they seem to be linear (not progressive) in front, unlike mine. Haven't done the backs yet so I guess we'll see how that turns out. Here is my logic in this situation. As your picture shows, the 260Z spring perch is one inch lower than the 240Z perch. The Eibach kit is the same for the 240Z and early 260Z. That means that using the same spring lowers the 260Z an extra inch. Therefore, if these Eibachs are designed to lower the 240Z 1-1.5" as advertised, that means that the 260Z is lowered 2-2.5 inches! Nevermind the essentially complete loss of bump travel. I suppose the first course of action is to cut the ES bump stops, like I should have done in the first place. If that doesn't help then I might just have to buy some 280Z springs and save the Eibachs for the '71 240Z. Oh those quirky 260Zs...

I'm rebuilding the suspension (bushings, springs, shocks, etc.) on my 9/73 260Z and I just ran into something unsettling. I installed Tokico HPs and Eibachs which are both listed as compatible with the 240Z and early 260Z. When I put in the HP inserts, the gland nuts almost bottomed out. They are tightened but very close to the strut top even with the gland nut spacer. But this is not the main problem. While I was putting the springs on I noticed that my 260Z spring perch sits noticeably lower than the 240Z struts I have to compare with. I decided to go on anyway, because the springs are listed as the same for the 240/260Z (early). I installed the struts on the car (ARB or steering rack uninstalled, but that doesn't make a difference) and I have virtually no bump travel with the ES bump stop in there. Cutting or removing the bump stop will help but not by much, as I think it would still bottom out all the time. The springs are installed correctly, with part number 6305.001 in front. Now I'm thinking someone installed later struts but I measured the strut ID and it was equal to my 240Z strut tube! My strut inserts fit snugly into both my 260Z and 240Z strut tubes. The difference being that the 260Z lower spring perch sits lower than the 240Z spring perch. I don't remember there being much of a difference in overall height. At this point, I'm not quite sure what's going on here. Are there three types of stock S30 struts? It does not look like someone cut the perch and welded it lower. I suppose I can get longer springs (maybe some 280Z performance springs), but what is the issue here? I've been searching and haven't seen this problem. Here are some photos for reference:

What do you mean by rocker arms are out of line? You don't have to "tear apart" anything to do anything rocker arm related. You do have to take the valve cover off. If that's a big undertaking for you then maybe an engine swap is not a good idea. Changing a clutch is also magnitudes easier than an engine swap. Some strange logic is being applied here.

Correct, I have the same tire size on my lowered 260Z. Wheel offset explanation: http://www.nicoclub.com/archives/wheel-tech.html You have wheels with a high positive offset.