Captain Obvious

There are flimsy metal brackets that are supposed to hold the raised floor "wood" up off the metal below. Not sure you'll be able to figure out what's going on here, but this is a pic in which you can see the metal brackets: Here's a decent pic of the front most bracket. Ignore the cargo lid. That was the project where I added the cargo hatch lids to my car: Here's a relatively decent shot of one of the rearmost supports: Hope that helps? You got any of those brackety things in your unknown parts pile? Oh, and you're also missing the two narrower "wood" pieces that fit into the side recessed areas way in the back. And lastly, someone modified your front most piece. Added the speaker holes and it looks like they took some material off the rear edge.

I can't believe I never measured the length of that nylon strap. Maybe I did and just wrote it down on a piece of note scrap. I've got a pile of them. I've long replaced the blue cheapo nylon strap with a better one with webbing from McMaster. I also upgraded to an adjustable mount on one side so I could adjust for belt stretch, etc. I think I've got my original proof of concept belt in a box somewhere and I'll measure it when I get a chance. And yes... You can remove and replace the strap relatively easily without dropping the diff or even removing the cross member.

Will do. I have a diagram around here somewhere. Some time ago I created a thread about it... I bet all the pics are dead because of photosucket. In the meantime before I find the details... I had the whole engine compartment harness out of the car because I was doing other changes as well. One of the other changes I made at the same time is I converted over to the internally regulated alternator and I put my headlight relays where the voltage regulator used to reside. Not sure what year you're working on, but on the 280's, the voltage regulator is on the back side of the relay bracket just forward of the battery. That's where I put my headlight relays. I'll dig up my details and post them.

I'm skeptical about the validity of taking photos out the windshield showing how my headlights look, but if I get the chance, I will do that. I'm not sure it'll add any value without having a fixed "point of reference", but I'll give it a shot. The best thing would be to have your car next to mine and we could compare. We should figure out a way to make that happen some time. I did my 280Z relays using a hybrid method of old wiring and new wiring. I'm still utilizing the original fuses in their original location, but the switches on the steering column are only controlling relay current now, not the high headlight current. So for me, one of the nice things is that the two headlight fuses in the fuse block are still labeled correctly, one per side.

So going back through the issue... Problem started simply because you left the coil wire off the distributor. You're thinking that damaged the ignition module and then with all the cranking with a damaged module, it badly flooded the engine? Is that the basic progression of events?

Steve, do you know if the original GM system was actually designed to utilize two throttle bodies (with two injectors), or just one? In other words, was your system originally designed to run one TBI but is now running two smaller injectors in parallel instead and letting the O2 sensor provide the feedback to level everything out? Back when I was current with my GM stuff, there was just one throttle body and they used that system on some of the in-line engines. I don't know if they ever did two of them on a V-engine or something like that.

From my Fiero days (88), I have a small amount of experience with the system a little older than what you're working with. I don't know if they called it the same thing in the later cars, but back in 88, they used a system they called "ALDL", which is Assembly Line Diagnostic Link. And the most common software used to talk to it was "WinALDL". Not sure if any of that is what you're dealing with in the later version you have, but that's what it was "way back then". I (thankfully) know very little about the GM EFI, but I do remember there was a there was a clear flood mode. Thankfully mine mostly just worked fine and I didn't have to troubleshoot. I did jumper the ALDL pins once or twice to blink the stored codes out on the check engine light, but that's about it. In any event, glad you made progress with the issue and things seem to be pretty much back to where you want them.

Agreed. I didn't put my relays in the interior (they are out in the engine compartment), but I used four relays. One per side per beam. Not only is it a more fault tolerant system, but it also minimizes the voltage drop in the switching system. Down sides are the obvious cost and complexity, but relays are cheap and the complexity is a once and done thing. With the relays, I find my old original incandescent bulbs to be quite enjoyable on a dark road.

Cool. I know was jumping in and assuming I understood what you were talking about and I'm glad I didn't just make things worse. So from the fact that the 510 latch has a longer handle, I'm thinking the 510 latch is mounted further from it's hood edge than the Z's? You need that longer handle so you don't have to reach so far under the lip for your fingers to hit the tab?

Haha! Glad to help. I didn't get it at first either.

And I put a furry blue sour cream container in the trash can today that I should have recycled. @Dave WM and I are clearly wildmen living the American dream!! In my own defense, out of the corner of my eye, I think I saw it move under it's own power. I didn't want to stick anything in it to clean it out.

Racer, I think you're misunderstanding what needed to be cut. The little grab handle you reach in to unlatch the hood was too long and hit the cowl. He cut the handle off and then re-welded it in a "shorter" position. At least I think:

Thanks for checking. Makes me wonder what they include in their kit for the 280's. A question for someone else who bought one of those. Thanks again and good luck with the build!

So why should we have environmental restrictions in the US that they don't impose in other countries? Someone answered that question earlier... "US, Europe are the cleanest on the planet, and have improved drastically." Sounds like if you want to live in the cleanest part of the world, you have to work at it and pay for it. If you allow a free-for-all with no restrictions, you get what people are complaining about in other parts of the world. There are compromises between many competing priorities that have to be made in order to enjoy the benefits. And I agree with several of the posters above when it comes to classic cars. I have zero fear that there will be restrictions on my use of my classic Z that would hamper my use of it. I'm not alarmist. I'm not worried about my Z.

Thanks. So which slack side guide style came in the 053-90300 kit you purchased? Did it come with the 280 style, or the 240/260 style? It's more than just the hole shape at the bottom. The upper portions are different as well. I don't know if they are the same overall length or not, but the metal back-up support plate is different. I'm having a hard time describing it, so I marked up a pic. This is the 240/260 version: And this is the 280 version. Note the additional meat on the metal support:

That's not it. Docs says same slinger number used for all cars 240 through 280: THROWER-OIL CRANK - 12302-A3500 And I know the ZX motors I've been into lately all have it too, so it went beyond the Z and into the ZX.

And I apologize for the distraction, but does anyone know what they changed with the crank sprocket that warranted a new part number? The 240 used P/N 13021-21000 260 and 280 used P/N 13021-U0100 And when they made the change, the 240 P/N was superseded to the later number. So Datsun believed the newer 260/280 crank gear could be used on an earlier 240 if necessary, but not the converse. Anyone have any idea what the difference is?

Thanks for checking. But now I'm really wondering. According to the parts fische, four of the parts (cam sprocket, chain, tensioner, and the tight side (straight) guide) were used unchanged on all the cars 240 through 280. According to the docs, the only two parts that ever changed were the crank sprocket and the slack side (curved side) guide. I have no idea what they changed with the crank gear and they all look the same to me, but the slack side guide is visibly different. Here's a pic showing the differences. (I don't remember where I hoovered this from so I unfortunately cannot credit the creator). They used the top one on the 280 and the lower version on the 240 and 260. Notice that the shape of the lower hole is different and so is the shape of the metal support bracing at the upper end: Again, it's tough to tell from your pic, but your curved guide looks like it has the single hole at the bottom and the metal bracing at the top. Meaning it's the 280 style and not the one for the 240. At this point, I bet you're wondering why I'm wondering... I need a timing set (for an L28) and the ITM sets are relatively cheap and plentiful. The pictures on ebay for their 280 set (053-90400) show the guide for the 240, and the timing set they offer for the 240 has a PICTURE showing the 280 style slack guide. Up until I saw your timing set, I thought it was just a picture problem. Now I'm really not sure. I want to make sure I get a 280 style guide and now I don't know if I should intentionally order the "wrong" ITM set. Now everything is muddy.

Well good luck and in the event that it doesn't work out with SpaceX, let me know. I'm betting that with enough time and money I could eventually carve something that would work. Also, if you want, send me a PM to connect me with your son and I can do some design review for him. Might be able to add some value there. I'm no CAD jockey, but I'm sure there's a file format the two of us could use to communicate on some basic level.

LOL. It's true. And I stand by my decision. Haha!

Hope your SpaceX guy can take care of you. I had thought about closing up the original holes and redrilling for a different pattern. I also thought there was no way you were going to try that.

Haha! Agreed about it sounding like salesman. Best year for the EFI? What is about 78 that makes it so much more refined? My 77's feelings are hurt. And the dash... So he installed a new repro from the guys that are making them. HIS supplier. I mean, it's well written sales literature. It's just a little over the top for me.

Sorry, I wasn't specific enough with my question. Based on the tensioner and the way the cam gear looks, I figured it was an ITM kit. The question(s) is What ITM kit is it? What's the ITM part number? The reason I ask is that the ITM kit listed for the 240 and 260 is 053-90300, while the kit for the 280 and 280ZX is 053-90400. From the pic, your slack side guide looks like the one that comes with the 280 kit, not the 240 kit. Hard to tell with it mounted up, but that's what it looks like to me.

Or you could just use the one in the kitchen when Ms. J isn't looking. Ms. Obvious was distracted by something else while I took the toaster oven outside and did bad things to it.