Captain Obvious

Not sure if there's any confusion here about color or not, but starting in 77 Datsun started painting the arms and blade holders black. Some details in this thread here: http://www.classiczcars.com/topic/58084-proper-wiper-blade-and-arm-color/ So the "correct" color for anything prior to 77 would be silver, but should be black for 77-78. And I'm not sure about the blade holders (solid vs. the rod style), but everything I've ever seen was the rod style regardless of year. I've not seen solid holders that were believed to be original as shipped.

Thanks guys! Yep, there are many ways to address the battery hold-down. I made that mod to an already needing to be replaced stock hold-down because it was free and was the fastest way to fix the problem for now. The long term pic is to fashion something similar to stock, but completely out of stainless. Jeff, your homemade bracket looks good. I've seen styles like that which are narrow through the center in case it had to fit between raised fill caps. You didn't need to worry about that with the Optima.

I disagree. I think it started to look nice a long time ago.

Yeah, Photobucket SUCKS!! I reloaded the pics at the (current) end of the thread. Take a look at page 4. http://www.classiczcars.com/topic/48621-steering-rack-disassembly-and-refurb/?page=4&tab=comments#comment-531913

I put an Interstate Battery (Group 24) in my 77 280 a couple years ago and I never liked the way the battery hold-down fit. Interstate has a stepped lip along the top of the battery that is juuuuusssst a little too big to fit inside the hold down bracket, resulting in a small contact patch on the top surface of the battery that is too small to provide what I consider a good reliable contact. In fact, it usually slips off one side or the other and wedges itself in on an angle. It's probably not just me, and I bet all you Interstate users know what I'm talking about. Here's the stepped lip that runs around the entire top of the Interstate. The inside dimensions of the battery hold-down bracket are just too small to fit around this lip: So I took matters into my own hands... I figured that my battery hold-down was rusty anyway and probably wasn't long for this world, I decided to try to make the situation better. With that in mind, I opened up the center hole in the original bracket a little bit to allow it to fit snug down against the step on the Interstate battery. I ran masking tape along the top of the bracket to give me a quick-n-dirty guide for how much material to remove and started grinding. I used an angle grinder for the bulk removal and a file to even it out and get into the corners: In this pic, you can see how much metal needed to be removed from the long sides of the bracket. If you look carefully at the top edge, I have removed metal back to the tape line near the corner, but towards the left side there is still metal beyond the tape. That's about how far back it needs to me removed to fit over the lip: And when you've done that process to all four inside edges, the modified bracket now fits snug and square against the top of the lip of the Interstate: The rear mounting hole is almost out of travel, but with a washer under the bolt head it still catches just fine: On my long term to-do list is to make up a full custom stainless bracket specifically for the Interstate, but until then this one fits way better than how it did originally. No more squirming battery and no more worry about shorting the battery cables to the mounting bracket since the bracket is now a half inch below the cable connections:

Yeah, I'm sure the spring is NOT stainless, but I believe the rest of the assy is. @dmorales-bello, why is it you don't think your arms are stainless?

Cool. So you had the three screw round tops? Was it titled as a 72 being built that late in the year, and you think the carbs were original? Maybe a transition period at the end of the 71 run? Everybody talks about the mid-year changes in 74. Maybe they did that kind of stuff in other years too.

You can't always use a magnet to positively identify stainless. There's plenty of stainless that IS magnetic. If it's steel and it's non-magnetic, then it's stainless. But if it's steel and it IS magnetic, you still can't rule out stainless. It might be a magnetic grade. I believe (from the fact that they are steel and haven't rusted) that the wiper arms ARE stainless.

Yeah, that's what I figured. You need to remember (or be told about) the "good old days" back when cars didn't do that compensation for you. The 280's were in a "mid-period" where they actually tried to mitigate that situation for you through the use of the auxiliary air regulator and take some of the manual drudgery out of your hands. Before that (with the 240 and 260), you manually used the choke lever yourself to modulate the cold idle speed. Consider it one of the endearing features of driving such a cool car. Now, you just jump in your Civic or your Sentra, turn the key, and pull out of the driveway before the starter has even wound down to a complete stop. It's all computer controlled. Thank you Moore's Law!!

72 does that. That's the only year that pushes coolant from intake manifold into the carbs. Good luck and here's to hoping the fix was as easy as a couple new gaskets!

Yes and yes. Most noticeable at idle, and could possibly be affected by temperature.

I believe he penned that between vampire hunting expeditions, right?

@Mike You might want to look into this.

Yeah, I'd want metal to metal. I'm no coatings expert, but most powder coatings I've messed with are much thicker than a coat of traditional solvent based spray. I'm thinking that one thin coat of traditional paint isn't nearly as problematic as a thick powder coat. Also, I believe powder coating is actually a thermoplastic coating (polyester?) melted into place. Reheat it and it melts again.

When you say "powder on the end of the flanges"... If what you mean is that you have powder coating on the mating surfaces of the flanges where the driveshaft mates to the differential, or where the axles bolt at either end, then I agree with your tech. I think there should be a hard, predictable, metal to metal contact there, and I worry that powder coating on those surfaces can extrude and squish out from between the two faces. Especially once things get hot and the coating softens from the heat. If that happens, you will end up with loose connections and it will snowball from there and probably result in snapped bolts. Might just be me, but I'd razor scrape off any paint on the mating surfaces and just apply a very thin coat of oil instead.

The early Z's used a simple vinyl covering on the A-pillars, but in 77 they switched to a screw retained plastic trim A-pillar cover. Well Datsun must have messed up some dimension somewhere because the plastic trim covers often crack due to the stress of tightening the screws. On my right hand side, I had one of the screws pull through. Cracked the plastic mounting hole clean off. My first attempt to remedy the situation was to simply buy another used pair somewhere off some forum. Unfortunately, the donor pair I bought not only had the same problem, but it was even the same screw, same location. This meant that I couldn't even use one side from my original pair, and the other side from the donor pair. It became clear that this is a common problem and it's not just me. With that in mind, I took matters into my own hands. Here's what I started with. My right side. Completely cracked off mounting hole in the lower position: It's supposed to look like this. Here's the other side where the screw boss is still intact: Figuring I had nothing to lose, I put a piece of tape over the hole on the visible side: Crosshatched the plastic on the hidden side: Taped a short length of small diameter cardboard tube where the mounting boss should be and filled the moat with epoxy: Gave it a day to cure, peeled off the cardboard, and using a dremel and some hand filing, I contoured the new boss to fit the into place on the car and drilled the hole for the screw: Countersink the other side for the screw head: Used a small brush to paint the exposed epoxy: And after the paint dried, the repair is nearly invisible: So I also figured that since I'd already seen two broken bosses, I would take the opportunity to reinforce the remaining ones which had not broken off (yet). I crosshatched the area and blobbed on a generous amount of epoxy to support the posts. And while I was looking at everything, I also noticed a couple small cracks starting to form along the edges, so I made a couple metal splints and epoxied them into place as reinforcement. After all this work, these things should be good for another forty years. Here's one of the splints next to a reinforced mounting boss: Installed back in the car, and I know it's the little things, but I don't have to look over at the right side of the car and see that missing screw in the cracked off mounting boss! Happy Happy!

Good news on the extremely high idle situation. So, now as for the current idle behavior where it starts out cold at 900-1000RPM and increases as it warms up to 1300-1400RPM? That is to be expected. Engines don't ever really like to idle, and cold engines like it even less. It's normal for the idle RPM to increase a couple hundred from stone cold to full warm, and without additional devices (like the air regulator), it's impossible to simply "tune" out. The engine will always idle somewhat higher once warm. In fact, it's the air regulators job to mitigate this situation. It's job is to apply a compensation bump to the cold idle to force it up a couple hundred RPM. The air regulator then gradually reduces this compensation bump as the engine warms up. In theory, once the engine is warm and the air regulator is no longer adding any compensation bump, the idle speed should be where you want it. So starting backwards... If your warm idle is where you want it to be, and you remove the air regulator. your cold idle will be too low. and in converse... If your cold idle is where you want it to be, and you have removed the air regulator, your warm idle will be too high. Haha!! Does that make any sense at all?

That's good to hear. The weather has been beautiful here in eastern PA as well. My 280 is running better than I can ever remember, and I've literally been coming up excuses to go out somewhere for whatever! Time's a tickin' and there won't be too many Z days left before the salt spreading starts!

And you need to do that. Because if you don't, you'll just spend all winter wondering! Good luck, and may the wind be at your back!

No problem. Glad to help. I've been running this alternative now for a couple months now and I couldn't be happier!! Give me a little bit and I'll get the pics back up again as soon as I get a chance to upload them.

"Here is the offending, evil oil pump shim firmly bent into position." Beautiful. Let's not go through that again!!

I'm mobile and can't post pics right now, but basically until 76, they used a single piston rear wheel cylinder where the one and only piston pushed against one shoe, and the whole wheel cylinder slid (floated) on the backing plate and pushed against the other shoe. Worked well enough until the cylinder froze in the slot. Then in 77 they changed to a fixed location cylinder with two opposing pistons. Same breaking performance (when everything is working as intended), but I consider the non-floating design much more reliable. I believe the chances that everything works as intended much higher for the later design. Wheer cylinder replacement cost is also an order of magnitude cheaper last time I looked. Not to turn this into a sales pitch, but I've got a set of the new design backing plates and stuff for the upgrade available. Easy purchase plan can be worked out when you come over to press your steering rack bearings.

I don't remember if you've talked about what your plan is with the rear brakes, but if you aren't going for a rear disk conversion and are planning to keep stock drums in the back... While you are doing the rear wheel bearings, you might consider upgrading to the newer 77-78 style two piston rear wheel cylinder design instead of the earlier floating cylinder design? You need the newer backing plate which requires taking the stub axles out. But if you're doing bearings and will have the axles out anyway...

Norton says any welding other than resistance welding is a no-no. From the info sheet I found here: http://www.nortonabrasives.com/sites/sga.na.com/files/document/Posters-BestPractices-24x36-NortonAA-8263-MB.pdf "Clamp or screw panel in place for a traditional bond. All products listed have glass beads in them to prevent over clamping. You can use a resistance welder to weld through the Acrylic Metal Bonders while they are in a wet or cured state. You can also use a resistance welder with the Epoxy Panel Bonder, but only while it is in a wet state. If you are using any other type of welder, do NOT weld through any adhesive. Also do NOT weld within 2" of the adhesive." And since I've never, ever, ever, never, ever done anything not recommended by the manufacturer. And always, always, always RTFM and do exactly to the letter what they recommend... I would have to advise against welding.

Yup. The way you had it (not) blocked off before was definitely a problem. If you were to blow into the nipple on that last block you took off, that air would come right out the center hole back atcha. It's not blocked off. And yes, now that you have taken that other block piece off, you should be able to slap a simple plate across the hole on the underside of the intake manifold to block the flow. Remove the hose and cap the nipple that used to feed the BCDD and you should be on to the next issue. If you are thinking you want to put the BCDD back on at some point, here's a recent thread that talked a bunch about the guts inside. Might help with getting yours back into usable condition: http://www.classiczcars.com/topic/58748-info-on-bcdd-boost-controlled-deceleration-device/ I've never messed with one, but I'm assuming the basic design for the newer one you have is very similar to the older ones pictured in that thread. I suspect yours is a little simpler and doesn't have an altitude corrector bellows on the underside (unless your car came from CA). Good luck with the rest of the project!