skunkbud280Z

That was a ZX, but yeah.

and I was using locking pliers on the other side as counter torque. And I sprayed it with WD-40 at least 10 times and left it for a few days before trying again to loosen it. The fitting began to round off on the flare-nut with just a modest amount of torque/counter torque so I went ballistic on the fitting with a 2nd vice grip. Locking it down as hard as I could and it STILL slips(slipped) on the fitting. It's frozen in place, hasn't been touched in 32 years. I've done so much damage to the outside of the fitting at this point I've chewed up half of the metal on the fitting with the vice grip, it's basically completely round now with groove marks from the vice grip, and still the thing won't budge. I'll dread having to cut the line next to the fitting and get a new fitting and reflare it, but I don't have any of the tools to do that, I don't want to have to do that all the way around the car, especially since I've never done it before and wind up buying $50 in tools for nothing and create even more expense for myself by the mechanic having to replace the metal lines, which are hard to even find anymore. I need other options. I've tried tapping on it with a hammer and the vice grip slipped around the fitting with that too. I even tried to wedge pins in the rounded corners and thereby jam the wrench onto the fitting so it wouldn't slip off, to no avail. My latest idea is to boil some water and slowly pour it on the fitting, the only thing I haven't tried yet. It might be the way I'm using the tools at this point, but I'm about to just tow it to the garage and have them do everything and hand me a huge bill because I really want to drive my car...fast. This brake work is easy, if I could only loosen this stuff I could do the rest so easily. The fittings on my '94 Camry's master cylinder were a lot easier to move than its wheel cylinders. Maybe the Z would behave similarly but I'm upset at myself at this point I never want to strip another fitting again.

I'll get one soon out of gratitude for this great website! Money's tight for me right now unfortunately and I've got major brake repairs to do on this car. Brakes seem to bleed but no pressure. Got one bad wheel cylinder, and I'm almost sure my master cylinder is shot. Z-shop told me it was going bad over 12 years ago and I neglected it when the brakes still worked. My car drank a lot of fluid when I was bleeding the brakes and the fluid level in the rear-brake reservoir is going fast, and losing some fluid from the front reservoir as well. With NO fluid anywhere spilled on the floor, I'm starting to worry the MC is leaking fluid into the booster and I suppose I'll be getting brake fluid in my intake so I'm not even running the engine right now. I am tempted to pull that line where it clamps onto the booster and see if there's any fluid coming out. I trust that if things are working correctly, there is nothing but vacuum in that line? I would do all this brake work myself (and would LOVE to), these brake fittings are just so tight every time I try to touch one, the only thing I need help with is to loosen them up. I'd almost tow my car to a shop, have them go around and loosen all my brake fittings, then put it back on the tow truck and tow it back, but getting someone to cooperate with such madness (for them) is another thing...

Hope you fellow S30 Z fans enjoy these old advertisements as much as I did.

11/75 and the same plate. Oh I like your car! Thanks for linking. Not that I'm partial or anything... wait, yes I am! We chose virtually the same air dam and spoiler it looks like.

suggests that the only change made between 1975 and 1976 was that the ammeter was changed to a voltmeter. And it lists the 1975 engine at 149 HP. It doesn't explicitly state that the power was increased in 1977 but it strongly implies it if you take the wording as it sounds. http://auto.howstuffworks.com/nissan-z-history3.htm What I'm curious about, if anyone has a 1975 280Z, is what does your plaque under your hood say regarding your engine's HP? If Nissan didn't raise power to 170 till 1977, why does it say that on our cars? If they raised it in 1976 then Howstuffworks is wrong, as is another website I visited (don't remember which one). And if there is a 21HP difference between any of these 280s, WHAT made the difference?

Didn't think to use Wiki for some reason. So all these fabled cars I always gawked over like the '69 Hurst/Olds with their ~400HP ratings were pared back a great deal due to how they measured horsepower differently. Still doesn't explain the extra 21 HP like you said. Could Nissan have reverted back to Gross Horsepower in 1976, where they hadn't done so in prior years? Or were they always using GrossHP in those prior years?

Okay I know this has been brought up and discussed before and I read the old threads and talked to different sources through the years and I'm as confused as ever. Let me see if I can put some supposed puzzle pieces down that I've heard about regarding 280Z's horsepower (and generally all the classic Zs). 1975 the 280Z came out. Sources speak of the engine having 149 HP. Okay. 1976 some online sources don't speak of anything different with the engine. I have a metal plate under the hood that says 170 HP. I was talking to the owner of one Z shop locally and he was saying "oh yeah we can completely rebuild your engine brand new to 200+HP for xxxx dollars". Another owner of another Z shop laughed and said "there's no way that engine is going to produce 200-220 HP and still be pleasant streetable". I retorted "Oh c'mon, my engine has 170 HP already!" And he replied back "That engine does NOT have 170 HP!" So, Nissan was pulling a fast one here (no pun intended)? They're using a different unit of measure that happens to share the same name? Samurai, like vikings, ride hobby horses? Or WTH is going on? Then I read on a lot of online sources that in 1977 280Z's HP is upped to 170. I also saw a sticker that still says it has 170 HP, just like mine. Then based on the discussions here and elsewhere, I read that the HP difference between these 280Z cars is non-existent and they're all the same or about the same???! I found this information in another forum which seems realistic, mentioning an old convention for measuring HP vs. the new convention for measuring it: BHP- Brake HP measured at flywheel HP- 1BHP=.986HP so for most cars the difference would only be off by 1, also measured at flywheel Gross HP- old way, HP of motor only-no accesories and out of car, also measured at flywheel. http://www.zcar.com/forums/read/2/854050 But is this right? So how much HP does a '76 really have? A '77 really have? A '70 really have 150? 151? A '74 really have 139? Etc. To add more dizziness to the discussion, an old friend was telling me the virtues and drawbacks of mounting weber carbs onto my L28: Sounds mean, FAST, difficulties starting, etc. How much of a HP boost would this move make? If I keep the EFI and just go for different options on a rebuild, what gains would we realistically be talking about here? Any good bang for the buck wisdom from any of you fellow Z-heads? I'd rather keep my original engine and EFI than install a V8 so am more interested in L28 EFI alternatives. I don't want to stifle the discussion though. Hearing someone's V8 stories would be fun too. I saw a 240Z on youtube with a big V8 in it, and when he got on the gas, the car wanted to lurch right out of its lane (TOO much engine as he said). I hate people who do burnouts and donuts in their Z. Doesn't impress me. I like to see cars vault ahead with smooth efficient power without losing any of their handling characteristics also. And original engines = greater worth, in theory. Here's that youtube video I was referring to: Supercharged V8 as it turns out. It looks like he's about to veer into oncoming traffic at one point. I also suspect those wheels, beautiful as they are, might be doing some rubbing there. Anyway...different strokes for different folks I suppose. If I had a 240Z I'd definitely want the original 2.4L in it.

That thing was so tight I'm going to have to tap the screwdriver with a hammer to loosen it to take it off again. And I hope I can remove it with the tank left installed. I would guess I can but I dunno. Not worried about fuel coming out, just clearance.

In my own layman's vocabulary: There is a sliding surface that moves between two terminals. It moves across a number of "winds" or metal coils, making contact with them. When the tank is near empty the sliding surface touches less of those winds, and when the tank is near full the surface touches more of them. Presuming higher resistance indicates greater fuel level. So now that (I think) I get the fundamentals better, what could be wrong with this thing... Of note, I did some shaking of the tank before I installed it because when I was carrying the tank out to be installed, I heard a few pieces of crud rattling around in it. So I was sloshing a gallon of gasoline through the tank several times to wash out the loose particles till I couldn't hear anything. A few times while I was swinging the tank in an arcing motion I heard the float apparatus moving around in there (in its 10 inch arc range of motion as was described). Maybe it's possible I caused something on it to shift out of position when holding (shaking) the tank back and forth but I can't see what that would be. The float got stuck on the arm in the full position perhaps? That would seem plausible at least. There I be, overly cautious while cleaning the thing, but oblivious to breaking it while sloshing the tank back and forth. :stupid:

It is a resistance reading that moves the gauge. At a certain level of resistance or higher the gauge is going to read full, I have to assume irrespective to what position the float is in. It was somewhat rusty when I pulled it out. Not as bad as the one you're showing in the pictures. It was more spotty with rust than scaley. I used a rust remover gel (a phosphoric-acid based naval jelly) on the (larger) rusty surfaces and rinsed it off. What I didn't do is try to clean the corrosion around the wires. It looked delicate there, there is a very fine metal wire on this that I wouldn't even touch and I didn't want to be "busting my thumbs" all over it trying to clean it immaculately and then end up breaking it. I figured I took off around 75-80% of the rust on aggregate. As the fuel gauge worked at the car's last running state about 10 years ago, I applied the rule "if it ain't broke don't fix it". Of course now it's broke so the rules have changed. I'm not gungho with climbing under the car and removing it either. BUT someone please tell me I can do this without taking the tank off. So here I am now and you've got me thinking that A) It's a corrosion issue and I didn't clean the oxidation where the wires attach (sufficiently, or more likely, at all) or Perhaps I left a little bit of the phosphorous coating that jelly tends to leave, as it seems to be chemically attracted to iron oxide as opposed to non-oxidized metal, it might have just "opened the circuit" so to speak and created an infinite resistance at the round piece the arm is attached to. At this point it would have been nice if I had disconnected the fuel pump, installed the battery, and checked the gauge for operation before draining and removing the tank to see whether I "broke" it or if it was already reading incorrectly. But since it sounds almost sure that I physically installed it right, I'm guessing something on the surface is creating resistance where it shouldn't be. Oh, and thanks!

That maybe I put it in upside down? If I put the float opposite the way I put it in there, it would be in a more elevated position as it sits in the tank. That didn't make sense to me. The float would sit in a low position with an empty tank thereby reading empty, and rise with the fuel level. I guess it's possible I put the thing in there wrong but common sense still tells me I didn't. But you asked "rightside" up or down. If I remember correctly and I think I do, the float was connected on the arm that was on the right side (passenger's side) and it was in a down or low position (as it rested when inserted into the fuel tank). If I put it in the opposite (and still horizontal) position, the float would be resting in a higher and left (driver's side) position. If the latter case is the correct way to install the float, then I have to assume that gravity alone (via the weight of the metal arm) is enough to drop the float to the level of fuel in the tank. This would seem like the wrong way to install it, but I'm not ready to conclude I didn't make a mistake here either.

I always wanted a 240Z, wound up with a 280Z, fell in love with the 300ZX Twin Turbo in 1990 when I read Motor Trend's article. I even won a $20 bet that the new Z would smoke the Ford Mustang, which was a big deal back then as I was just a kid. But anyway, I posted a video on youtube hybridizing two old Nissan ads for the Z32 over some Filter music. My old title for the vid was talking about Barbie and Ken and I think I attracted some pre-teen girls who didn't think very fondly of my participation in the youtube community. Anyway I thought some of you fellow Z-heads would appreciate it more. It combines a few ads; one where the Z-driver is dreaming about being chased, the other is the Toys commercial where GI Joe picks up Barbie at the mansion. Hope some of you folks like it!

but I didn't replace the sending unit or change the wires in mine. I disconnected the keyed pins at the tank and removed the float apparatus when the tank was off and being cleaned out. My car hadn't run in about 10 years. It's running now but the voltmeter still reads zero and the fuel gauge still reads full. Because the battery is brand new, the fuel tank has 3 gallons in it, and the gauge is useless reading like this, I just unplugged it. I'm not sure if I placed the float inside the tank incorrectly. I placed it horizontally to the surface of the fuel in its lowest position, assuming the fluid in the tank would cause it to rise accordingly. The arms of my float are perfectly straight so their being physically bent isn't my problem (and might not be yours); likewise, the sending unit might not be my problem either.

If the owners dry this market up a little bit then the prices will rise. I agree, they go too cheaply, so stop selling them that way! If I had a '70 240Z in mint condition, either someone would be paying me $35-40k or someone wouldn't be buying my Z. Put another way, part of working the market is passive. That is, we get the accepted "values" for things from the aggregate market forces we are slave to, and concede to them in our buys and our sells. This is observed by nearly everyone as is evident by reading the replies in this thread. The other part, and this part is often completely overlooked by everybody, is active. If all of you (us) Z fanatics could collectively agree to bloat the prices of these cars together (by stubbornly refusing to sell them for reduced prices, buying them for higher prices, et al), the net result would be a market that completely dries up. A dried up market with no Z cars for sale is going to jack the demand and as everyone with some economics under their belt knows, demand is the prime mover of price. Making the market "want" the Z car more is a job that many of you Z owners oversee, whether you knew it or not. There are less "legal" ways of driving prices higher that I won't get into here. They would involve an absolute trust between Z owners that would be impossible to instill through simple rhetoric on a message board. But in theory...there are ways....

As famous as he became for his acting career, his career as a businessman far exceeded his earnings as an actor. And if you've ever tried his Newman's Own products you'll know why. That Caesar dressing and Sockarooni spaghetti sauce of his are the best I've ever tried. And what made Paul Newman so special, besides the fact that he stayed married to his wife his entire life unlike the rest of Hollywood, is that he gave all of his profits from his food line to charities. And of course he raced Zs. Whatever you think of his acting, that was one hell of a good man. He'll be missed.

Two: Fuel gauge is indicating full tank although tank is almost empty. Re: problem #1: Well I got frustrated with trying to get that fitting off. If I want to replace the brake hoses it looks like I'll have to cut the line, re-fit it, and re-flare it, and I'm not looking forward to any of that. Don't have the tools or the experience. But while I was back there, I noticed on closer observation of the brake hoses that looked torn on the outside, I noticed underneath the black rubber "outer" hose that had cracks was an inner braided hose that seemed to be intact. I fed fluid through the rear master cylinder chamber and started th bleeding process at the slave (wheel) cylinders. To my pleasant surprise the hoses held the fluid, and the bleeding process was working. At least while I was still on the right rear wheel. I moved over to the left rear to bleed that one next, and while I was over there, I heard some noises to my right while my assistant was pumping the brake pedal, and I looked over there and saw a stream of liquid come pouring out of the wheel cylinder. Well in little time, the rear master cylinder was completely empty again (just like it was when I started the process). In a way I was angry at myself for "causing" the cylinder to go bad but in hindsight it's probably better that it happened sitting in the garage bleeding brakes than out on the road somewhere. I really wanted to drive the car though. Anyway I noticed that the wheel cylinder seems to have expanded outwards a good deal on the side with the rubber boot and the pin on it. The round metal that holds the rubber boot popped off and I can't get the boot to go back on. The lever that "auto-adjusts" on the gear wheel has completely separated itself from the adjuster wheel and also looks a little bent compared to the other one on the driver's side which is horizontal and straight with the teeth on the wheel. The shoes are so pulled out on the bottom now I wonder if I'll even be able to get the drum back on. My question is pretty easy for most to answer I suppose. And it's just this: Can I use the adjuster wheel to push the cylinder back in, at least so I can get the drum and the wheel back on? I should be able to use a slot screwdriver to do this. Also, and if so, which way should I rotate the adjuster? Assuming perspective of sitting at the rear of the car looking forward. I would guess the wheel only turns in one direction but that'd be a real drag if it's not the case and I accidentally turn it the wrong direction... To replace the cylinder I'm going to have to take the brakes completely apart, and that means another fitting at the cylinder needs to come off and after having such a nightmare with the other fitting, I don't even really want to touch it. I'll let a real mechanic with a blow-torch or a magic vice-grip or whatever take it off. I'm wondering if maybe the wheel cylinder isn't bad and it just pulled apart too far and is SUPPOSED to let fluid out when that happens?? Maybe it's a matter of bleeding the brakes wrong somehow. Can never be sure. Re: problem #2: I got the fuel tank back on. It went on perfectly. Really happy about that. However, when I plugged my fuel gauge back in at the tank, and turn the ignition on, the fuel gauge on the dash is indicating a full tank and I know I only have two gallons in the tank. Also the voltage meter still isn't working, although it gave a little wiggle when I turned the ignition on the first time. At first I thought I plugged it in wrong but on careful study of the manual I see the plug is "keyed" so you can't do it wrong. One other possibility is that I put the actual float mechanism in the tank wrong. I thought I put it in right. With the float sitting horizontal (parallel to fuel fluid surface) and down at it's lowest point. I assumed the fuel level would make the float rise from that low point. Could I have put it on backwards so that the float is sticking up at the high point and then gravity alone causes it to drop and the fluid level opposes that gravitational force? Thanks

Thanks for sharing! Looks like either a '75 or a '76 judging by the bumpers. Love the paint and you've taken really nice care of it. Congrats! The early Z's are such head turners and a blast to drive aren't they? Cheers! Edit: I just learned how to read I guess...'75 it is then.

Car is idling great, running really smooth. Can't wait to finish up and take it for a ride. Thanks again! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wl0-hlQMzI

for all the information! I'll buy a cheaper Multimeter then. I found a few better deals. That was actually a lot of money for me to spend, and less necessary for me to even buy one since the car is running. I'm really glad to hear that the voltage guage is tied to the fuel gauge ground! It did work before so I'm hoping it will work again! The charge light still comes on but I suppose that is separate. I was hoping I didn't reverse the polarity when I put in the new battery. --what someone like me thinks after I install the battery and look at the gauge Thanks for the info on the headlights too. I might wait on purchasing some new ones until I have some fun with the Multimeter. It's likely the bulbs I guess, and I've changed the headlights in this Z before. I remember how it took me about five minutes to change the headlights in my '72 Cutlass. Not so much for this car, I remember being out there almost all afternoon with it. heh Yep I remember hearing long ago about the failure with the clocks. Mine hadn't worked for at least a few years before I stopped driving it. Just a minor nuisance, I hate seeing what's involved with getting to those instruments under the dash. I don't feel comfortable with that amount of disassembly. Oh sure I'd take the whole engine apart if I had to, but only as an apprentice to someone who really knows what they're doing. The clock, at least for now, can wait. Okay I think I see from what you're saying that you use the hammer and the flare nut wrench AT THE SAME TIME! I was using them seperately. *slaps forehead* Respect,

I uploaded a video of the car cranking on Youtube and meant to post it on here but I lost internet for several days and never quite made it to respond temporarily from work. I just got the car fired up last night and uploaded the video of it starting a little while ago. I'm one happy clam right now as you can imagine! No and no to your two questions. I just visually observed the fuel pump taking fuel and presume that it's working just fine. It's what I would expect about 35psi to look like. I figured the easiest way I could hear the injectors pulse would be to be with a stethoscope (dunno, just guessing) and I didn't have one of those. I tapped on the fuel injectors lightly with a hammer, and they'd been saturated (I had hoped) with that fuel system cleaner for days now. I left the cap my fuel container all this time, I was wondering if the fuel would start to go bad as it's been sitting in there a few weeks now. Believe it or not there is no gas available where I live in Atlanta right now due to the hurricane. One station down the street was charging $5.50/gal for regular unleaded. I'm glad I bought this 93 octane gas when I did because it's the only gallon in town! I've been having fun chasing after bits and pieces of "stuff" in my fuel tank. Still haven't put it back on yet. It's sitting in the basement, I have all the holes plugged, and some gas in there I swish around now and then, and the dehumidifier is working overtime. I spent all night draining it from the plug to remove little flakes/pieces that roll/rattle around in the tank when I shake it. The reason it took so long is I spent about an hour trying to get the stuff out of the big hole, until I put my finger all the way down in it and realized that there is a cylinder of metal that extends down into the tank, and I realized any debris in the tank would have to come out the drain plug. I sloshed a gallon of gas through the tank several times and was removing a little more crap each time. Yes this is after getting it boiled in acid at the local radiator shop. They charged me $65 for the cleaning which seems to be a good deal. I notice there's a spot on the corner of the tank that was in the process of rusting out. There are going to inevitably be some flakes breaking off at that particular part of the tank unfortunately but the rest of the inside of the tank looks like new. Light grey and smooth instead of the red color it was when I took the tank to be serviced. Anyway a few observations about my car that have me perplexed. Obviously my fuel gauge isn't working because the tank is off therefore so is the gauge. But my voltage gauge isn't working either. I was wondering if that is because I disconnected the fuel gauge? They both share the same instrument. I doubt this is the reason why the voltage gauge isn't working but I'd love to hear that they share a circuit and once I plug the fuel gauge back in, the voltage will work again too? The clock doesn't work, but it stopped working before it stopped running 10 years ago. My headlights don't work. I wonder if I can just replace the bulbs and that will fix the problem? Do headlights go bad if they're just sitting in a garage for years, typically? And for some reason I'm missing the fuse for the dome light in my fuse box. Not sure where it went or if it was ever there, but my dome light doesn't come on either. I was flirting with this Multimeter on Amazon. I was hoping someone could recommend whether this would be a good one to run some more detailed tests on the electrical system in my car? Thanks! http://www.amazon.com/Actron-CP7677-Automotive-TroubleShooter-Multimeter/dp/B0002LZU7K/ref=pd_bbs_sr_11/105-8424811-2394851?ie=UTF8&s=automotive&qid=1221481640&sr=8-11 Looks pretty sweet. Oh and here are the videos of the Z. Thank you for your help and my thanks for the great Z website. It was idling at about 600rpm during the video. I let it run for about 20-25 minutes and it was idling at 650rpm before I shut it off. It sounded pretty good, but I wonder if all six cylinders are firing right. Perhaps a test drive will be the best way to see. But my rear brake hoses are ripped, the rear master cyl. reservoir is bone dry, and I rounded off one of the brake fittings between the metal line and the rubber hose on one of the rear wheels. Used a flare nut wrench, it didn't matter. Those things are locked on there like superglue. I was using two Vice Grips on it since it was already rounded anyway, and even those couldn't get that damn fitting to come loose. I just about need to shoot it with my rifle but the bullet will probably ricochet off the fitting and it will still be as tight as ever. :laugh: I've used WD40, over and over again. Does anyone have any magic answer to how to get these infernal brake fittings loose without causing any more damage? And can I "somewhat safely" drive the car on just front brakes? The master cylinder is supposedly dual circuit, meaning the front and rear are independent hydraulic pressure. Or supposedly they are. But I've heard warnings from friends that even so, I can lose all pressure in many instances with other vehicles. I noticed this happen on my Camry recently when I had a brake hose go bad on that. Barely got the thing home from my emissions test, total brake failure due to a torn line in the drivers side front. I had just bled the entire system at all four wheels and still had total hydraulic failure after driving only several miles. And despite the supposed "dual circuit" brake hydraulics. Oh and does anyone know what size/specification/brand/whatever of headlight this car uses, or that it should use? Thanks!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sJ_vipQn7M Crikey! I think I'm high on some nasty smelling fumes mate!

I had been cranking it for awhile already. A stupid mishap on my part happened which set me back a bit. I realized that the fat fuel hose between the fuel tank and the fuel pump wasn't long enough to sit down into the fuel container, so to remedy this, I got a section of my excess 5/16" injector hose and it just so happened to fit snugly up into the inner diameter of the fatter hose. After some undetermined length of cranking, the smaller hose slipped off the larger hose and fell into the gas can. I don't know how long it was in there and how long I was cranking without any fuel to the system, but when I saw this had happened I fished the hose back out of the gas, and got a clamp and right now I have the hoses clamped together so it doesn't happen again. As I said, I got a clean glass bottle full of gas and held it while someone cranked the engine and it quickly took half of the gas in that bottle through the lines so that'd be about what I'd expect from a fuel pump at ~35psi. The spark plugs were not only black but they were moist black, and yes they smelled of gas. For all I knew/know, I figured they would have still smelled of gas from 10 years ago and the smell didn't signify any fresh gas on them. I think if I can intuitively read what you're saying, I figured wrong. I thought the moistness on the electrodes was from oil coming through the rings as the FSM suggested, engine has 120k+ miles on it, all stock aside from headers/exhaust. I got some gumout maximum strength fuel system cleaner (cleans lines, injectors, everything) and one bottle treats up to 20 gallons of gas, I put half of that bottle into only 2 gallons of gas, which would have made the mixture 5 times more concentrated than what the bottle suggests. That was an arbitrary judgment call on my part. I didn't know how much to add, maybe I should have used the WHOLE bottle? *shrugs* A friend recommended that I let the car sit overnight or longer with that cleaner in the system to hopefully break up clogs in or to the injectors. Thanks for your reply Curtis. Perhaps you'll think if the plugs were wet and smelled like gas, the injectors would not be clogged...just about everything there is to talk about, is something for me to ponder about. It's still FUN though and that's what matters to me.

Let the fuel pump live and let live, and just: Disconnect the feed line just forward of the fuel damper and under the hood where the metal rails begin and blow the lines clean with an air compressor. About 40psi through the lines and they were clean in seconds. Return line was already disconnected at the fuel tank as I took the fuel tank off, so I only had to disconnect that line up front. You said the fuel pump works only when the car is running, but I'm guessing you meant the pump works only when the car is cranking? I was told by two separate sources that the pump actuates when the key is merely turned to the "On" position, but the FSM quickly clarified that this is not the case. It pumps in the "Start" position, when the engine is running obviously, and it has an emergency shut off feature if/when the engine stalls, I suppose to prevent fires in the case of wrecks etc.

:disappoin I was warned and worried about fouled/contaminated fuel so I wanted to do a lot more fuel-prep work than just drain and refill the gas tank. I pulled the gas tank, got it cleaned at a local shop who gave it a Castic acid bath for a day, got it back last week but haven't reinstalled it yet. Blew all the bad gas out of both the feed and return lines with an air compressor (the feed line between the fuel damper and the fuel filter; the return line between the fuel rail and the fuel tank). The fuel in the feed line had some black flakes in it, the fuel in the return line had a bit of thick white junk similar to a jelly but otherwise the decade old gas looked clean and new in color. Changed the fuel filter, changed the oil and oil filter, drained and replaced coolant, replaced a bad fuel hose, replaced the leaky bypass hose(s) (why I stopped running it long ago in the first place), got some 93 octane gas with some gumout fuel system cleaner in it, and here I am. I have a 2-gallon fuel container sitting on a box right behind the fuel pump I'm feeding the fuel hose with gas. Incidentally, I have the rear of the car up on jack stands (using the proper jack stand points as instructed by the repair manual). The rear wheels and drums are off (bad break hoses and brake fitting nightmare but that's another story) and I don't think this has anything to do with why the car won't start. :stupid: The hole on the container was wide enough to put the return hose in there as well, I've already verified the fuel pump is pulling fuel at a good rate, and there is fuel coming out the return hose when I'm cranking the engine. I verified there is spark in #2 and #3 cylinders by using a test light. I hooked the negative alligator clip up to ground and stuck the needle up against the metal contact inside the rubber boot of the spark plug wire and when someone else was cranking the engine I could see sparks in there. The cranking is really healthy sounding. Not too fast, not too slow, just like I remember it when it was running. It just won't fire up. I lifted the distributor cap to inspect inside. There was a bit of corrosion on the rotor head and contact points. Nothing to keep the car from starting I would think. I cleaned them up and put the cap back on. I felt air pulling into the air filter housing when the car was cranking. I know these are rudimentary checks I'm doing but I'm afraid I don't know much. Most of what I know about my Z I've learned in the past three weeks just reading the repair manual and hobbying away on it. Suffice it to say removing the fuel tank was a challenge for me, especially the venting vapor lines, but I succeeded at it without breaking anything. Not looking forward to putting the tank back on. I presumed it would be running by the time I got to that point. Anyway, I read elsewhere on the site that vacuum hoses can prevent the car from starting. There are some small rubber hoses around the distributor I observed today that were cracked and hardened and didn't seat together that good. I'm not sure why the timing would be off, it's only sat in the garage for 10 years. Not sure how to check for a bad timing chain or even set the timing. I see the adjustment screw on the distributor and I see the two little plates with the lines on them, and that they're offset from each other by a certain angle. If the rotor head spins counter-clockwise, the little bit of white corrosion on it would have been closer to the leading edge of the head rather than the trailing edge (relative to the middle of the rotor head). I presume this would signify a more "advanced" timing than "retarded" timing. Which is what I figured already anyway: The car is advanced and I'm retarded, it's okay, it doesn't mean that life is unbearable. I pulled the spark plugs out last night. They were all blackened on the electrodes and the insulators. I lightly sanded them and wiped them all clean and checked their gaps with a feeler gauge I bought. Not really sure how tight the fit is supposed to be but they all seemed to be gapped around 0.8mm. Anyway the car should be getting fuel as the pump draws the fuel out of the container nicely and I have fuel coming out the return hose. Doesn't mean the injectors are good but I don't know how to check the injectors and wouldn't they go bad one at a time? Would two or three bad injectors keep the motor from starting? I have spark inside the spark plug wires by using my test light probe grounded to the (-) battery terminal, but that doesn't mean it's a "good enough" spark. I haven't done a compression check. Seems self explanatory enough to put a compression gauge into the spark plug holes and check the cylinder compression but I don't know if this is a likely culprit of why it won't start at all. Seems implausible to me that it would prevent the car from starting when it ran very well the last time it ran a decade ago. Anyway, any general wisdom of what/how to check next, or most-likely-culprit information would be greatly appreciated. :stupid: Thank you in advance! Shawn