Captain Obvious

Yeah, I think the only year they did that interlock stuff was 74. Big Brother at it's finest. Actually, I think the seatbelts on the motorized tracks that automatically swung into place was the "finest"...

I have no idea at all how the automatic knob mounts. But I'm a little confused about the "why would you want to"... You're thinking you would put a manual knob on top of an automatic shift lever in an auto car? Why?

Haha! Well I hadn't given a lot of thought about going into the knob business. I'm not sure how many shots I'm going to get out of my mold for the shift map. It's certainly not what I would consider a production endeavor. I did cast a few extras but didn't finish the process. Let me dust off the project and see what I got. siteunseen, I believe those knobs that MSA sell are Nissan's current factory offering and are the same ones that show up on ebay as well. They look very nice but it looks like the dimensions of the wood is off from the original and the font on the shift map is different as well. I mean, if your original knob is a mess, then those are certainly a huge step up, but someone who knows what they are looking for would be able to spot the difference. I've not yet seen a highly accurate recreation of the original knob other than what I produced. On all the aftermarket options I've seen, either the wood dimensions are off, the lettering on the shift map is off, or the map is just two dimensional design without the "depth" of the original three dimensional reverse lettering design. I would put mine on a stock restoration and let the show judges see if they can tell it's a repro. Other than the fact that the threads on mine aren't all stripped out inside, I would challenge even the vintage experts to tell the difference.

Not really. That big nut adjustment controls how much friction there is when sliding the rack back and forth, but doesn't really take up any play. I guess if it's completely loose the rack might be able to wobble around a tiny bit in the housing, but that nut isn't what you would consider a play-taker-upper.

LMAO! Great story. No duct tape "racing stripes" down the side hiding externally run fuel lines? Didn't have to resort to that? . . . This time?

Hahahaha!!!! :: ::

To expand a little on what SteveJ mentioned about the white bottle... It's a vacuum storage reservoir. It "stores and smooths" the vacuum generated in the intake manifold and that vacuum is pulled out of that reservoir and used to control the HVAC system. There's a check valve on the manifold side of that bottle so all your vacuum doesn't run back out into the manifold when you floor it. The canister thing is your carbon canister. It's an emissions device who's job is to scrub the air/fuel vapors coming out of your gas tank when the engine is off and store the fumes in activated charcoal which is inside the black plastic canister. It stores the vapors in there when the engine is off and then burns them the next time you run the car. The port on top that is capped is supposed to be capped. I've not studied the system in enough detail to tell you why, but they're all like that. The broken line is a vacuum line and the device it's supposed to be connected to is your FICD (Fast Idle Control Device). The purpose of the FICD is to bump the idle up a little when you turn the A/C on. That line only has vacuum in it when the A/C is on, so if you're not running the A/C it doesn't matter if it's connected or not. If you turn the A/C on however, it will cause a small vacuum leak. Welcome to Z ownership. Buy stock in the companies that make rubber tubing.

Oh yeah? Well my oil is better than your oil. edited it just so I could have the little banner come up like you did. My edit is better than your edit.

Mike, Haha! No the spell check squiggly works just fine for me too. Apparently that's not enough to stop me though. I was never very bright... And thanks for checking! (had to edit that in)

Yeah, in that case you might consider resetting everything. And I'm sure you would do this without mentioning, but I'd keep an eye on your tires too... If the changes are dramatic enough, you might find an alignment is in order.

Oh. Bummer. Surprising that it's an all or nothing. I'm spoiled in the same way you arr.

Well if we're soliciting suggestions, I'd make it such that if you edited your post very quickly after you first created it (say 30 seconds or a minute) then no note that the post had been edited would show up. But if the post is edited after that time period expired, then the notice that the editing took place would be added. I think that's how a lot of other forums operate. Gives you a short time to fix the bonehead spelling mistake "without penalty". Edited ten seconds after posting to fix a bonehead speling mistake.

Don't forget to do the tightening of the bushing nuts with the car on the ground. You might even consider loosening the other bushing locations as well and resetting them to a new "normalized" position. I'm thinking that your new springs and strut inserts might establish a different neutral stance than your old parts and it would be good to re-normalize everything. Loosen everything up both front and rear, jounce around a couple times, (have someone sit in the driver's seat if you're that concerned) and tighten them up again? Wait a minute... You're running stock style rubber bushings, not poly, right?

it's clear from the fact they built a multiple alloy assembly for the rockers that they were trying to utilize properties of different materials in different areas. I don't have rockers laying loose anymore to inspect, but I suspect the pad that contacts the cam was brazed into place similar to how they attach carbide bits to a saw blade. I also suspect it's properties run pretty much the same through the whole pad. By that, I mean I bet a couple thousandths down into it is pretty much the same as at the original surface. If there were issues, I would expect them to surface (get it?) at the lash pad end. I believe surface hardening runs deeper than .001" so if they did something like that at the factory, you shouldn't be through it at just .001. And there's no way I would try to home heat treat those things! I've done a little hardening with my oxy-acetylene torch and a can of quench oil, but there's no way I'd try it on something like that! Not nearly consistent or predictable enough. As for how good the workmanship looks... I've heard stories of the training of the old school European machinists and their apprentice days. One of the stories is that some apprentices spent their first year or two doing nothing other than hand filing. Maybe not even with a goal in mind other than to spend time filing. I'm clearly still an apprentice and with that in mind, I just spent a bunch of time hand filing a Z project yesterday. Turned out fantastic...

Blue, Those look great. Any considerations about surface treatment of the contacting surfaces? Do you know if there was any special treatments done that you might be wearing through? I thought I saw a thread on hybrid that talked about that sort of thing, but I can't find it. My search-foo is weak,

Yeah, me too. I know this is a Z forum, but they're just so closely related.

Matt, One other thing about the bolts... I don't think mine rub all the time, but once the engine is running and the car is driving and flexing and the hood is rattling around up there, you may need more clearance than you think you do. In other words, just because you can close the hood and there's no contact, that might not be good enough. That might be fine sitting still, but more clearance may be needed once things start vibrating and flexing. Beautiful work as always!

Matt, be careful with those new bolts you used to attach the fenders. My PO did the same thing and they rub against the hood sometimes when the hood is closed. I've not done a lot of investigation into it, but I've got a tub of old used hardware that my PO took off and replaced and I believe I've identified the original bolts that held the fenders on and they are lower profile than "normal". Low profile head and no lock washers. (Maybe no flats as well, but don't remember for sure.) Point is, It would suck for you to mess up your brand new paint because the heads on those bolts stick up too far. BTDT

Sorry to hear about the brain fart. I'm just so glad that I'm not the only one that does bonehead stuff like that! I wouldn't worry about it. It's not like you're putting on aftermarket lowering springs or anything... Sorry!

Excellent. It's always a little tentative to provide that level of detail when I don't have the official documentation. Glad that worked out and glad you got your test done.

My documentation for the early years is sketchy, but I believe it goes like this: Green/White is the +12 side. Black is the ground side. I'm assuming there's only one G/W in the dash harness, and you should be able to pick it up at the headlight (combination) switch connector. You should use a current limited power supply if you've got one or put a couple amp fuse (like 2A) in series with your power source just in case. Maybe turn the dimmer control full dim before you make any connections and then turn it up after you have power on the circuit? And anecdotally... They changed the wiring scheme somewhere along the way. The earlier cars (maybe through 73?) had the dimmer on the high side and the later cars (74 on?) had the dimmer on the low side. But I don't think it matters for what you're trying to do.

Gotcha. That will work to vent the tank (in both directions). However... A concern about doing it that way is that you're going to smell it since it will vent into the passenger compartment.

Just make sure you've got ways for air to both enter and leave the tank before the vacuum or pressure reaches levels unhealthy for the system. If you simply remove the vapor/liquid separator tank and just cap everything back there, you're asking for trouble (even if you've got a later style gas cap with the check valve). You'll be OK for vacuum, but pressure will still be an issue. And simply connecting the nipple on the tank that used to have the "orange" hose on it to the nipple on the filler neck won't do anything to relieve pressure or vacuum. It'll enable you to get more fuel in the tank at the gas station, but it won't do anything about vacuum or pressure buildup.

That link shows clearly the perils of letting the tank draw a vacuum. It doesn't have any pics of a tank that has bulged outward from pressure, but some of those may be out there as well. In normal operation the tank can draw either a vacuum or develop pressure and you need to have provisions somewhere in the system to account for both of those possibilities. That drawing on the previous page of this thread looks to recommend completely eliminating all the venting in the system. Am I reading that right? Are people really completely eliminating the vents on their systems?

Yup. That's the one. They called that the Flow Guide Valve, and it's purpose was to vent the gas tank pressure into the crankcase when the engine wasn't running. These vapors would be "stored" there until the engine was running, and then once the engine was running, those vapors were pulled into the intake manifold through the PCV and burned. I'm skeptical as to how effective an engine crankcase is for "storing vapors", and apparently the emissions czars were as well because starting in 74 they went away from the idea of storing the vapors in the crankcase and went to the activated carbon canisters instead. I've not had anything early enough to have a flow guide design (everything I've had is 74 or newer), but I believe the years with the flow guide were supposed to have a non-vented gas cap. The flow guide is supposed to direct air from the air cleaner housing into the tank if the tank draws a vacuum. In other words, the later years used a check valve in the gas caps, but I think the earlier years did that check valve function as part of the flow guide valve. In any event, there still needs to be a way to vent pressure out of the tank.