Namerow

Putting the bodyside mouldings back in place will avoid the need to weld up the mounting holes (probably a couple of hours of shop time). Suggest you consider using steel rivets rather than aluminum, so as to avoid dissimilar-metal corrosion issues. Plain-steel rivets will have their own bare-metal corrosion issues, though. Check to see whether stainless or galvanized types are available. If not, the rivets can be phosphate-dipped to provide at least a degree of corrosion protection.

This reminds me of the discussion here a year or two back regarding the clips that hold the Series 1 hatch vent diffusers in place. They were -- and I believe still are -- NLA. One of the CZCC members gathered advance orders from a few other members and then had a batch order made by a local shop. IIRC, the price per piece was nowhere close to $30.

So perhaps a new header thread, titled: 'Show Us Your Tubes'

Reminds me that one of the foremost names in headers back in the day was 'Hooker'.

Way back in 2011, long-time contributor, LeonV, led an informative thread on the topic of headers vs manifold and on exhaust systems (pipe diameters, dual vs single-pipe). The discussion is backed up with dyno test results (note: the quoted Hp numbers are 'road horsepower', so net of all driveline losses -- which typically run at about 10%). The test vehicle was a 260Z that had been retrofitted with a 2.4/E88 engine fitted with triple 40mm Webers and a Datsun Competition header (which I assume is the same as the Nissan Motorsports header just mentioned by Conedodger). Exhaust system theory hasn't changed over the years, so the info in this old thread is still relevant. Included is a video of the dyno test. The car sounds great... although it's informative to listen to the resonance periods as the engine is powered up to max revs.

As Dutchzcarguy mentioned, the 'Body' chapter of the FSM contains sectional drawings for most of the Z's key sheet metal assemblies. Here's the one for the rocker/floor assembly:

Another build thread: Disepzeon (or something like that). He fabricated his own replacement panels. Great workmanship.

A little off-topic, but your experience with height gain reminds me of the very first column that Peter Egan wrote for Road & Track magazine about 20 years ago... or maybe it was 30 years ago (time flies). In it, he describes his very first efforts as a teenager to get into the local racing scene ('jalopy racing' on a local 1/2-mile dirt track). For that purpose, he and his buddy secured a mid-1950's Buick sedan from the local wrecking yard. Reasoning (like Colin Chapman) that 'adding lightness' would improve not just acceleration, but also cornering and braking, they set about removing all of the Buick's unnecessary bodywork -- including the (massive) front and rear bumpers and the also-massive chrome front grill. They were dismayed to find that the result was a car with about 1 foot of ground clearance and a center of gravity that was probably 30 inches above the ground. Great read if you an find it online.

You can get what you need from this Florida-based supplier: KlassicFab Vintage JDM https://kfvintagejdm.com/product-category/datsun/ KFV are relatively new to the Datsun Z market (since 2019?), but well-known for their line of replacement panels for VW Kombi buses. The traditional supplier of replacement outer-body panels is Tabco. Based on reports from others, Tabco's panels offer a fit that is just 'ok'. Tabco doesn't offer the inner rocker -- just the outer. If you use the 'search' function, you'll find some excellent threads within this website that illustrate the repair of this area in detail (lots of photos and lots of great pointers). Members whose build threads come to mind include: wheee, convertt, grannyknot, eurodat and patcon.

I'm having trouble with my photo storage software right now, but I had these pix stored separately. They'll give you an idea of how the vinyl paint goes on. As you'll see, the coverage is very good and I was able to transition these panels from the original black to butterscotch without any issues. The third photo, taken in natural sunlight, shows you just how good the coverage really is (and the paint is quite durable, too). IIRC, it required at least three coats, maybe four, to cover my black trim pieces properly. The hard-plastic panels are pretty easy to clean and prep. It's the soft-vinyl pieces with the faux 'quilting' that take so much effort -- made even more difficult in the case of the shock tower covers because they won't lay out flat for either cleaning or painting. BTW, these pix just show that parts lying on the grass after the paint coat was applied. I had them hanging vertically during the actual paint application. Unlike gwri8, I used an HVLP gun to apply the paint. Nothing too difficult about this. The vinyl paint is water-based. It mixes, pours, and sprays very easily. You need to manage the overall process so that you can spray all the parts, coat by coat, in a steady rotation without any interruptions. This is partly because you need to clean up the gun right after you stop. You do not want the vinyl paint to cure inside the spray gun. I sprayed all of my hard plastic parts on one day, then did the soft-vinyl pieces on a separate day. One final word of caution: There are some interesting fumes given off by this paint during the spray application. You won't smell them, but you will certainly feel them. Make sure you have good ventilation. And use a good mask. Your spray gun is not the only place where you don't want this paint to cure. If I can fix my photo software, I'll post a few pix of the soft-vinyl pieces on the weekend.

Maybe buy a socket that's slightly oversize and have it machined down to exactly the diameter you want.

Maybe for a Nissan product other than the Z?

These are the specs that I have in my notes for the Nissan Europe springs that MSA used to offer (but now NLA, according to MSA's website): Front: 122 lb/in (so +17% vs the NA-spec spring) Rear: 142 lb/in (so +36% vs the NA-spec spring) For comparison purposes, my notes show Eibach's progressive springs with these specs: Front: 133 - 183 lb/in Rear: 154 - 212 lb/in And the Vogtland springs as follows: Front: 152 lb/in Rear: 170 lb/in

So here's a question: Is the Nissan L24 the only engine of its era whose stamped-steel oil pan needed reinforcement plates to keep the mounting flange from deforming during installation?

Interesting that the section-view drawing of the installed bushing remains unchanged in the FSM's all the way from the 240Z through to the 280Z (i.e. shows a symmetric bushing and a rubber washer on both the inner and outer sides of the control arm pivots, making for a total of 8 rubber washers in the design). The Parts Manual, on the other hand, shows the rubber washer only on the outer sides of the control arm pivots and states the number of rubber washers as '4'. Given that disassembly of the rear suspension would have been a relatively common (and time-intensive) job for Nissan dealers' service departments, it seems curious that the service techs were apparently left to discover the asymmetric bushing design on their own and then correctly interpret the implications for correct installation. I wonder if anyone has a photo of the Nissan OE part that would help verify that the bushing was assymetric right from the start.

What Siteunseen has done achieves exactly the same net effect: no coolant flow to the carbs. You can do what he's done if you want. However, the plugs put into the front and rear carb body coolant ports by Z-Therapy mean that -- for you, with your new carbs -- there's no need to do what Siteunseen has done in his set-up. Nor do you need to worry about the pipe connecting the front and rear carbs. It's long gone and irrelevant.

The plugs installed in the carbs by Z-Therapy mean that coolant will be present (*maybe) in each carb's coolant cavity and in the hose leading into the cavity... but it won't be flowing. For that reason, the coolant will just assume the same temperature as its surroundings (i.e. the carb block casting). So: if the carbs are at engine-cold condition, the coolant in the carb cavities will be the same as the carb blocks ('cold'). And if the carbs are at at engine-hot condition, the coolant in the cavities will again be the same as the carb blocks ('hot'). Put another way, the coolant will not be performing any kind of heating (or cooling) function for the carb blocks. It will just be sitting there, 'along for the ride' as it were. (* I say 'maybe' because it seems quite possible that coolant will never actually find its way into the carb blocks' coolant cavities when you fill the coolant system. That's because there's no bleed hole in the carb block coolant cavity to let the air escape and the coolant enter. I suppose that gravity might let some coolant find its way from the thermostat casting down into the front carb cavity, but I doubt whether coolant will be able to flow uphill into the rear carb cavity). Bottom line is that you just hook up the coolant hoses to the front and rear carbs. Job done.

I have two pairs of L/R windows. All of those screws were firmly in place and showed no signs of being ready to back out. I can't imagine why yours ended up at the bottom of the door. I wonder, perhaps, if that window was the victim of a break-and-enter at some time earlier in the car's life, with the new glass not properly secured to the frame by the installer?

I've often wondered whether the problem with aftermarket polyurethane bushings not the fact that they're made from polyurethane, but that they're made from the wrong polyurethane. The traditional suppliers of these PU bushes have always skewed their products toward the performance buyer. The result is a vehicle that's hard to live with on real-world pavement. I'm sure there are lower-durometer synthetic materials -- PU or otherwise -- that could be cast from the same molds. Unfortunately, supporting a second product line called 'street' would cost a lot of money. The 'performance' segment of the market is, arguably, a lot bigger and certainly more lucrative.

Try Z Cars of Arizona for the radiator. It won't be cheap, I suspect.

Functionally, the hose braiding was supposed to provide extra 'burst' resistance. I have no idea the extent to which this is true. My best guess would be an extra 20% to 40%. Without that, the hose manufacturers wouldn't have been able to justify the extra cost to their clients, the vehicle manufacturers (notorious penny-pinchers). By the mid-1970's, however, it appears that improvements in hose materials rendered the braiding superfluous in both cost and performance. Restorers are now left with an expensive decision to make -- one that comes down to appearance and originality (it certainly has nothing to do with performance). Personally, I like the braided look -- but it's expen$ive and fragile (the OE braiding seems to have been good for about 3 or 4 years, after which it started to disintegrate).

Try Z Cars of Arizona for a more reliable source of quality used steering rack assemblies. Several years ago, our friend Mr. Hoover ( @240260280 ) produced an excellent photo-article guide on the topic of replacing the Z rear wheel bearings. It includes his secret tips for getting the staked nut off. I just checked and the full article is still available (along with all of his other great 'tech tip' guides) on the Atlantic Zcar website. Go here... http://www.atlanticz.ca/zclub/techtips/rearwheelbearings/index.html

About a month ago, one of the CZCC members pointed out that Nissan's part numbering scheme for 'normal' bolts actually contain the full bolt spec. I wish I'd remembered to copy that post into my notebook, but you can kind of see it in the PN for this particular bolt: '61812' I think it goes something like this: x-yy-z-a x = thread diameter ('6 '= 6, '8' = 8, '0' = 10, '2' = 12) yy = length under the bolt head (18mm in this case) z = ? (I think it's the pitch designator - '1' for coarse thread and either '0' or '2' for fine thread) a = ? (I think it's the grade designator -- most of the suspension bolt PN's show '0', whereas this low-load bolt's PN is '2' Maybe somebody with a better memory can fill in the correct information.

If you're interested, there was an extensive discussion on this topic back in 2012...

the kfvintagejdm.com website says 18-gauge for their floors and also 18-gauge for almost all of the other panels they're offering. The clear exception seems to be the frame rails. The website says 14-gauge (about 0.075", or 5/32"). I suspect that's probably the correct OE gauge for the big piece at the front of the rail, but maybe a bit over-spec for the long skinny 'hat' section rail that runs under the floor pan. ZCar Depot that long rail section (without the front piece) and my notes say that they claim 0.060" (which is roughly 16-gauge). I wouldn't be at all surprised if the OE version was only 18-gauge. These look like very nicely-done pieces. If the KF Vintage outer rocker panels resolve all of the fit problems that Tabco's pieces seem to have, they'll have a winner.