sblake01

Well, that's why I put the word in brackets. It's not really callibrated per se but it's designed to run with the evap system intact. By that I mean that the mixture, the fuel pulse, etc. are all set through the various sensors to work with the fuel vapor that is drawn into the intake from the cannister purge line. The more throttle you give it, the more vapor is drawn in. Since it designed to work that way, I don't know what you'd do to compensate for that function if it wasn't there.

Same color and same wheels (or at least similar) as #488.

I believe that the 75-76 280Z fuel tank will fit a 240Z. I know that the 77-78 tank won't. It's larger.

I'd fix it. It ties in with the fuel vapor venting system and the EFI is 'calibrated' to run with it hooked up and functioning properly. These cars run bad when the carbon cannister is clogged or has a dirty filter. It would take a bit of re-engineering to remove the entire system and everything else work the way it should. JMO.

Oh, I don't know. What you put in it is not what it's worth to anyone but you. Especially in the case of a 77 like yours, or a 78 like mine. I have far less than half of that in mine and have been able to drive and enjoy it from virtually the first day I bought it. But many times more 280Zs were made than 240Zs. So, how do you define worth? I still contend that it's what someone is willing to pay. Lots of variables there but I've seen low number cars that I wouldn't want to own because of the way I use a car. I like to drive them, not look at them. I don't care what others think of them. There is no set 'book' on what a 240Z is worth, regardless of what anyone says. They just haven't reached that stature yet. And as much as people will argue the point, I don't think they will in my lifetime. The only reason I'd be interested in 488 is because I once owned it. I was the first new car I ever purchased. Just a pipe dream. Sentimental value. I wouldn't be willing to spend upwards of 20-30K or more just to relive those days.

That's when Nissan changed them on the production lines. Being over 35 years old, I'd imagine that the largest percentage of them have been changed to the later style.

Free play is set at the master cylinder push rod. 24 to 35mm is the spec for clutch pedal free travel. The only thing I see in the FSM on the slave is that the push rod stroke is 35mm on the non-adjustable one. Any tweaks/adjustments to the slave, bleeding, etc. should be done before adjusting the free play and pedal stopper.

If anyone ever finds #488, let me know.

What's the reason you'd want to remove it? In states that require emissions inspections, you'd run into problems there. In reading the description of the system in the FSM, clogged lines and/or removing the system could lead to things like gas fumes and/or insufficient delivery of fuel to the engine or vapor lock to name a few. If it's working, I'd leave it alone.

You can adjust where it releases with the rod that attaches to the pedal. Obviously, you changed that adjustment when you changed master cylinders.

Good luck with that! I searched out that fuel pump in your link, the Airtex E8312, and it looks a lot like the Master E8312 that many of the chain store auto parts places sell. From, my experience, and if it's the same fuel pump, I would say since you just recently installed it, give it time. It won't last as long as the OEM pump and it will gradually lose pressure. I've installed one of those on my 810 and two others on other people's cars and they didn't last a year. Looks like it has the same 1 year warranty that Kragen Auto as on it. By complaining loudly and long enough, I was able to get a refund on mine rather than a replacement. Since then, nothing but OEM when it comes to fuel pumps.

Sounds like your dad was much more of a 'car guy' than mine. Other than the Renault, I don't recall my dad ever tinkering much with cars. I guess with Renaults, if you wanted to drive them, you had to tinker with them. All of his other cars were more basic. 60 Ford Falcon station wagon, 66 Chevelle 4 dr. hardtop, couple of VW bugs, a Pinto, Ford Granada, 70-ish Buick Skylark, gas guzzling 70s Buick Centurion with a 455 ci V8. Not in that order and I'm sure I've left a couple out.

Not sure if I get the entire statement but 260Zs had carbs and 280Zs had EFI. There's no 'grey area' between the two.

My father once owned a Renault Dauphine with a Judson supercharger! I was quite young at the time, so you know that was a long time ago! All I recall about that car is that it was hot and noisy and my dad seemed to always be working on it.

Wow. Rather salty answer to a legit question by one of the eBayers.

There is no such thing as a '74 280Z'. Good luck with that. I suggest you do a lot of reading on what is different between the systems on a 75-78 280Z as that was the only years that they were made (USA models).

I don't think anyone here understood the question except Will. Either that or it wasn't asked properly. Sounds like he wants to use the L28ET with the turbo in his 240Z but it's missing the above mentioned parts. You're also missing the wiring harness, fuel lines, fuel pump, and many other ancillary parts needed for the L28ET to work properly, including the fuel tank. Regardless of what anyone has said, an EFI engine will not work satisfactorily with a non EFI fuel tank. There is nothing simple about doing this swap properly. Plus it takes $$$$$$$$.

spursfan55, I think this is done. This thread was dead for about 6 months before your post.

You'd still have the pedal stop, and pedal to MC adjustments.

I doesn't really work that way as we've discussed in other threads. The number my be 64 later than his but they didn't necessarily produce them in sequential order.

Welcome. Is your car a 78? Is black it's original color? You may have done even better that you think on your purchase. If it's originally black it's a Black Pearl Edition. If the paint code tag is still there on the radiator support, see if it had '638' for the paint code.

Seperate with one on each side, Ansas or Monzas would look fine. But stacked together or side by side on the same side of the car would look strange to me. Besides, these are single bank engines. I'm not sure that dual exhaust would be good for anything other than asthetics.

Matchbox? As in E12-80 module on the side of the distributor? That's not stock on a 77 or any other S30 but many have done the conversion but it has to be done right. That could also be part of your problem(s). A stock 77 would have the much larger E12-27 ignition module mounted on the passenger side kick panel just above and forward of the fuse box and nothing on the side of the distributor. And what you're referring to as the "fuel injection module (large black unit on kick panel left of driver foot)" is the ECU (electronic control unit). I don't know what reverse polarity would do to it because I've never been through that.

Now this is just my opinion but that would look strange like ricey or what's that other term? Bosoku or something like that? Again, JMO.

The main problem you'd have there is the lack of space between the gas tank and the right side of the car. I haven't looked under a 75-76 lately but on a 77-78, you'd have no room on the right side for a tailpipe.