Duffy's 1/71 Series 1 240z build

[Zed Head]

I think that you're back to the original point of your quest.  You have a new switch now and you know how it functions.  "Best" is very subjective.  

I think that the "key" point here is that you have the possibility of continuous power from the ignition switch from On to Start and back to On.

[SteveJ]

Probably the easiest way to ensure you have power at start and on is to jumper the BW from the ignition switch to the GW at the ballast resistor. You won't backfeed the circuit for the starter solenoid.

After watching Duffy's video, I ran a test on my 73. I disconnected the solenoid wire and took apart the connection for the BW and GW wires under the hood that I did put together to jumper out the ballast. (BW cannot backfeed the GW wire.)

I put the turn signal into a right turn and put the key in start. The turn signal flashed, meaning in my 73 with an original switch (AFAIK) supplies power to the BW wire in start and on.

 

[Zed Head]

I picked the S circuit just because it was the first thing that came to mind.

Wrong, pretty sure, the stuff below.  Corrected farther down the page.

If you connect GW and BW then you'll be backfeeding the Acc circuit during Start.  #4.  IF it's a 240Z switch.  Check out the 1976 280Z switch in the next post.

 

 

 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Zed Head

[Zed Head]

Here is a 1976 280Z.  240Z next to it.  Ig and R ((R)esistor/ballast) both get power on a 280Z switch.  I'd test that switch's Ig and R pins and see what kind of switch you have.  See if Ig and R both have continuity at Start.

I thought this was a simple problem but it's really not.  Maybe that's why they changed the switch, and the wiring.

Edited August 29, 2022 by Zed Head

[duffymahoney]

It's as if Nissan didn't want me to do this:)

[duffymahoney]

3 hours ago, SteveJ said:

Probably the easiest way to ensure you have power at start and on is to jumper the BW from the ignition switch to the GW at the ballast resistor. You won't backfeed the circuit for the starter solenoid.

After watching Duffy's video, I ran a test on my 73. I disconnected the solenoid wire and took apart the connection for the BW and GW wires under the hood that I did put together to jumper out the ballast. (BW cannot backfeed the GW wire.)

I put the turn signal into a right turn and put the key in start. The turn signal flashed, meaning in my 73 with an original switch (AFAIK) supplies power to the BW wire in start and on.

 

Will you explain this a little more?  

[SteveJ]

1 hour ago, duffymahoney said:

Will you explain this a little more?  

In the stock wiring, the GW wire has power with the key in Start and goes over to the tachometer. This wire also branches over to the ballast resistor. The BW wire branches out to the engine bay to the other side of the ballast resistor.

The other branch of the BW wire goes to the center stack where it splits again. One branch goes to the fuse box and the other goes to a 2 pin T-shaped connector.  You could get a connector from Vintage Connections that will let you plug an inline fuse into the circuit and go out to the pink wire on the Haltech. http://www.vintageconnections.com/Products/Detail/79 

You could also get a single pin connector to attach the inline fuse to the pink wire: http://www.vintageconnections.com/Products/Detail/78

The only caveat is that you can't have the GW wire going to the tachometer connector anymore.

[duffymahoney]

What about simple 12v in line diodes (one way)? That way the ecu gets 12v in on and start, minimal issues  

 

[SteveJ]

You don't need the diodes. What I gave you was a very simple way to wire. You said you aren't using the GW wire for the tach, so all you would need to do is land the GW and BW wire at the same place in the engine bay or replace the terminals on them now for a male/female bullet. Why do you want to do 10 times more work?

[SteveJ]

Here is the connection in my car of the GW and BW wires near the coil in the engine bay. 

The 2 pin connector in the center stack is easily identified by the T shape with BW and G wires connected to it.

[Zed Head]

Earlier I said that the Accessory pin would be powered if you did that.   I think that I misunderstood how the switch works on the inside.  The diagram is misleading.  It looks like a circuit illustration but really it just shows what's connected to Battery at any position of the switch.  Sorry about the confusion.  If column #4 was connected to column #2 you would not be able to use Accessory alone, without having power to the the Ignition circuit.  Therefore they must not be connected.

 

Is there an effort here to keep the original wires intact?  Seems odd to have powered wires run all the way in to the engine bay that don't actually serve their original purpose.

I think that you could connect the pins on the back of the switch and achieve the same result as connecting them in the engine bay.  A simple back probed jumper at the connection.

 

[SteveJ]

5 minutes ago, Zed Head said:

Earlier I said that the Accessory pin would be powered if you did that.   I think that I misunderstood how the switch works on the inside.  The diagram is misleading.  It looks like a circuit illustration but really it just shows what's connected to Battery at any position of the switch.  Sorry about the confusion.  If column #4 was connected to column #2 you would not be able to use Accessory alone, without having power to the the Ignition circuit.  Therefore they must not be connected.

 

Is there an effort here to keep the original wires intact?  Seems odd to have powered wires run all the way in to the engine bay that don't actually serve their original purpose.

I think that you could connect the pins on the back of the switch and achieve the same result as connecting them in the engine bay.  A simple back probed jumper at the connection.

 

It's better to keep as much of the original wires intact, but it's easy to "kill" the GW and BW wires in the engine bay, I outlined that earlier. However, Duffy was hindered by the evaporator on the aftermarket AC. The wiring suggestions I gave a couple of comments prior to this one would be easy to implement.