geezer

I just looked at the microfiche to see how the 1980 280ZX is configured. It is a lot different than the S30 cowl assembly. You have an upper cowl top as Stephen points but I have no experience removing one. It needs replacing. If the rust damage in the pic is any indication, you will find much more damage after removing the cowl top. Is water getting on the floor? If so, what is called the "dash upper assembly" also has rust damage and will have to be metal repaired and sealed. Is there evidence under the hood of rust forming or breaking through the cowl/firewall? If you had a S30 I could show you some before & after pics showing the inner cowl/chimney damage and repair but it may look quite foreign, compared to yours. After the cowl top is removed, post more pics.

$352.16 with another $51.00 at the door for the taxman. That's more than I've paid in the past for destination charges on a new car! I think they padded the shipping charges to make up for the sale price.

Thanks, I have a set of Watanabe wheels but it would be nice to have another type to change it up once in a while.

Michael, I had the pleasure of looking your car over a few years back at the ZCCA convention in Cleveland. I am sure that today she is in just as good or better condition, knowing your commitment to excellence. I am not very well versed on 280Zs but I know an extremely nice example of one when I see it. I certainly can't argue the point with a certified appraiser but I don't think you could replace your car with another comparable example for only $11,000.

Heres the link in this post Chris. I shouldn't have put that pic in this thread. I was just excited http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showpost.php?p=350285&postcount=48

Here's a couple of pics as promised and the link requested. http://www.rhdjapan.com/fujitsubo-legalis-r-exhaust-muffler-s30-hs30-63314 I have never seen such a high standard of production work on any exhaust system as these! I think that is a good price for what you are getting. The shipping is what hurts.

I finally did get around to sending my inserts to Bilstein for a rebuild. I kept the existing valving and they also replaced the rods. They were great people to work with. Very quick turn around and they even took the time to call and arrange the cheapest shipping. I just opened the box and removed one to look at it and the doorbell rang again. It was my new Fujitsuto stainless exhaust being delivered.

It really is just a mindset. There will always be those that covet the low VIN. It can be easy to get caught up in that mindset. As well, it is fairly affordable to purchase a low VIN example that needs restoration. That is only the beginning though. It takes a special kind of dedicated Z nut to follow through and spend the countless thousands upon thousands needed for a correct restoration. As well, several years or a decade or more in some cases can pass by before being finished. I really think that there are different degrees of "finished" when an early Z is being restored simply because of the difficulty of finding the early pieces needed. My hat is off to who ever takes on the challenge. In reality, the earliest cars were the ones that had the most problems, experiencing the typical deficiencies of any new model being introduced. As time progresses, the cars naturally were improved. This is what sets the early cars apart. They are not better, just unique and more desirable if you have that mindset. Lots of us would never take on the challenge but take a great deal of interest in the subject and consider the early cars an important aspect of the hobby.

Good luck Leonard getting it under control. I have been lucky so far with the Warfarin I have been taking for about 3 1/2 years now, since my heart attack. I had a couple of stents put in. The doctor says I'm doing well as can be expected now but still doesn't approve of my projects in the garage. You probably feel the same and can't change who you are or give up on current projects. I don't move so fast any more but the desire to get things done is still there and I do keep at it. Just coincidence, but I have just this past week, thinned the Z stockpile, selling all the Z parts I have been collecting for several years, for possible future projects. I sold everything to one individual and only kept what is going on my present project. I figure after this car is done, I'll get my Z kicks from driving it, instead of working on it, but luckily they are never done. Years ago, I sold off or gave away most all my other major projects, realizing they needed to be in the hands of someone who could give them the attention needed. Take extreme care Leonard until you are stabilized and do what the Doc says. He knows best. I'm looking forward to seeing your finished Z even if it is a long, long time after April or May. Best of luck to you.

I have a spare set of 8 I can send you, after I find some chrome, philips head, properly matched machine screws to go with them. I'm doing the same, using metal nacelles instead of the FRP type, for mounting the headlight covers.

I understand now. I forgot what you had said in post #33 and thought perhaps once again you had uncovered something new to me. I am curious what the differences between the E4100 & E4126 suffix versions are. Mike, since you don't have the mounting hardware and if you are not too concerned with originality when you mount yours, you could use these type of threaded inserts, matched up with the appropriate screws for a cleaner, more simplified mounting.

Mike, what is it that makes you think that yours are the "originals"? I'm not saying they aren't, I'm just trying to find out what is the difference between your headlight covers and rings and the E4126 prefixed version shown in post #22. What part numbers would you assign to yours? Alan and Carl have submitted parts #63900-E4100 & #63901-E4100 as the first known available headlight cover sets. If yours are the E4100 suffixed version, how did you determine this? I have been unable to find photographic evidence to identify the "originals".

Andrew, don't become paranoid about who is reading your thread. You have done nothing wrong and are not trying to pull a scam on your insurance company, who is supposed to be on your side, looking after your interests. I can understand your concern of leaving your car in an impound yard but by taking possession of it you have relieved your insurance company of the daily storage fees and possibly, effectively slowed the settlement process. Myself, I don't think I would have taken possession of it until it was assessed for damage and evaluated but I'm sure you were cleared by your insurance company to do so. It very well may come down to a cash settlement if a body repair shop cannot be found willing to take on the job. Understandably, because of the cars age and difficulty of having all needed parts readily available it isn't a straight forward time & material job and will fall into a specialty repair catagory. Most high volume shops don't want floor/yard space taken up for extended periods while waiting for parts. I would make it a priority to have the damage formally assessed and the car evaluated as soon as possible. Don't allow your insurance company to drag their feet. Are they providing a rental car? The costs associated with a rental is the only incentive they have to settle quickly and hopefully fairly. I'm sure you could find an individual on your own to repair your car, but make sure any compensation agreed to is enough to bring your car back to its pre accident condition and also considers your inconvenience suffered throughout the ordeal.

That's funny! I live a lot further away from Dan then 4kms, but he has been there and helped me out as well, as have several other members from this site. Glad to hear the problem has been resolved.

Hi Steve, I pulled the plastic vent assembly from a R200 cover and measured it at 14.3mm. I measured the hole in the cover that it press fits into and got 11.8mm. I did not remove the metal vent assembly from my R200 finned cover but measured the diameter of the tube that was accessible outside of the cover at 14mm. I'm sure they would be interchangable. The metal spring loaded vent assembly does not protrude through the cover but only into it and therefore does not have the smaller holes which have to be orientated in the proper direction. I didn't have a R180 on hand to compare with.

I borrowed this pic from the classified ads, in case you didn't see it. The components are shown from another viewpoint.

rscottm - OK, this thread is a little confusing and more complicated than it needs to be. In post #4 Jim posted a couple of excellent before and after resto pics of his R180. This is the same as your car came equipt from the factory. The differential you posted pics of is also a R180. I'm pretty sure LeonV just looked at the wrong pic or something and he actually knows the difference. You did not provide a pic of anything other than the differential assembly and the rear transverse member, so that leaves us to speculate what happened to the transverse member. Just compare with Jim's pics and forget about anything to do with a R200. cygnus1 posted a great pic of his '72 factory modified/corrected mounting so you can see the difference between the two versions. Hope that helps.

rscottm - The pics you put up are of a R180. What remains to be determined is if it was modified at all from the mounting position that your car originally had. The change to the new rearward position was announced for the 1972 model year starting with HLS30-46001 but we know that there was sometimes a bit of a grey area surrounding the actual implementation of some changes. Anyhow, I dug up some info to help you determine what you have. 40 years down the road, anything is possible.

I forgot to mention that for a GM alternator, either a "SI" or "CS" type, just substitute the Nissan "L" field connection in my diagram with GMs #1. Also just ignore the jumper bypassing the remote sense. I drew that diagram up for another member creating a bare bones electrical system.

You can either use a diode on the field wire on the alternator or instead use the charge light/idiot light to prevent run on as a field feed. I looked for an example and found this from a past project. My crude diagram shows both the diode and charge light but only one or the other is neccesary.

I checked a few R200 vents I have. The arrow points forward. My finned R200 cover has a metal vent which remains closed until the spring loaded valve is opened to relieve the excess pressure. I measured it if you are interested in swapping one of these in place of the plastic one. It is 14mm. Don't know the part number or availability off hand. Edit - After removing and studying one of the plastic vents from a R200 cover, I can't see any reason why the arrow couldn't also point to the rear as long as the through holes in the case are oriented to the sides, which they would be either way.

I could be mistaken but from what I've seen, this joint was finished using the same processes, with the same underlying structure for all models of the early Zs. It is a matter of how each of these cars held up over the years, that will determine how intact the seam remains. The image I have flash through my mind is a Z travelling at a speed sufficient enough to cause a substantial downward force when a dip is encountered in the road. The combined weight of the occupants as well will increase the stress put on the unibody. There are countless factors that will make each car unique as well over its history. I noticed a post recently where someone was puzzled about his car being rusted much more on the LH (driver's) side. Living in the rustbelt, I instantly recognized this as a car that has been parked on the street and subjected to traffic splash/spray. Putting a car up on a lift or on jackstands, seems to me, to be more of a controlled, slow movement, but who knows, its possibly a contributing cause. I think potholes, speedbumps, railroad tracks and general rough, uneven surfaces are larger factors. In conclusion, I think a few well placed welds before re-leading or filling, prior to a paint job sure can't hurt.

I'm glad you and your girlfriend and the other party escaped physical injury. I found this news very disturbing, knowing how you feel about your Z. You will know more after the damage has been fully assessed but from my first impressions from looking at the pic and your initial observations of the damage, I would say it can be fixed. If it was me, I would at least explore the possibility of a "buyback", if a write off and cash settlement can be reached. Maybe chaztg can offer some guideance but I would think it would also be in the best interest of the insurance companies involved, to reach a quick cash settlement thus eliminating costly rental cars and the increased case load. Just thinking out loud. Good luck Andrew.

^^Excellent points to consider. Taking a look at JohnnyO's particular problem, it reocurred after his bodyman redid the seam with filler. This is a recent paintjob and a darned shame this happened. I would heed Nissanman's advise and bring it back and ask them to repair it. I just hope a few well placed welds will correct it and they blend in the paint repair so it is unnoticeable. Just as an aside to the amount of flex in these old Z bodies. Try raising the front end of your Z while both doors are open and then carefully try closing the doors, checking for door drop. Some of them don't fair too well, including mine when I first bought it. That was one of the reasons why, when I replaced the floors and outer rockers, I also made up some full length floor supports to tie into the rear frame section, in an attempt to beef it up and add some more rigidity. But, a guy trying to achieve an original restoration might not want to go to these extremes.

Just thought I would add a few illustrations to further define the problem and support what has been said. My personal take on this problem, would point to a body design problem that was bound to show up sooner or later, depending on the individual cars usage, as well as the combined effects of time induced metal fatigue and the very likely (in many cases), rust corrosion which weakens the lower unibody structure, thereby putting an increased amount of stress on the roof support and quarter panel seam. It is not stout enough to carry the weight or flexing forces exerted at this point after weakening of the lower shell has occurred. Steps must be taken to strengthen the shell in its entirety to relieve the destructive flexing at this joint.