Captain Obvious

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.

I bet you'd let yours go for $49K if pressed.

When they are stating the size of a throttle body, they use the diameter of the butterfly. And usually, the outlet size is the same size as the butterfly, so that would make that a 70mm throttle body regardless of the larger diameter inlet side. Now, I have no idea if that throttle body you have there is the same as the factory supplied throttle bodies for the 350Z, but that one you have there would be called a 70mm. As for the mounting... Did your son make up drawings for an adapter?

Very pretty work. So what timing kit did you buy? I can see the ITM on the tensioner, but the curved (slack side) guide looks like the one for the 280, not the 240. I have also heard (somebody's post-purchase feedback) somewhere that there were some minor fitment issues with the front cover hitting one of the guides. Too much material on some spot and it hit the timing cover. I think it was ITM, but I don't remember for sure.

I did that a number of years ago. Back before I started taking pictures of stuff like that. My "jig" was a piece of coat hanger wire that was bent into the desired shape (over-bent actually to account for spring-back), and my "heat" was a toaster oven. Worked pretty well. I did some parts out of Viton and some others out of neoprene. PSA - Don't burn the Viton or anything else with fluorine in it. Some more detail just to fill out the story... I ran a pair of those tubes on a some round tops for a while and then pulled the round tops off to go back to flat tops. They worked great while on the car. No binding or other issues. However... Just a few days ago (quite coincidently) I was inspecting those round tops and noticed that the rubber tubes were failing. Cracking around where they were expanded onto the nipples at the ends. I don't know why they were failing. It was Viton from McMaster, so it should have been quality material. Maybe I did some damage with the heat.

Here's what Innovate says in the user's manual for the gauge: "Using a clock as reference, mount the bung between the 9:00 o’clock and 3:00 o’clock position. Welding the bung in the lower section of the exhaust pipe can result in sensor damage caused by condensation making contact with the sensor’s internal heating element." My interpretation of that is "anywhere along the top half of the tube is OK." That said, I think I would rather have it a little off 12:00 for the surface tension reasons Dutch mentioned.