Carl Beck

I wonder why? It that because of the differences in front end geometry? Or because the rotational mass of an in-line six is greater than that of an in-line four? Both of which want to continue in their present direction of travel? Or is it weight and wheel base related? Tell us more..... Carl B.

Hi Rolf: We would really need a Mechanical Engineer, with experience in this area to get factual information. Most certainly - Fastener selection is based on a number of criteria, but having the strength to do the job assigned, is most certainly one of the most important. Fasteners are designed to clamp something together. The loads or stresses that the assembly will have to bare, determine to a large extent the strength of the fastener required. For example, if the strength required equals one 10.9 grade bolt - the engineer might prefer to use two 8.8 grade bolts, because of common availability or cost considerations - if space allows two bolts, or if the load/stress is better distributed. If a 10.9 grade bolt is required - and if they are hard to find in your area - the best course of action is to order the bolt from the manufacturer (NISSAN OEM Parts). Agreed. That is a problem. 4, 7, 6/9 could well be a manufacturer (the consumer in this case) specific code. With very large consumers as found in the auto industry, it is not uncommon for the manufacturer to define their own unique set of standards. Usually one or two fastener suppliers will produce products to meet the consumers specifications. For example - "4" or "7" might refer to both the strength of the bolt, as well as any protective coatings and finishes applied - that Nissan specified at the time. We call it Shear - the shear strength of a bolt is usually some percentage of its minimum tensile strength. Keep in mind that when two parts are bolted together - the side loads are carried by, or distributed across the parts themselves. The bolt doesn't carry the entire load. (ME's jump in here... if my general comments are completely out bed. This is just my perceptions from working with ME's and reviewing FEM results/reports etc. ). I'm not sure I understand the question. Let's put it this way - the higher the tensile strength of the bolt, the more clamping force it can apply and hold. Higher clamping forces can sustain higher shear loads ( I would guess??). Interesting discussion - but as I said - we really need an M.E. with specific knowledge and experience in this area. FWIW, Carl B.

1973 FSM says 18 to 23 ft-lb I'd go with that... It can't be 50 ft-lb - lug nuts are 65 ft-lb on much larger studs... FWIW, Carl B.

No - aluminum will oxidize to a white power. Leave it what way??? Clean Aluminum or clean black???? Clean cast aluminum is stock. Has the valve cover been Black Anodized? Did buffing it result in semi-gloss black?? FWIW, Carl B.

Just swap the inspection lids for newer one's. You aren't keeping it stock anyway.. Carl B.

You just need a good used valve cover that hasn't been molested, previously primed/painted or badly stained. Shouldn't be that hard to find in California. Contact a few local Z Car Clubs and one should turn up. Used valve covers are $75.00 to $95.00 for the late 70/71 models ie. "NISSAN OHC". Expect to pay far more for the early 70's with the 2400 on them... around here they are now $150.00 and up.. Clean it up with a good detergent and then take it to be glass bead blasted. Check your local Yellow Pages for shops that do media blasting and call a few. It should come out looking pretty much like it did when originally cast. FWIW, Carl B.

This might help: http://euler9.tripod.com/bolt-database/22.html # ISO metric fastener material strength property classes (grades). As given in ISO 898-1, ISO metric fastener material property classes (grades) should be used. For example, fastener material ISO property class 5.8 means nominal (minimum) tensile ultimate strength 500 MPa and nominal (minimum) tensile yield strength 0.8 times tensile ultimate strength or 0.8(500) = 400 MPa. (In a few cases, the actual tensile ultimate strength may be approximately 20 MPa higher than nominal tensile ultimate strength indicated via the nominal property class code. Consult Table 10, below, for exact values.) Many anchor bolts (L, J, and U bolts, and threaded rod) are made from low carbon steel grades, such as ISO classes 4.6, 4.8, and 5.8. # See the bottom of the page for the table. FWIW, Carl B.

That "modification" would greatly reduce the volume of air in the passenger's cabin needing cooling, and thus greatly increase the effectiveness of A/C in a 240Z. It would also provide storage space more out of sight, although for smaller items. Not something I'd want, but it might have had a small market when produced decades ago. FWIW, Carl B.

Posted earlier here as well: http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showpost.php?p=277843&postcount=1 FWIW, Carl B.

Wonderful !! - thanks Dave.

Thanks George - I'd been looking for pictures of that pump and bracket for the past two days.. Knew I had them somewhere... but couldn't find them again... Anyone have pictures of the second type used on the late model 73 240-Z's and 260Z's? FWIW, Carl B.

A couple of people have contacted me on this since the E-Bay auction ended - so I thought I'd better update the listing. Rick's 260Z has found a new home... thanks to everyone for spreading the word... Carl B.

What is the dollar value of a "low price"? What is the dollar value of "high prices"? Carl B.

Arne: If the top of the hatch lid, lines up correctly with the roof line.... If the sides of the hatch lid line up evenly with the sides of the body.... Then that's about all you can accomplish with hinge adjustments. Once the above was done - Then a Body Man would: 1. Open the hatch, and place a block of wood under the lower right corner of the hatch lid, on the threshold plate. 2. Close the hatch lid down on the block of wood - then place his left hand on the lower left corner of the hatch lid - and push it down an inch or two with medium force. Using a sort of bouncing/rocking force... to spring it back into shape. This would raise the lower right side of the hatch - and maybe lower the left side a bit. Once the line at the bottom of the hatch lid is straight - you might have to adjust your hatch lid latch down a bit. After doing this - make sure that your hatch lid hinges did NOT move. Always very carefully open the hatch lid - while watching the hatch lid/roof interface!! THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT... FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Guys: Received the following from Germany. Looks like the man has a 280Z for sale (although he refers to it as a 240Z. - I thought I'd pass it on here. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - From: "Udo Fritsche" U.Fritsche1@gmx.de To: Carl Beck beck@becksystems.com Subject: Z For Sale Hallo. Entschuldigen Sie bitte ich spreche kein Holländisch. Leider muß ich Umständehalber meinen* Datsun 240Z verkaufen Es sind noch sehr viele Ersatzteile vorhanden.anbei Bilder Informationen Tel 02941/21252 Festpreis 2000• Gruß Udo Fritsche Weißdornallee 1 59557 Lippstadt (Deutschland) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Bob: The short answer to your qestion is - Yes. If that was where your #1 spark plug wire was to begin with - and if that allowed enough movement of the distributor housing to fine tune the ignition advance/retard... Yes that will do. I used 10:30 - and 3:30/4:00 off the top my head at the time -Sorry if that confused you - the factory position is closer to the 9:00 o'clock that Guy used. However, if someone sat the driven gear/distributor drive shaft position up to use 7:00 as the #1 spark plug wire the last time it was done - then that's fine too. FWIW, Carl B.

TOMO - BTDC is Before Top Dead Center... your ignition is set to fire just Before Top Dead Center...

Hi Bill: He said he still has the oil pump installed - the "0" notch on the crank pully will pass the pointer once, then return to "0" again - before the rotor returns to fire the #1 cylinder. Just putting the "0" mark on the pointer is not enough to be certain that eveything is back where he started.. Turning the crank over once as he said he did, then again - SHOULD put him back were he was....but far better to be certain by verifying it with the rotor position. Also -while he'd doing that - it is always good to assure that the pointer is correctly positioned. Put the piston in the #1 cylinder at its top dead center (just before it starts to go down again)... then check the pointer position in relation to the "0" mark on the crank - looking from were you would see it while using a timing light. FWIW, Carl B.

Yes it matters. Your distributor timing will be off. The rotor in the distributor turns once for every two turns of the crank. Put the distributor back in - and look at the position the rotor is pointing to. If it's pointing to around 3:30 - you are one revolution off. If it's pointing to around 10:30 your at/near BTDC. FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Mike: Your are IZCC #594 You first registered HS30 00016 16 March 1997 When you first registered it - as I recall, you registered it on the HLS30 register. I replied and ask if it was in fact HS30 00016 - which you then confirmed. I believe it is possible that you are confusing the Web Site, ie. the Z Car Home Page where the "Registers" are maintained, with the e-mail based Z Car Discussion group, ie. the Z Car List. Prior to registering HS30-00016 in March of 1997, In a response to my Annual Up-date to the "Z Car List", on tracking the 69 Production 240-Z's in Nov. of 1995 - you Posted the Following to the Z Car List. = = = = = From: "Lucas, Mike" mike.lucas@fernz.com To: Z Car List z-car@taex001.tamu.edu Date: Thu, Nov 20, 1995 12:55 PM Subject: {z} Re: 240Z Production numbers I am a little confused about the production number of the 240Z. I own a RHD 240Z #00016 yet I have been told by Carl Beck that there is a LHD 240Z #00016 in the U.S.A According to the original Z reference manual (a felloe Z member has) 1974 version. The production of Z were as follows 240Z 2 Seater Model HS30 (A) (U) (Q) Oct 69-May 71 00003-00500 Jan 71-Aug 71 00501-01500 <- (I suspect Jan should read Jun?) Sept 71-Jun 72 01501-14000 July 72-July 73 14001-101537 F.Y.I we also have the following car here in NZ my car is the earliest at HS30-00016='70 (according to NISSAN Japan I mailed their web site for the info) engine L24-006777 HS30-00249='70 engine L24-?????? owner believes it was original an AUTO but who can tell it had a V8 when he got it HS30-00250='70 engine L24-?????? HS30-00251='70 engine L24-?????? HS30-01047='71 engine L24-?????? original Auto model. HS30-01259='71 engine L24-054810 According to the production figures there was only 155,000 and something Z made. Yet I have been lead to believe that according U.S.A records there was 179000 and something. This original parts reference manual (used to obtain the above production numbers) only mentions HS30 (A) (U) (Q) not the HLS30 Can anyone confirm that LHD and RHD Z had different VIN #. Mike Lucas IZCC #594 240Z #00016, '77260Z = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Back in 95 - I responded that at one time we (Eric Sheeler/Stan Beckman/James Irvine et al, that had started the tracking effort to locate 69 production cars) thought that the Right and Left Hand 240Z's did share the same series numbers - but that we had dispelled that, as well as the fact that none of the 240-Z's sold in Australia had been 1969 production cars, as had been widely published there. I don't know who on the Z Car List at the time would have told you your car was a fake - I can't find a Public Post in my archives to that effect. Possible it was sent directly to you - off list. (you didn't happen to keep it did you?). Nonetheless, it would seem from your Post in 1995 that you were surprised to hear that the Right and Left hand 240Z's used individualy series numbers, and were asking the list for verification. The last report we had from you was in 1999 - when you reported selling to to Peter Campbell in Au. FWIW, Carl B.

Kind of make you wish someone in S.America or Mexico was still enjoying it. Sorry to hear of the result. FWIW, Carl B.

It has most likely been shipped to S.America by now, or driven back to Mexico. Unlikely to be resold here in the States, nor to have been used for parts. One theft ring was busted that operated in Central Florida - they were shipping about 200 cars per month to S. America. Several countries there require no title for cars... FWIW, Carl B.

Are you talking about the car in the first picture? Is that first picture supposed to be the car that won the 72,73 etc C-Production championships, that was then ran later by Scott as a 280Z? Are you saying that car in the first picture is in California now? thanks, Carl B.

Hi Brandon: Thanks for Posting the article - I looked Tod's 240-Z over at one of the West Coast Nationals. I must have spent at least half an hour marveling at the quality and detail that went into it. FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Mike: Great pictures - thanks for sharing them. Carl B.