geezer

No need for a flame suit, but WOW, I’m shaking my head in wonderment. Does anyone actually think it is anything other than asinine for anyone to say they could build a rear quarter from scratch? We are talking about a 1976 280Z here, not an ultra rare, count on one hand how many exist, exotic piece of automotive art, where money is no object. Good used replacements can be found easily enough without resorting to piecing together a “scratch” built abortion. That statement, coupled with talk of a Nissan replacement quarter section for $500. or less, should cause the BS meter to max out. That’s all it would take for me to walk. There is nothing wrong with standing up for the profession. If you find a shop that you can develop an honest, good working relationship with, great, but “trust your bodyman”? What? I hope this is not a blanket statement to live by! If it is, there’s a bridge in Brooklyn I can sell you. It is a tough way to make a buck, but that does not give them the right to dance around with part descriptions. Even if it was described as a genuine Nissan replacement quarter section in a signed agreement, I would have to see it before believing it or allowing any work to be done. What is the problem with that, if they deliver what was promised? The only way a problem arises, is if they turn up with $150. worth of Tabco pieces that they are charging you $500. for. Just for the record, my previous post only addressed the original post concerning “quarter panel questions”. I would never venture a guess on what the total restoration cost should be, not knowing the car or even being current on the associated costs today. What I do know, is the cost of a genuine Nissan replacement quarter section. I also have a fair amount of firsthand knowledge on rust progression in these cars. If the quarter section is rusted as badly as the body man says it is, the entire car must likewise be afflicted. If so, I would rethink spending the money on it. It would be a cash cow for the body shop and the source of bad memories for you. In a recent post I showed a ’77 280Z, as rust free as an unrestored Z can possibly be, in beautiful condition that the seller was willing to let go for $10,000. Sometimes, it is better to cut your losses, stand back and look at the big picture. Burn much? Next.

The old girl sure did clean up nice! Your stepdad would be proud!

As am I. I would be leary of anyone who claims they can make a quarter panel from scratch. Also, the price of $500. for a genuine Nissan replacement quarter is not even in the ballpark. In most cases where the dog leg, outer wheel arch and outer wheel housing has been severly rusted it does not advance any higher than the lower half of the outer wheelhouse. There will be a fair amount of surface rust extending higher but not to the extent that the metal needs to be replaced. Ask to see the replacement parts before he starts any work. Don't let him tear into it before he has the parts in hand. Then you will know "whats what".

When I bought my Z it had these home spun aluminum horns that were fabricated by the POs grandpa. They fit great under the shallow K&N filter housings. Just to show, it doesn't have to be costly to achieve the desired results.

After looking more closely and the fact it was under the accumulated oil & dirt, it was probably well protected/preserved; my opinion has changed. Most likely "factory" paint markings.

Very nice indeed! Most of us would prefer a little mechanical work as opposed to the more common east coast menace (rust).

Yellow paint was used when these cars were built, to verify the torque value of several bolts. I don't think that is what we see here but could be. It appears to have been applied more recently but perhaps for the same reason.

Short of drilling out the spotwelds to totally access the rust that is harboured inbetween, in most cases you will not get it all. After tackling it the best you can, using all the methods known to man, you can then encapsulate it, in order to keep air & moisture from contacting it, thus preventing the rust from spreading. If there is a better way, I would like to know about it too.

The proper flare nut wrench is good advise. I also keep a small tin of valve grinding compound on hand. When applied to the nut or wrench, it provides an additional "bite" that will prevent rounding the nut. I've also alternated a little heat from a propane torch and a shot of PB Blaster as well in extreeme cases.

That's the one I mistook. I lost a ton of pics & info that were on a previous computer. Was HLS30-00059 an Ontario car when those pics were taken? It's great that you (as well as others) are keeping a file on these early cars. The pics being included with the data is priceless. Thanks Mike.

No, I remember HLS30-00048. I very well may be mistaken, and can't find the pics or the ad for the car, but I did find the pic of the parts that came with the car before it was restored. Look familiar, from around mid 2006?

Don't know, but found this in a Wiki. Mountain Dew, and its energy drink counterpart AMP often incur disapproval from health experts due to its high caffeine content. However, Mountain Dew was marketed in Australia and Canada (see Dew Fuel/Mountain Dew Energy varieties below) – as well as several U.S. states[citation needed] – as having no additional caffeine. (Health Canada prohibits caffeine in non-cola soft drinks,[7] while Australia has a similar law.[8]) Mountain Dew contains tartrazine (“FD&C Yellow No. 5” in the U.S.), which can cause allergic reactions in some people, possibly creating the urban legend that Mountain Dew can reduce sperm count.[9] Mountain Dew, like other citrus flavored drinks, contains citric acid, sodium benzoate, and brominated vegetable oil (in small quantities, as its concentration is regulated in the US) Although the original formulation of Diet Mountain Dew contained only aspartame as a sweetener, the reformulated Diet Mountain Dew contains three artificial sweeteners: aspartame, acesulfame potassium, and sucralose, advertised on its packaging as having a "Tuned Up Taste." Never had one myself.:disappoin

If I remember correctly, HLS30-00094 was for sale here in Ontario a few years ago. I think I have the pictures saved somewhere. I believe the restoration was completed at that time, if I have the right car in mind.

Dang, I got real busy this week and forgot to look for these. I seen these listed on Ebay. If this seller has them available, maybe they can be obtained over the Nissan Parts counter. All he does is resell at a higher price and pad the shipping. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=370368470935&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT Edit: after a second look, it seems he only has 1 and it's used at that. How many do you need?

I don't think there is any difference between one for a '69 or '70 is there? One came up for sale on Ebay a few months back, while we were discussing them in this thread. Goose52 teased us with his and a pic of an empty box too. The part number shown in the 1970 FairladyZ S30-PS30 catalog, listed as an option is C2865-E4100. http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showpost.php?p=313480&postcount=32

Here's the message from Charlie Osborne of ZeddFindings that is posted on the Ontario Z Car site: “Charlie Osborne reports that Zedd Findings is as active as ever. We are now mainly focused on marketing and selling the floor kits, for the 240Z, 260Z, 280Z and 280ZX as well as the front frame rails and lower rear panels for the 1970-1978 Z series cars, all of which we have manufactured here in Kingston. As well, we continue to sell new OEM parts. We are no longer selling used parts, but can help you locate what you need. Please contact us by telephone at 613-389-1397, on-line at zeddfind at kos dot net, or visit our website at http://www.datsunzparts.ca/.” or http://www.datsunzparts.com/.” I have corresponded with him this past week, myself.

Funny Dave! He clocked you with his tallywackertracker system huh? I think more of us are guilty of these infractions than are willing to admit. I bet we all have a really good story to tell, if we didn't care about making it public. In my case responsibility came with age, and today, I police myself the best I can, not to say I don't occasionally get above the speed limit. Heck, just to move along with the traffic, at times I find I'm easily 15-20kms or more over at times. I don't want to pay unneccesary tickets and don't want to endanger anyone either, so drive lawfully for the most part.

Thanks for taking the time to restore this wiring diagram Sully. It was beyond my capabilities and I thought it was important to restore it back to a ledgible copy, even if we can't identify what manual it came from. A color version would be cool too, to add to your growing list of works. I just love how they can be enlarged as much as we like, without losing any of the crisp detail. Thanks again!

I usually check the ring tone, by striking the rotor sharply with whatever is handy, to check for a crack. Sometimes, they can't be seen with the naked eye.

I don't know, is spray on bedliner necessarily a bad thing? A lot of people use it for the durability and water protection it provides. I would imagine it provides good sound dampening as well. He states up front the interior needs to be completed. Looks to be an unfinished project, that has been going through a rigorous testing phase. Bidding probably won't reach what has been spent on the motor alone.

In that case, it seems that your Z sailed through the system without any delays. My Z is a 10/70, HLS30-11730. That's a difference of 5915 from katcarl1's Z built in 11/70 and made me wonder about the daily production rate. I haven't seen any numbers made public covering this era that break the production counts down by day/shift. Rick's records as well as other sources, give us some perspective but wouldn't account for the total worldwide build in a graduated timeframe. Numbers for the year can be determined but I would find it interesting to know the work schedule. Was it a two shift operation, a 6 day workweek, voluntary 7, overtime? These are the bits of information that are hard to come by. I find this data interesting, maybe more than anyone should, because its still in my blood. I've been retired almost 10 years now but previously did a stint as the Production Co-ordinator in the largest automobile manufacturing complex in the world (by production volume), where we put out 1455 vehicles a day, on a 3 shift, 6 and sometime 7 day work schedule. That accounts for my overactive imagination at times guessing what occurred in Japan all those years ago. In comparison the S30 production run was a much smaller operation, but not any less interesting.

Thank you also Rick. We all take something away from these discussions which are usually spawned from a simple question. I believe Mike is correct in his assumption of starting VINs. It is reasonable and downright logical, if you consider what I have also said. There were likely a dozen or so 1972 pilot cars built as much as 3-4 months before the official build was slated to begin. They had to be assigned VINs that were representative of 1972 models, therefore an estimation of how many 1971s would be built before launch of the 1972s had to be made. A margin of safety included and a rounding of the number brings them safely to 46001. Remember, the VIN was engraved right into the cowl, so a simple tag swap couldn't be done. Make sense? Does this theory fill in the blanks?

What that represents to me is a car that was held back in the system before being completed and being issued the conformance tag. It could have been for any number of reasons. We will never know the exact reason and could only guess. At the end of the model year build it is nessesary to clear out the system, complete any stragglers that were held back for repair or kept for reference. Consider that the VIN is etched onto the cowl early in the build process and the conformance/door tag is the last thing attached to the car before going out the door. In my automobile manufacturing experience, some of the last to be completed were always the ones that were kept in the layout room and kept as perfect examples with exacting tolerances as masters. With the new model under way even they had to go. Maybe you got a perfect example. Just another point. There is never a clean division between model years. Many 1972s were being built in the system before the last of the 1971s was completed. Every year several of the new model were built ahead of the official launch date for the engineers use, advertizing or training purposes. This had to be done to also to allow sufficent lead time for tooling to be finalized. They were just mixed in with the previous year model, but didn't have a conformance tag attached until deemed fit and it was time. Maybe more than you wanted to know, but I hope it helps.

Hey there Rick - This is page 1 of TS71-47 issued Oct 6, 1971. I know from discussions with club members that some of the changes intended for the '72 model year were delayed, because of what appears to have been a need to use the remaining stock from the '71 model.