I broke it and I don't know what it is!!!

[shadesh]

I found a "Reference" picture that shows the locations for the various sensors screwed into the housing.

webdawg1

I was looking at the attachement and had a few questions. I have a 1975 280z and I broke the temp guage bolt. .. also the wire for the water temp switch was never there although the bolt is there. I also broke the Thermotime switch plug as well..

My question is,

1. what are the part numbers for the water temp switch, water temp sensor ("Water Temp), Thermotime, and the Temp Guage?

2. where does the wire to the "water temp switch" connect to?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

[webdawg1]

Water Temp Switch....P/N: 22120-N4200

Water Temp Sensor....P/N: 22636-N4200

Thermotime....P/N: 22635-N4200 or 22635-N4710

Temp Gauge Sender....P/N: ???? (Could not find a P/N)

Wire colors for the water temp switch should be...Black (which is ground) and blue. The blue wire should be coming out of the water temp switch and hook up to a red wire via a female bullet connector. The Black wire should be grounded using any bolt within reach...

Hopefully someone has the P/N for the temp gauge sender...

webdawg1

[beandip]

I was looking at the attachement and had a few questions. I have a 1975 280z and I broke the temp guage bolt. .. also the wire for the water temp switch was never there although the bolt is there. I also broke the Thermotime switch plug as well..

My question is,

1. what are the part numbers for the water temp switch, water temp sensor ("Water Temp), Thermotime, and the Temp Guage?

2. where does the wire to the "water temp switch" connect to?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

Do you realise this thread is 3 years old?

[webdawg1]

So it is...he he. I was replying back to "Shadesh" which was dated 4/08/08 so I guess he needed the info...I was just trying to help man....

webdawg1

[EScanlon]

Since he was referencing a picture on this thread, after having used the Search feature, and had questions pertaining EXACTLY to the thread's content....where ELSE should he have posted his questions? I can't think of a more logical place than within the thread that contains the bulk of the information...it helps the thread be MORE informative.

Starting a new thread would have disjointed the question/answer and made future searches even more difficult.

It IS difficult to discern one thread's content from another, the search feature at least allows you to know that the thread contains what you're looking for. But by propagating the number of threads simply because one is old...well, you're back at step one with hundreds of threads with the same subject matter.

Sorry, the blanket "old post" comment won't cut it here. If it were a "Me too!" type of comment - then it would apply, but not when it's on-topic. By posting a relevant question IN the same thread, it enriches the thread for future searches and readers, and un-complicates a tedious search after using the Search feature.

2¢

E

[GunnerRob]

Since he was referencing a picture on this thread, after having used the Search feature, and had questions pertaining EXACTLY to the thread's content....where ELSE should he have posted his questions? I can't think of a more logical place than within the thread that contains the bulk of the information...it helps the thread be MORE informative.

Starting a new thread would have disjointed the question/answer and made future searches even more difficult.

It IS difficult to discern one thread's content from another, the search feature at least allows you to know that the thread contains what you're looking for. But by propagating the number of threads simply because one is old...well, you're back at step one with hundreds of threads with the same subject matter.

Sorry, the blanket "old post" comment won't cut it here. If it were a "Me too!" type of comment - then it would apply, but not when it's on-topic. By posting a relevant question IN the same thread, it enriches the thread for future searches and readers, and un-complicates a tedious search after using the Search feature.

2¢

E[/]

Thank you for stepping up on this one E. Your point is right on.

I noticed the guy (or gal) who brought out this thread is a new member and was sharp enough to know to bring this thread out instead of starting a new one. I hope your defending his actions will encourage him to stay and become an asset to the club.

Rob

[shadesh]

Sorry if I created any problems here. I was doing a search on the above topic and saw this thread that was relevant to my question... and so I decided to "plug in" and ask my question here instead of starting a whole new thread. I was just trying to continue on this topic which I thought was relevant to my problem. I apologize for any inconvenience.

[EScanlon]

No need to apologize at all.

There have been incidents of people resurrecting old threads simply to add a comment that boils down to..."Me too!" or "I agree!", and that is what we would like to discourage. Those comments do not serve anything other than to plump up post counts. For the most part, post-whoring is frowned upon.

However, IMO, both comments and questions that are ON-TOPIC of the thread and rely on the content of the thread as well as enrich the thread are welcome ...regardless of the age of the original thread.

These cars are 35+ years old! How many different ways do you think there are to repair the same problems? How many different ways should you have to search for them? While the title of this thread is definitively not on-topic (and Mike the Head Admin of the site may change it), the content is informative and other than these specific posts, on topic.

So, no worries and feel free to post comments and questions that are on topic.

2¢

E