Namerow

Re door panel assemblies: No, sorry. You're looking at the wrong diagram. See items 1 & 2 on this diagram... http://www.carpartsmanual.com/datsun/Z-1969-1978/body-240z/door-panel-glass-hinge

I have a few questions that I'm hoping some of our CZCC veterans can answer: Door Panels: The parts manual shows a change made to the Door Panel Assemblies (lhs and rhs) starting in 71-10. Can anyone comment on the design change(s) made? (Note that the upper/lower Hinges are not considered to be part of the Door Panel Assemblies) Door Hinges: The parts manual shows a change made, starting in 72-07. Oddly, though, the change is noted only for the upper hinges. The lower hinges are shown as staying unchanged. This seems odd, because I believe that the design change included adding a revised travel limiter link with a detent, so that the doors would have two opening positions: fully-opened, and half-opened. The travel-limiter link, however, is part of the lower hinge. And the Nissan 'updates' document that Carl Beck posted a couple of days ago indicated that the detent feature was added to the driver's door only. Is there a mistake in the parts manual, or am I missing something? Lock Cylinders and Keys: At some point in its development, the S30's locking system switched from a 2-key set-up to a single-key arrangement (I thought this took place as part of the launch of 1972 models, but maybe it was actually when the 'early-to-late' transition happened during MY-71). In any case, it would seem that the design of the lock cylinders would have been revised as part of this change. However, the parts manuals shows no changes to the parts numbers for the door and tailgate lock cylinders over the complete span of the 240 model. The steering column lock assembly (c/w lock cylinder), on the other hand, shows a change in 70-10 (why?) and then nothing until 73-07. Can anyone explain how all of this works?

Mr. Neyerlin at zparts.com has some nicely done 'parts chronology' posts in the 'Blog' section of his website. The piece that 7tooZ has noted suggests that there may have been four choke knob designs within the 240Z model range (plus the fifth design for the 260Z).

I forgot to mention at the time when this topic first appeared that it seems to my eye that there were two early choke knob designs. The earliest is the very curvaceous, asymmetric version that Steve (nix240) reproduces so nicely. The one that the other Steve (sdyck, aka 'Steve from Calgary) had break on his car does not look the same. Instead, it's kind of halfway between the early-early, no-hard-corners style vs. the quite angular version that showed up in MY-72 and is now the only version that's conveniently available. Notice too how Steve-from-Calgary's broken item has a head that looks quite symmetric. All the other versions are visibly asymmetric. 3 choke knob designs in the course of just three years, then? And then a 4th version added when the 260Z arrived.

Same goes for me.

I wonder if the original owners of both your cars simply bought aftermarket A/R bars from the same mail order operation. You've reminded me of the two big sportscar accessory shops in Toronto back in the 1970's. One was called Piranha Motorsports . The other was R&R, or something like that. Both benefited from large sums of hard-earned money I pushed across their counters.

Topic: Relevance and usage of 'Series 1' vs. 'Series 2' vs. 'Series 3' definitions --- Jaguar E-Type vs. Nissan/Datsun S30. Discuss.

Ha! Zkars has opened an entirely new can of worms, that being the really early Series 1 cars. Shall we call them the Series 0.5 cars? They deserve entirely separate consideration. New levels of minutia beckon (and I have a list).

I am an incurable keeper of notes and lists. When I bought my 70 Z a few years back and starting researching my 'refresh-toration' project, I started to keep track of all the big and little and obscure changes that I found others had discovered over the years. The list I've ended up with is longer than what I've seen others publish. But I think everything on my list is verifiable. And I may have missed several items, too. Do the differences really matter? Let the market speak, I say.

So, growing consensus (4 owners!) that bolts, not studs, are correct for the top row of manifold fasteners. Now the still-unanswered question: Why?

Here's my list of items that changed from Series 1 to Series 2...

It's about the only way to do a decent paint job. Too many nooks and crannies otherwise and v. difficult to spray the slats properly because they mask each other. Reassembly's actually not too hard, other than needing to use care not to scratch your new paint when fitting the slats into the slots in the vertical ribs.

Check out the website for ZeddFindings (Kingston, Ontario)... http://www.datsunzparts.com/products.html Charlie Osborne offers the lower valence panel for C$189 + shipping. ZeddFindings has a great reputation and has been in business for decades.

Hey Captain O -- I've got a new way for you to hate remanufactured parts: Yesterday, while trying to install the rebuilt mastervac booster that I'd bought for my car (a Cardone unit, purchased from my local NAPA outlet), I discovered that the metric mounting studs (8x1.25) had been replaced with 5/16-24 SAE items! The first signs of trouble were when the metric nuts would start on the stud threads but then jam. At first, I thought maybe the stud threads were gunked up with paint, so I pulled the booster out of the car and tried to run a die down one of the studs, just to clean up the threads a bit. When the die wouldn't start easily, I started to get suspicious. I grabbed my thread gauge (metric) and discovered that I couldn't get a match with either the 1.25 or the 1.00 pitch. Then the light-bulb went on! How close are these threads? So: On diameter, near enough as to not matter. On thread pitch, though, they're close enough to get things started but far enough off to chew things up if you go beyond that. I'm just glad that I didn't get impatient and try to force 8mm nuts onto those studs. Oddly, the studs on the other side of the booster (that mount the brake master cylinder) were left as metric. Go figure.

When you get the opportunity, take some pix of your new system when the car is up on a lift. I'm sure we'd all like to see your muffler guy's handiwork.

Who did you source the clamps from? (I can't read the tags in the photo -- looks like just a bar code).

It's not. I came from the western US.

OK, thanks. I have a similar tumbler that I bought from a USA-based online supplier, Eastwood. They offer a few different types of media, including the green pyramids. I'd just never heard them referred to as a Delfir-chip, and a google search on that phrase came up empty, too. I've had 'ok' results with mine. It doesn't perform miracles, but it's a lot better than a wire wheel (ouch!) for nuts and bolts. The green pyramid media doesn't last forever. They're made from plastic, of course, and the sharp edges wear off over time, diminishing their effectiveness. They do seem to have a remarkable facility for getting (firmly) lodged inside the threads of certain sizes of nuts! I've often wondered whether a real tumbler (i.e. rotating 'can') would do a better job than these vibratory machines. I haven't seen one being offered for sale from any of the suppliers that I deal with, but I think they're available from .

If no one comes up with a loaner, I noticed that Zcar Depot has added a spindle-pin puller to their catalog. Look under 'Tools'. No CZCC member reviews that I've seen yet, so all bets are off as to how good it is.

My car has a similar but lower VIN than yours, but it does have the valve and the hard line.

What Is a Delfir-chip?

Good write-up. Thanks for taking the time. Not much difference in your methodology vs. mine, except for four things: Use of brass wire: Your comment about this making a difference is intriguing (although not intriguing enough to make me drag out all my chemicals to try it out). It would seem to be a matter of net conductivity at the contact point(s) between the wire and the part. I used copper wire (should be better than brass). Not sure that it was a determining factor in the quality of my plating, but seem to have observed a difference with brass vs. 'other' (steel?). Batched jobs I had miserable luck trying to plate multiple pieces at once. Too much difference from one part to another, so lack of reliable way to control for best net result. I adopted an approach of max. 2 parts at a time. Took forever, of course. Current setting Many detailed write-ups on zinc plating specify a current setting based on the immersed surface area of the part(s) being plated. Current set to high = fluffy/flaking zinc over-deposit on the part. Current set too low = long plating times or minimal plating activity. I have a notepad full of surface area calculations. You seem to have gotten away with a 'let 'er rip' approach, by just cranking your power supply up to max and putting as many parts as will comfortably fit on your wire. Is so, I am in awe. Yellow chromate I used Caswell's stuff. Your DIY formula is interesting, but I don't think the yellow chromate dip is the determining factor in the end result. Nor the blue chromate dip. Instead, it's the quality of the zinc plating job that, in my experience, determines the quality of the final finish. The chromate dips embellish a good zinc plating job, but they won't rescue a badly plated part. In fact, they just exaggerate any deficiencies. Zinc I used 'MossBoss' roof flashing. It's an uncoated, thick zinc foil. I lined my electrolyte bucket with it. Although not shown in your photos, it appears that you used Caswell's zinc plate and hung it on one side of your bucket. In theory (emphasis on 'theory'), my approach should be better because it reduces the directional effect. Things we've done the same: muriatic acid dip distilled water dip between every stage of the process Caswell chemicals for the electrolyte bath Caswell brightener added on a regular basis (with notable effect) heated degreaser bath (I used an ammonia/water/TSP solution in a crock pot -- I think you used the Caswell stuff) heated electrolyte bath (I think I ran mine a bit hotter than yours... maybe 100 degrees F) size of electrolyte tank (mine bucket might be about 10% smaller in depth and diameter) The main things I had problem with were: hyper-sensitivity of end results to the prep and cleaning of the parts. Once a part displayed a 'flaw' after initial plating, I had to take it right back to the sandblasting stage to get rid of the problem. Wire-wheeling and acid-dipping wouldn't get rid of it. irregular plating over large surfaces (e.g. timing chain inspection cover) and parts with bends (e.g. brake line clips) inability to get satisfactory results when trying to plate multiple parts in on go

And exactly what have you learned, please?

Where did you find those ?

There is a specialty paint supplier based in Toronto -- Parasol Paints ( www.parasolinc.com ) -- who will custom-mix vinyl paint ('dye') to order, based on a material sample or paint chip supplied by the customer. One-week turnaround. I sent them a swatch from the butterscotch seat covers I bought from Banzai Motorworks and found that their color-matching was spot on. This stuff is not what I would call a dye (to me, a dye is something that soaks into a porous surface). Instead, it's some kind of plasticized paint that creates a flexible colored skin that bonds to the substrate. From the can, it has the consistency of water, so its sprays very nicely with an HVLP gun. It begins to set up about 30 minutes after application and is essentially ready for use after 24 hours. It bonds very nicely to both hard plastic and soft vinyl, and -- as others have noted for SEM's rattle-can products -- it's remarkably durable. I've observed no tendency whatsoever for it to lift or peel off. The only application I might be a little hesitant about would be the seats, just because they're subjected to so much stretching and abrasion. Here's a picture of a sample of the paint after curing (I did a test shot on a shiny surface where I knew there wouldn't be a good bond). This was after two or three coats, IIRC. As you can see, the paint is stretchy and very skin-like... x The prep steps are the same as for the SEM products and are well-described on the Parasol website. Different prep chemicals are used for hard plastic vs. soft vinyl, but the same paint is used ('VaraKolor'). The main challenge in the prep is getting all of the ArmorAll-type silicone off the surfaces. The diamond-textured soft vinyl used on the Z is a challenge because it's hard to get all the silicone out of the grooves in the crosshatching. Here are some of the panels and covers after re-installation in my '70 Z. Apologies for indifferent focus (cheap, garage camera). The color register may be a little off, too (varies, depending on whether I'm using the flash or not). BTW, all of the panels and vinyls were originally black... ... x