Captain Obvious

I've been thinking the same thing. It's very "un-Datsun" like for them to give a spec that is actually unusable and unmeasureable in reality. I've been thinking there may have simply been a dimensioning mistake there. I mean, it's clear that the documentation is not without error... For example, on that very same page (EF-25 of 72 manual), they say "dimension "H" in Figure EF-46" while it's clear that's a typo and they actually meant "Figure EF-47". So I take that "inside of the lid" dimension with a grain of salt, but without factory confirmation (which will never happen), it's all we got. When I set my floats, I accounted for about two mm for the gasket and the thickness of the lid casting and set mine at 25 mm down from the OUTSIDE TOP of the bowl lid. My car ran great. YMMV. Contrary to a lot of the discussion between you guys above, my experience is that the float bowl level is not that super critical to the overall operation of the carbs. 23 mm down, 25 mm down... Didn't seem to make that much difference to me on a stock engine. Of course, I had gone over the rest of the carbs and everything else and was confident that everything was working as intended. If that's not the case, you end up chasing your tail. No short cuts. You either have the skills to do it yourself, or if not, you take it to someone else who does. Or you sell the car and buy something more mainstream. Something that has a local following of experts in your area.

So what about this ten turns down thing? What's that all about? The ten turns down method is an alternate method of checking the fuel level instead of using a clear tube. Brian claims to have taken some measurements with a straight edge and believes he has determined (unconfirmed by me) that when the fuel level in the bowl is 23 mm down from the inside of the lid, then it should also be 1 cm down from the top of the nozzle when the nozzle is adjusted all the way up (zero turns down). He also contends that this might be not only more convenient a measurement technique, but more accurate. That's what he was alluding to when he says this: "HOWEVER: Even though adjusting the floatbowl levels to 23mm down is a factory setting, it doesn't guarantee that the fuel levels in the carbs are the same." What he's saying is that even if you have set the fuel level in the bowl to be 23 mm down from the inside of the lid, it doesn't guarantee that the level will be in the correct level at the nozzle. The REAL important level is where the fuel is inside the carb, not inside the bowl chamber. So if there is something wrong with the bowl mounting or the bolt holding the bowl to the carb is bent or something, you could have the level in the bowl "to spec", and still have the level wrong inside the carb body. So to combat that, he's suggesting that it may actually be even better to directly measure the level inside the CARB instead because that's what's really important in the end. And to do that, he believes the correct level INSIDE THE CARB is 1 cm down from the top of the fully raised nozzle. Doing the math using the pitch of the nozzle adjustment nut and all that yields the following: A FUEL LEVEL IN THE CARB THAT IS TEN TURNS DOWN OF THE NOZZLE, SHOULD BE THE CORRECT FUEL LEVEL AND SHOULD ALSO CORRESPOND TO APPROXIMATELY 23 MM DOWN FROM INSIDE THE BOWL LID. Finally, after you have used the ten turns down method the check the fuel level, you should put the nozzle level back to it's ballpark setting of 2 1/2 turns down. His not mentioning that is clearly a simple oversight. Check the level ten turns down, and then put the nozzles back where they belong when you're done.

The FSM documents the correct fuel level as 23mm down from the inside of the float lid. And to verify that level, you put a clear tube on the bowl outlet and check it. End of story. But as easy as that sounds... It's not. One problem with that spec and check procedure is that since the spec is referenced to the INSIDE of the bowl lid, you cannot measure it directly (because the bowl lid is not transparent). You need to measure or estimate the gasket thickness and the bowl lid recess depth and then measure down that amount to a dimension on the OUTSIDE of the bowl. Bunch of detailed indirect measurements like that... Not impossible, and you can do it accurately enough, but it's a little finicky. Another problem is that if you are replacing parts, like putting in a new float or float valve, you have no guarantee that your new parts are the same as your old parts, so you won't have any idea where the level is going to end up. So... The FSM describes a procedure for adjusting the float level based on mechanical float position only. That's where they talk about the 14 to 15 mm dimension "H" between the float and inside of the lid when the tang contacts the valve tip. But what they were not clear about is THAT IS A PRELIMINARY "BALLPARK" MEASUREMENT ONLY JUST TO GET YOU CLOSE. The final (and only important) measurement is the fuel level 23mm down from the inside of the bow lid. SO YOU USE THE 14-15 MM "H" MEASUREMENT ONCE, JUST TO GET YOU CLOSE. AND THEN YOU FINE TUNE TO 23MM DOWN FROM THE INSIDE OF THE BOWL LID AFTER THAT USING THE CLEAR TUBE METHOD.

Seriously though, it looks a lot better now. I know the gunk on the outside doesn't affect operation, but I hate messy parts like that. Nice work.

Beautiful work. I wish my car was that clean! What kind of bushings are you using? Stock rubber style, or poly?

I thought the doctor said that cleared up?

I looked at the page and saw the notes about being reproductions. Are you guys saying that's not what it said when he first relisted them? It's pretty clear to me that he's aware of the discussion here and is watching the site. He cut the gloss after we talked about it earlier (and it's still wrong), and he changed the verbiage to include notes about them being repros after you guys went off again. At this point, if he's clearly advertising that they are repros and not OEM or NOS, then I can't complain about the current auction. I can only complain as proxy for the people whom he has already ripped off before we called him on it. I wonder if he's contacted past customers and offered them a refund. I know if I dropped a grand on these after finding out they were misrepresented as being recently discovered New Old Stock, only to find out that they were not NOS at all... I would be Pissedd with a capitol "P". I know I'd be all over eBay's fraud department if I had bought a set.

One last thought on this project. Should you decide to stick with the 7mm bolt idea... I would hate to find an 11mm headed bolt where a 10mm head should exist. You would only need to grind off about .020 per flat to get the head size down to 10mm where it belongs. Surely there's enough meat on the head to do that. You'll grind through the plating, but you'll have the correct size head. If you started with un-plated stainless, you wouldn't even know the difference from the outside.

Excellent. Just another example of a fifteen minute job turning into a two week long expensive ordeal. We've all been there, done that!

If that's the extent of the body work done on a 40 year old car, I think you're still way ahead of the game. But back up a little bit... When you say "airline stripper", are you talking about the methylene chloride based paint stripper? If so, then I think you are using the wrong product there. Any of the methylene chloride based strippers are extremely aggressive, and I wouldn't want them anywhere NEAR my paint unless I was actually using it to remove the paint. I wouldn't let that stuff touch paint that I was intending to keep. If you're trying to get adhesive residue off, I'd use WD-40.

M6 x 1.0 is the one used ubiquitously all over the Z (and all the rest of the Japanese stuff). I checked my metric set and I've got M7 x 1.0, so it appears that a M7 with the necessary pitch IS a standard and is easily available option. Assuming, of course, that my set has "standard" sizes. (As a point of reference, I've also got both M6 and M7 in a 0.75 for the finer pitch.) So if you decide on M7 x 1.0, the trick would be to retap it to the larger size, but carefully start the tap so you're cutting the new threads in the same location as the old threads. Taking advantage of whatever remains of the original peaks and valleys. As for needing to drill out the old hole first or not... If the pilot drill for a M7 x 1.0 tap is a 6mm (.236) drill and you've already ripped the M6 threads out of the original hole, it should be just about .236. Whatever you do, just don't break off a tap in the hole. A brand new sharp tap with suitable cutting oil should be pretty forgiving though, and it's not like you're tapping a very deep hole into thick material. You'll only have a couple threads cutting at once. Getting the tap started square (normal) to the hole is important. If you're unsure of your ability to do it freehand, drill a just fitting hole in a piece of wood to guide the tap and keep it perpendicular to the hole.

If the female threads are pulled through, then I don't think 1/4 inch threads size is going to solve the problem. M6 and 1/4 inch threads are so close to each other that there isn't enough meat to recut the threads. And if you do decide to try... absolutely do not drill first. Just run the 1/4 inch tap into the existing hole. There's no reason to enlarge the existing hole. You'll cut across the existing threads fine. But I don't think any 1/4 size will suffice. And if the thread pitch for the M7 is different than the M6, that's not the answer either. But if you can find a M7 bolt with the same pitch as the original M6, you could retap to M7. And I would have to look at the drill sizes before deciding if it required a redrill first. If you're looking for a small diameter head, you might want to consider socket head cap screws? Won't look anything close to stock, but it should have a smaller head than anything else you'll easily find. 5/16 - 18 SHCS maybe if you can't find a suitable metric option?

I also saw them on the New York craigslist yesterday or the day before as well. However, I just looked a second ago, and couldn't find them anymore. I'm thinking someone flagged them and the ads were pulled. The worst now is that we told him they are fakes. And he even acknowledged on ebay that they are fakes after we cornered him: "I took a vacation trip to Asia countries. I found a few set. I kept 1 set for my car. Tell you the true. I did not know they are reproduction or restored, they look brand new to me." So now he clearly knows! But despite that fact, he is still peddling them in other places as NOS. It's deceitful.

I believe you can see a blurry reflection of the perp in some of the ebay auction photos. It might be my imagination, but I might also see the front end of a white Z reflected in there as well. Haha!! Amateur detective mode off! Yet another application for the Esper photo analysis machine that Blue was supposed to build.

I was going to cut the stubs off completely, so if there's someone who could use them as lowering devices as they exist, then that would be a better thing to do with them. The best thing would be for you to be able to sell or give them to someone who could use them as is!

I wonder how the people who already purchased sets of these would feel to be learn that the parts were misrepresented as NOS from the OEM, but are in fact newly pressed repros. If I were judging at a concourse show, I would slam these things hard in my judge eval. I also wonder if the people selling these have properly claimed them (and the value they represent) on their customs import forms. I also question the country of origin as Japan. I wonder how that can be confirmed. I mean, I'm all for parts being made available. And if repros are necessary because originals are unavailable, then I got nothing wrong with that either. But clearly advertise and sell them as repros. Passing them off as OEM or NOS, or rebuilt originals is deceitful.

So earlier there was a question about the crenelated rubber washers for the moustache bar. Anyone have any input into this? Anybody have an idea where the solid ones came from? Some different application?

Hmm...I disagree. I believe the results would be completely predictable. With suitable plugs on the ports, I don't think there would be any question about what would happen! Completely predictable!

I didn't know that either. What's with the lead? Is it in the old formulation of the grease?

You should report that to ebay. I believe if there was no reserve, he is obligated to some degree. You should sic the ebay dogs on him. First for counterfeit parts, then for improper business practices.

Other options on CL for the same parts: Orange Co CA - For sale by "Brad": https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/pts/d/datsun-240z-hubcaps-excellent/6484684385.html https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/wto/d/datsun-240z-hubcaps-excellent/6501221907.html Or the previously mentioned ad from Spokane, WA - Also by "Brad": https://spokane.craigslist.org/pts/d/datsun-240z-hubcaps-excellent/6484688936.html Maybe someone should give Kevin a call. There is a phone number in the CL ad... There is apparently a plethora of these really hard to find expensive parts to be had. In fact, so many, that they shouldn't be either expensive, OR hard to find.

If you decide to completely bail on everything you have done so far and toss the parts, I might be interested in the cut down front spindles for an experiment.

As opposed to the rest of us completely normal and well socialized examples of humanity!

Haha!! I know!! And it's cruel! Cruel to post pics of building the tool, but no pics showing how well it works. Seriously though, it looks like a neat project, and I hope the results turn out great.

Seriously? You posted all kinds of pics of the start of this project and you didn't show any parts that you actually blasted??? Seriously? WOOT! I'd be all over that NOHO like a... Well like a guy who likes a good beer! Hoppy and strong, just like me! And I'm bitter too!!