mdbrandy

Thanks for the thought . Actually, different part numbers don't necessarily mean incompatibility. In many cases, superseding parts work fine from 240Z to 280Z, and just indicate small material changes or something. But apparently not this. I actually have two full sets of used 280Z rotors, but I'm essentially making the entire front end and braking system new this time around, and these are even drilled rotors. Too expensive to just punt.

ARRRGGHH! I'm in the final stages of assembling the newly minted front end on my 280Z. Bolt on the new, MSA-purchased discs to the hubs, grease up the wheel bearings, and slide it on to the axle. Push it back and put in the front bearing, lightly screw on the nut. Spin the hub. It is rubbing on the backing plate! Huh? So I measured the height of the "hat" above the disk surface. 1/4" higher than the original 280Z discs! Then I measure the hats on my 240Z. Also 1/4" higher than the 280Z disc! I knew that the hubs were different 240 vs 280, but I didn't know that 240Z/280Z discs were not interchangable. Bolts up fine, just too thick. Am I crazy, or is this common knowledge that I for whatever reason have never come across before? I already had to send back some front wheel bearings that were wrong to MSA, now this! They aren't doing so well for me....and they aren't going to like me much on this one, since I bought them about 6 months ago. GRRRRRR....

Ah, I remember that thread now. I still find it very strange the way your springs loaded. If the wire is uniform and the coil spacing is uniform, it shouldn't do that. But hey, you checked with tokico, so it must be right! I have the same springs (for the 280 though) but they are not competely installed yet, so I can't put it on the ground. Hopefully this weekend. We shall see if mine do the same thing... Thanks!

I'm looking for what characteristic(s) of the springs that were in your package tells you that the springs are progressive. I've seen the Eibach progressives, and they have varying coil spacing along the length of the spring (the Eibachs aren't even available for the 280; just the 240). Did the ones you get have varying coil spacing? Or is there some other characteristic of progressive rate springs that I should know...just looking for info for the future here. I'm working on my 280Z now, but the 240Z is coming... Thanks.

Is this only for a 240Z tokico illumina package? I am currently installing the illumina shock/spring package on my 280Z, and as far as I can see, they are not progressive springs. The spring wire seems to be constant diameter, and the coil spacing is uniform up and down the spring. Where did you get/find/see the info that the tokico springs are progressive? Just wondering... Thanks.

After having my first two Z's rust into piles of oxide by driving them year-round (they were my only cars in my high school/college years), I just can't do that to my current 280Z. Since it was a california car, and has little rust, I just have to keep it that way - even it means suffering through a few months per year with no Z to drive!

Bummer guy. It's 67 today here in Sunny Central Illinois! Too bad my car isn't road worthy yet . Suspension is half back in now - going for more this afternoon! Better luck later in the week - maybe our warm weather will come east your way!

I'm definately leaving them in, but I'm asking about making them shorter. The springs are already lowering the car an inch (although with my 27 year old springs, I suspect I won't notice much difference in actual ride height), and I'm not interested in lowering it any further. Essentially, the question is will I have adequate suspension travel if I leave the Energy Suspension Poly bumpstop the original size, or should I shorten it. Since I don't actually have stock bumpstops to compare, I don't know how the Energy suspension ones compare. On the street I suspect that they will be fine. Will I be annoyed at a track day if I try to push it?

It's amazing how many parts there really are in putting the front struts back together on a 280Z. Question for those that know: I am installing Tokico Illuminas and the matching springs. I also have an energy suspension poly bushing set, and I'm using the bump stops that came with it. Supposed to lower the car one inch. The Tokico kit suggests "if you want greater suspension travel" to cut the bump stops down by half. Now, they are really thinking about OEM bump stops. Well, the bump stops I took out of this car were crumbled pieces of junk (totally missing on one side), so I have nothing to tell me how tall the OEM bump stops were compared to these poly ones. Any advice on whether to bother doing that? I might take this thing to a track day or two, but it isn't a racer. Thanks.

I'd LOVE to get my 280Z out this weekend, but unfortunately, it's front end is still on the shelf. The parts look good though! Just got wheel bearings and rack boots by UPS today, so this weekend is reassembly time. I can't wait!

The "2400" valve covers are early 70-71 covers. After that they changed to the Nissan OHC. I'd guess, although I could be wrong, that someone replaced yours, if the car is the '72 in your sig. By 72, I think it would have been the Nissan OHC cover. I've attached a pic of the VC off my '70 car.

Carl, You're right. At least for me, that's the mental factory model I have. Even as an engineer by training, I'm an analyst/modeler, and have never studied production techniques. The modular methodology you describe would certainly clear up time-sequence anomolies to some extent. It would be very interesting to get a more first hand account of how the factory actually worked in the early days of 240Z production...

Just as a point of possible interest - you're right that the steering gear "box" is aluminum on the 240Z rack - I just went out and tested my 240 rack with a magnet (through the dirt on it) to make sure. The reason I was interested is that the 280Z rack that I am currently refreshing is not! The gear box on my '78 280Z rack has a cast iron-looking grain and a magnet will stick to it. So there's another Datsun change between 240's and 280's.

Here's a couple of harness tags from #215. The main dash harness date is as expected - 11/69. The Heater control subharness, however, has the right part number, but a totally different look. On the far left bottom, there is a "72", although it is dirty and partially obscured. I surmise that my PO must have pirated the Heater harness out of a 72. This part number stayed the same all the way up until 7/72 according to my fiche. Oh well, lots of history in this car...

I'd say be REALLY careful. I am getting ready to do this, and I checked on the availability of this seal before I started, since I generally replace all oil and grease seals as just a matter of course. According to my local Nissan dealer, Nissan has none. He located a total of three of these seals in stock at two different Nissan dealers, and I just bought two of them. There are probably others in the hands of various parts dealers, but you won't be able to just wander down to your local Nissan dealer and pick one up.

Kats, Here's the data plate off HLS30-00215. As you say, the stamping could have been a bit more uniform, but it's not too bad. Most of the items on my car that would have had dates are either faded or have been replaced (e.g., the dash pad I have was replaced by the previous owner with one slightly later). My Seat Belts are 10/69. Any markings on the steering wheel are gone. I'll keep on the lookout as I go through parts on the car. Great Thread!

Is it the crossmember or the steering rack that is in the way of removing the pan? I've got my steering rack out now, and I have a nice powder coated oil pan to replace my currently rusty and leaking one. Would be nice to do it now, but I'd really like not to have to lift the engine. Weather is getting nice, and I'd like to drive this thing some day! Anyway, there seems to be quite a bit of room under the pan over the crossmember now that the rack is gone....

I guess I just have to be a little less worried about pounding on the 27 year old beast. Cold chisel about the right size to slip just a little way into the pinch slot, hammer :stupid: at an angle away from the rack, and there ya go! I didn't even have to hammer that hard. Good thing I took it out too. One of the rack boots was split on the back and I had missed it. One more thing to replace now... Thanks Wayne(and Keith, offline )

It's amazing sometimes what doesn't occur to you during the heat of battle - I shall remove the rubber bushings from the rack before reengaging the problem tonight... I received an offline answer that was similar too, so I guess I'll break out one of my BFH's and go at it as carefully as possible. Right now, the only part of the front suspension/steering that is on the car is the rack and the front crossmember. Over the winter I dissassembled everything else, wire brushed/sandblasted it all, and just got done repainting most of it. Left the rack until last - probably should have taken it off a couple months ago, and not as the last thing! Thanks for the thoughts - hopefully a bit more persuasion will get it out tonight!

OK, the last thing I want to do on my winter front-end rebuild is take the rack out and clean it up before I put everything else back in, especially since I'm doing poly on the rack bushings and steering coupler anyway. So, right now, the rack is loose and ready to pull out, EXCEPT, that it won't come out with the U-joint rod still attached! I have the rod disconnected at the steering coupler, but not at the rack end. I do, of course have the rack end pinch bolt off, but the #%*#&% joint onto the splined shaft will NOT come off. I've been Kroiling it for a little while, and done a LITTLE light prying, but I don't want to hurt the rack. The pinch area seems really thick, and trying to pry it open with a big screwdriver doesn't seem to help at all. Any ideas or advice how to get the rack out, and/or how to get this pinch coupler off? I suspect on a 240 it might come out with the rod, but on mine, the air conditioning compressor is right above the 'box' on the rack where the coupler connects, and there is no way it's coming up and out. I have to draw it out the left side of the car... And on top of this, my garage heater died tonight. At least it's above freezing now!

I have a '78 that is next-best-thing to rust free, but I also have a garage full of parts from another '78 that was rusted horribly. I also know of another '78 sitting in a yard in town that is little more than a pile of rust. The later S30s have more metal, so I guess they might be a little less prone to complete rust through than a 240, but not much.

I second that!

Other than the bumpers, what on the 280 makes you think that? Just wondering. Take off the bumpers, and it takes some hard looking from the exterior to figure out if you are looking at a series II 240Z or a 260Z or 280Z. As long as we are NOT talking about the 280ZX, which is an entirely different animal...

The 280Z has the same vacuum assist design as the 240Z. Small differences the the capacities of the components. Maybe you should get one of each! I love my 280Z as a daily driver, and it is still a hugely fun car to drive. My 240Z is still a driving figment, since it will be a few years before the rust, mechanicals, engine rebuild, etc. are done, but I look forward to it being a prime example of the 240Z.

Spybot blocks Avenue A, Inc., which I believe is a tracking cookie. After that, only a blank page shows up. May be just the way we have our respective setups with Spybot. I won't let stuff like Doubleclick write cookies on my machine, and I'm assuming Avenue A is similar.