mdbrandy

I've seen a couple spares and a set or two of used "D" hubcaps over the past few months. I haven't paid too much attention, since "I have mine" :classic: , but I watch the prices. The used sets of four are still easily breaking $200 - $250 or more. With that darned braided radiator hose going for over $100 the other day, the hubcaps will be going up too, I suppose!

There's a set on e-bay right now. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2481746853&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1 Only $89 so far, although that is probably less than half of where they'll end up. "D" hubcaps are expensive. Good luck.

It should work with phone numbers that are of the form abc-wxyz. If you call the value "x" the "abc" from the phone number, and the value "y" the wxyz from the phone number, the problem comes out like this: ((80x + 1)250 + 2y - 250)/2 = (20000x + 250 + 2y - 250)/2 = 10000x + 125 + y - 125 = 10000x + y Thus, if your phone number is 555-1212, then the number you get will be 5550000 + 1212 = 5551212, your original phone number.

Major bummer. I did the exact same thing in about 1989, but luckily I was driving a POS Dodge Station Wagon. Did a similar amount of damage to my hood and grill though. No guages to look at - I had glanced down at my radio. Good luck bringing it back. That kind of damage is not something I know much about... "We feel your pain"

In your gallery. It just takes a little while for them to be approved.

Right. At least two of the cars on the board (26th-Z and mine) have established that ours came without evap tanks because they were made in 1969, and the laws didn't mandate the evap tanks until 1970. Got a new hose from Chloe, but we did it by picture and not by part number. Pic of the one originally on my car attached.

Mike's got to be right...who in their right minds would take a Fuel Injected 280Z, and put FLAT TOPS on it? ROFL :stupid:

No. Given the flat-top carbs and the fairly slim bumpers, but with the big rubber blocks, it is probably a 1974 260Z 2+2. Definately not a '72, and not a 280Z either.

OK. A little more research, from http://www.synlube.com/glossary.htm#octane%20number : expression of the antiknock properties of a gasoline, relative to that of a standard reference fuel. There are two distinct types of octane number measured in the laboratory: Research Octane Number (RON) and Motor Octane Number (MON), determined in accordance with ASTM D 2699 and D 2700, respectively. Both the RON and MON tests are conducted in the same laboratory engine, but RON is determined under less severe conditions, and is therefore numerically greater than MON for the same fuel. The average of the two numbers — (RON + MON)/2 — is commonly used as the indicator of a gasoline’s road antiknock performance. The gasoline being tested is run in a special single-cylinder engine, whose compression ratio can be varied (the higher the compression ratio, the higher the octane requirement). The knock intensity of the test fuel, as measured by a knockmeter, is compared with the knock intensities of blends of isooctane (assigned a knock rating of 100) and heptane (with a knock rating of zero), measured under the same conditions as the test fuel. The percentage, by volume, of the isooctane in the blend that matches the characteristics of the test fuel is designated as the octane number of the fuel. For example, if the matching blend contained 90% isooctane, the octane number of the test fuel would be 90. In addition to the laboratory tests for RON and MON, there is a third method, Road Octane Number, which is conducted in a specially equipped test car by individuals trained to hear trace levels of engine knock. I don't have a conversion, but it appears to me that what used to be, say 91 Octane on the RON scale is now more like 87 on the (RON + MON)/2 scale. Thus, octane ratings may not have REALLY dropped over the years, but knowledge of what is important, and the ways that it is measured have changed. Of course, since I don't have a conversion, it may be that 91 RON might be 89 (RON+MON)/2, so there may have been some degradation in Octane. I haven't seen any real conversion. What I have seen is that Octane rating is very complicated.

I believe that the way Octane rating is calculated changed some years ago. Something about RON (Research Octane Number) versus MON (Motor Octance Number). I think the current value is (RON + MON)/2 . There's a bunch of info at : http://www.repairfaq.org/filipg/AUTO/F_Gasoline6.html RON appears to give higher numbers, and was used some years ago. MON gives lower numbers, so octane numbers are lower now. I'm still doing some searching, and am not quite sure about this yet....

I run regular, 87 octane in my '78 280Z, and it seems quite happy.

I had a short e-mail conversation with the winner. He has a restored '72, so at least it is going to a good home .

Not meaning to steal your thunder texasz, but just FYI, Chloe at MidwestZ actually lists new center panels for 70-72! http://www.midwestz.com/Z_Body_Panels.htm They ain't cheap, though!

Well, that's pretty standard e-bay disclaimer stuff. I wasn't really worried about it.

Actually, there's no telling how much I really missed it by. I bid with 17 seconds to go, and was high bidder at $80. The other guy then sniped in with 3 seconds left, and put in a bid that was something higher than mine. There is no way to tell what his maximum bid was - e-bay just bids slightly higher than the next highest bid for you. So he could have bid $150 for all I know. Let's think that :cross-eye . That way I won't worry about the fact that he might have only bid $105, and if-only....!!!!:tapemouth That's one reason I snipe. Gives me no time to lose control and get into a bidding war.

Rats! That one got too expensive. $104!!

Only available in black unless you're lucky. Every once in a while other colors show up on e-bay, and Chloe has taken to coloring black ones with custom colors, although I don't know how many different colors.

You appear to be correct. The pic attached shows the MC (circled in the background) on my '70 240Z. Reservoir at the very end of the cylinder. I just went out to my 280 and looked at what I bought from Nissan a few months ago, and it has the reservoir about halfway down the cylinder. Learned something new today! Thanks.

So, this is a part that I haven't researched differences in. Are the MCs different between the 240 and 280Zs? I didn't think they were. Last winter I bought a new MC for the 280 from my local Nissan dealer. Pricy, but I needed it fast.

That has nothing to do with oil pressure. That is a separate sending unit on the right side of the block down by the oil filter.

Doesn't sound normal. In my '78, when the car is cold, the oil pressure guage is maybe 1/4 of the way up at idle, and 2/3 of the way up when I am driving. Once the car warms up, the idle pressure is a little above the bottom mark, and the running pressure is something around half way. Which part can't you find? The sending unit, or the guage? The problem is more likely the sending unit. I know Chloe (MidwestZ) can get those - the NOS Nissan ones are over $50, but there are aftermarket ones too that are cheaper. I have no experience lately buying and installing one, however.

I think Carl's point is that while you may be seeing flow, it may be only half the flow that is supposed to be there due to plugging of the radiator tubes. No way you can tell by just looking. Heat transfer in an air-to-water heat exchanger like the radiator is highly dependent on heat transfer area (as well as velocity, surface conditions, and other things), so half the flow would be at most only half the heat transfer. Maybe at idle that half flow is fine, but at speed, the engine's heat output outstrips the radiator's (degraded) flow ability. Bottom line is don't discount the possibility of degraded radiator flow due to plugged tubes. Wish I could help you on the sender. Don't know that one.

I just got over my overheating problem on my '78 by replacing the fan clutch. However, my problem was opposite from yours - I could not idle for any length of time after the engine was up to temp without the temperature quickly rising. Getting the car moving (with air moving through the radiator) brought the temp back down. New fan clutch was the ticket. For your problem, I don't know. My fan clutch was freewheeling, and thus not cooling enough. If yours is locked up instead, could it be fine at low speed, and putting extra stress on the motor/water pump at higher RPM, causing higher temps? Seems like a SWAG, but.... Since your problem is occurring at higher speeds, seems like it should not be a problem with moving air through the radiator (is the radiator clean outside?), so it has to be with moving hot coolant through the radiator. Thus, thermostat, blocked radiator, bad water pump, etc. are reasonable things to look at. My guage is now pretty much rock solid right in the center.

If those are for me, after I answered the first time, I refreshed the home page, and this question showed up under the latest news items. It is gone now, so Mike must have moved it to the right place.

BTW, this doesn't belong on the front page news...