Arne

Yeah, really odd. My car's build date is 10/70, HLS30-12746. Still think a build date of 9/70 would be more logical for yours, but whatever...

I'm willing to give the seller the benefit of the doubt on the "prototype" label, lot's of people don't really understand the the actual meaning of the word. But no way I'm going to bid on a car like that if I can't look at it in person first.

I'm interested in this thread, as the 240Z I'm picking up tomorrow has an injected L28 in it now. I haven't confirmed it totally yet, but it appears to be an F54/P79 combo with the matching late 280ZX injection. I haven't decided for sure yet, but I'm leaning toward swapping back to SUs on it. We'll see...

My brother has one that is very similar. His is a '63 Series II 88, in very faded blue, with the deluxe bonnet and safari roof. Very cool.

If I'm visualizing this correctly, lowering the rack will make the bumpsteer worse, not better. When you lower the car, you are already lowering the rack (as well as the rest of the car) in relation to the wheels. Lowering the rack will make that worse.

The link to Bryan's site. Good info there.http://www.geocities.com/zgarage2001/z.html

So sad for you folks back there. No road salt used in Oregon...

Is it worth it? Hard to say since we don't know where you live, or how often you'd use it there.

Interesting that it still appears to have its transmission!

Don't know that I've seen any spacers thicker than 25mm, so you may be hosed.

But bear in mind that they may not have been rating those engines the same way, so the differences may not be what it looks like.

The rated HP for the early Z-cars bounced up and down over the years, and the rating system used was not always the same either. So direct comparisons are difficult at best. The following list is from memory, so don't hold my to this. Factory claimed HP 1970 - 150 1971 - 150 1972 - 150? 1973 - 129 1974 (L26) - 139 1975 (L28) - 149 1976 - 149? 1977 - 170 1978 - 170? Side note - the '71 240Z I am picking up this weekend has an injected L28 (from an '83 280ZX) in it now. No idea how much power that was claimed to make. But I suspect I will eventually yank the injection and revert to carbs.

Yup, I spent over 20 years in the tire and suspension business, and the biggest ride improvement will be from tires - specifically nice soft 14" 70 series as noted. All the suspension tweaking you can do won't make as much difference as tires will.

Gonna need some hellacious spacers for those, dude. They won't clear the struts as is. The preferred offset for a Z with 7" wheels is 0. Those are 40mm!!

A well known American rust-proofing treatment. Used extensively in the Eastern US back in the day.

The '71 I'm picking up next week is pretty close to this one - HLS30-12746, also 10/70 build date. 919 yellow and an automatic (for now).

True, they probably were rather heavy. But you need to put them in their proper context. Back in the early '80s, their competition was companies like American Racing, Appliance, Western and Keystone. The Shelby's didn't look too bad in comparison. They were one of the first affordable wheel makers to make their wheels hub centering, for example. I don't think I'd want a set now, but back in the day they were acceptable.

Back in the '80s we sold them at the tire outfit I used to work for at the time. The mesh style was called "CSS". They made several other styles as well. Most of their styles were kind of two dimensional, not many curves to them. They were OK wheels for the most part. I never owned any though, because that was about the same time that the first Enkei wheels hit the US market, and the Enkeis were so much higher quality that those of us in the business all bought them instead.

It is a good book, if you're goal is to totally strip and restore the car. It's an OK book if your plan is to refresh only, or refresh and modify. I bought the book as research before I decided for sure that I wanted to tackle a Z. I was hoping it would be as good as a similar book I had covering MGB restoration. That one covered each area separately, whereas Humble's book covers the entire process as one overwhelming lump. Fact is, Humble's book (while being filled with valuable info) might scare off someone who's never gotten into something like this before.

Vapor lock is typically caused by the high underhood temperatures that the lean mixture of the flat-tops create. PCV and vapor systems have no measurable effect on performance or driveability. The term "dizzy" is short for distributor. There are gains to be had by using a dizzy with a different advance curve.

When I sold wheels and tires for a living (prior career), Elite wheels were a low cost wheel of so-so quality. But I left that industry over 7 years ago, so I can't say that my impressions from then are still valid. A lot can change in 7 years.

Glad this post came back to the top so I could find it. The series 1 car that I am picking up in two weeks no longer has its original vented hatch. I've been trying to decide if this is going to be a problem or not. So if I'm reading this correctly, if the rest of the car is properly sealed the issues I may face for having no vents is the pressure "boom" when closing the door, and lack of flow in the ventilation system with the windows closed. Hmm, I may need to look for an early hatch...

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't complaining. I am enjoying the investigative part of the thread, and will continue to follow it as long as new data is unearthed.

True for most of the world, but the US 240Z had a smog pump, so the damper had two belt grooves. MSA sells the single belt unit as an upgrade, claiming it to be even lighter yet.

As a Z newbie, I've been following this thread with interest, and yet some amusement as well. The interest because I enjoy learning new things about the family of cars I am getting into. The amusement because this discussion has been much like some of those I've seen (and participated in) regarding my prior restoration projects - a '67 MGB, and an '81 BMW 323i (Euro model not officially offered here in the USA). So I have learned some things about early and late S30's from this thread. But I have to agree with some of the sentiments expressed above. Interesting as this is to look at, it is really just an intellectual exercise. We will probably never know the whole story of this car. I do hope that it is restored, just because, but whether a particular car is really low numbered or not doesn't mean much in most cases. When I decided I wanted to restore a Z, my only hard and fast criteria was that it would have small bumpers. Series I, series II, early 260 - I really didn't care which. It just had to be suitable for restoration. Turns out the car I settled on is an early '71 series I, just by chance. But interesting as all this is, the main point for me is for all of us to learn more about these cars, so that they can be saved for the future.