Captain Obvious

It is completely conceivable that your old switch has burned up contacts inside and turning it as far as you can (to full stop) in the clockwise direction would break the contact. And of course, it would be more concerning if your new switch did the same thing. So check it again with your new-new switch when it arrives, and let us know. Let's hope if was the loose terminal.

What? You think that was an accident? What took you so long?

Wow. Nice switch. Hope that was a really really rare occurrence. So your question "if I turn it full hard to the right or clockwise. The starter doesn’t kick on at all. Is this normal?" In my experience, the answer is "No, that is not normal." It sounds like your lock is travelling too far and going PAST the location that it should rotate. I've seen situations where internal wear makes it such that the switch doesn't turn far enough, but I don't think I've seen it turning TOO far. I'll dig some lock parts out when I get the chance and see if I can come up with any ideas.

LOL! I was going to respond earlier, but I was out of computer time. Beer to drink and all that... So I'm speculating that those parts are formed and NOT extruded. I would guess they are formed in the annealed state and then heat treated to a more springy condition after forming. The fact that they look completely closed where the fuse blade is inserted is interesting. My limited experience making such things says that would be difficult to achieve due to spring-back of any material when you are forming it. Hats off to them for achieving that and I'm not sure how they did it. As far as the material, stainless is not generally known for awesome electrical conduction properties compared to copper based alloys. Stainless is also not known for great forming properties either. I would have guessed they were chrome plated brass, but their website says they are " high-strength steel", so it seems my guess would have been wrong. All in all, a neat idea and a well done implementation. I'm guessing the investment in tooling to make those things was not trivial. Going to have to sell a lot of them to recoup that investment.

Because that's the sort of thing you do when you have access to a laser cutter. Haha!!

And lastly... Here's a pic of my gland nut wrench test piece. This is on the 280 nut. Fits great: But here it is on the smaller 240 nut. The octagon is too big. So my CAD file won't do you a lot of good since it's the wrong size. @Daluvian I got your PM and will respond there too.

So that brings up a point... You 240 owners who bought the KYB 361002 struts for the front of your car... Don't toss out that larger gland nut that didn't fit your car. There might be a 280 owner out there who could use it! And vice versa for the 280 owners like me who have small nuts and don't know what to do with them.

Well would you look at that! It appears that the 240 DOES have a smaller ID strut tube and a smaller gland nut! I thought they just made the 280 wall thicker, but apparently both OD and ID changed with the 280's. The point is I have the smaller KYB gland nuts that I'm not going to use because they don't fit my 280. Using that info, here's what I have: So do you want just one, or both?

From my years in GM world, there were many HEI module failures, but those were attributed to mounting the module under the distributor cap and dealing with all the engine heat. I never personally studied the failures, but that's the belief. Keep it cool, and it'll be fine. Put it on top of the engine, and it won't last nearly as long.

Do you have a caliper that you can use to measure the outside diameter of the threads on your damaged nut? That would be the easiest way to talk about them. Length is confusing. Thread diameter is not. And about your gland nut wrench... Not long ago, I did exactly that and had a peototype wrench head laser cut for the KYB nuts and I have the CAD file I created if you're interested. Mine was just a test part cut out of thinner material (too thin to be really usable), but the outline fit great.

Yes, the 280 tubes are thicker wall, but I think the ID and the threads of the the 240 and 280 are the same. If the 240 uses the smaller KYB nut, then those are available. I have no need for those! That would be a perfect solution!

And just so I'm positive that I wasn't seeing things, here's a couple threads that talk about the old one eared ignition switch: https://www.classiczcars.com/forums/topic/45631-ignition-switch/ https://www.classiczcars.com/forums/topic/49960-240z-ignition-problem/ Good pics in those threads. Like this one: So it's completely conceivable that those older one-eared switches did not follow the same power map as the newer two-eared versions, but without a sample, I'm not sure if we will be able to figure out if that's the case, or if it's a documentation error. Me personally? I find it really odd that they would kill the power to the ballast resistor while in the START position. I would expect them to keep that powered in both ON and START. You need a bump-less transfer between those two when you are starting the car. You don't want a dead spot between those two positions.

I took a look at what I have, and I unfortunately do not have a spare KYB gland nut. Here's a pic of what I could quickly put my hands on... Note that the new KYB on the bottom row is not available. I took that out of a KYB strut box here and the plan is that strut (and it's nut) will find it's way onto my car. I don't know the brand/origin of the top left nut or the one top middle. The top right is from a Tokico strut, and the bottom two are new KYB's' from a front strut box. I need the big KYB, but the small one is extra. Too small for my strut tubes:

I did not pour over the 75 wiring diagram, but for other years, a temperature switch controlled things like ignition timing and EGR engagement. I understand that you're not running the original ignition module, but maybe somehow you're getting EGR pumped into the intake manifold when you shouldn't be? Just tossing out ideas.

Daluvian, I will look to see if I've got one of those.

I have seen that the early ignition switches were different. Mechanically at least. The early switches used just one mounting screw to hold the switch to the back of the lock assembly, while the later switches used two mounting screws. And because of the mounting screw position(s), those two switches were not interchangeable. In other words, if you have an early ignition lock assy, you would not be able to go to Rock-Auto and simply buy an ignition switch for the back of it. R-A sells the new style switch and it won't fit the back of the old lock bodies. All that aside... The POINT is, I do know that the early switches are MECHANICALLY different than the later style, but I do not know if they are ELECTRICALLY different as well. And when I say "early", I'm not putting a hard date on that. I don't know when they changed over to the two mounting ear switch. I know I'm muddying the waters with a small point here (about whether the B/W wire has power on it when in START), but it might depend on the year and whether the switch has been replaced in the past. I suspect many of the ignition lock assys have worn out over the past and have been replaced with newer versions.

I've got some gland nuts here in a box. Can you post a pic of the style you're looking for? I'll check the box.

There was some discussion about such things a while ago, but I can't find the discussion. I remember that it happened because I created and posted this pic culled from the various wiring diagrams over the years: The wiring diagrams seem to indicate that starting in 73, that B/W wire is hot in both ON and START, but in 72 it is not? And I don't have reliable wiring diagrams for 70 or 71, so I can't tell if 72 is just an anomaly. It always seemed like a documentation error to me. Have you confirmed how it really works?

A local buddy of mine had a similar situation and his theory is crud in the gas tank. The crud gets sucked all to one spot as the car runs and eventually plugs the tube feeding the fuel pump. Shut the car off, vacuum stops, and crud settles back out. Car starts and runs again for a while. Another (simpler) suggestion is the valve on the gas cap isn't working correctly and you're drawing a vacuum on the tank. Maybe pop the cap next time the problem happens and see if there is a big woosh of air into the tank? That feeling of not being able to trust the car really sucks. All you want to do is enjoy it, and you can't stop worrying. Hope you get to the bottom of it!

I'm thinking that if you had more carbs, your engine might run longer? I mean, if you started out with ten or something.....

I run 10W-40 in my car. Why? Because back when these cars were new, 10W-40 reigned supreme. You could find 10W-30, but it wasn't nearly as prevalent as 10W-40. And you could find 20W-50 as well, but only at specialty "high performance" shops that used to have brick-n-mortar locations, but pretty much don't anymore.

Well I know very little about turbos and what's considered "normal", but I really don't like the stiffness of that turbo. Maybe it'll loosen up after the seals run-in, but I have no idea. Maybe some of the turbo guys can chime in and provide some guidance.

Well I'm no ME, but I have concerns about using two dissimilar parts for that assembly. It's really not a big deal and I'm not going to throw my body in front of anyone who wants to try it, but I've just got concerns. Things like this: If you make the tip out of some slippy plastic and press it into a tube... How deep of an engagement do you get? The whole thing is 5mm long. With the spring seat being maybe 3mm deep? So you get .078 inches of some slippy plastic into the end of a brass tube? You make the press fit mild and there's less force to hold it together. You make the press fit aggressive and that slippy plastic squeezes itself out of the hole just sitting static on the desk like toothpaste extruding out of the tube. Change the temperature and who knows what's gonna happen. And then you put that assy into an un-damped spring snapping application? When that thing changes position, what's the frequency of the bounce? That brass isn't going to change direction instantaneously. Newton's laws and all that say there will be forces trying to pull that thing apart. Like I said, not a big deal... A lot of discussion and analysis of such a small simple part.

Glad to (try to) help. I'm actually planning to be messing with floats later today. Call me.

The struggle is real: https://www.classiczcars.com/forums/topic/55190-float-level-advice-please/?&page=5#comments