Zed Head

If you set your timing mark to zero on the compression stroke and the cam sprocket notch is lined up with the oblong groove as shown the Engine Mechanical chapter, BEFORE you take everything apart, you should be able to align the notch with the groove on the replacement head before you install it and everything should drop in to place and be correct. Those are the two pairs of things that need to match - damper pulley notch with zero, and oblong groove with sprocket notch. Get everything aligned and the chain in place before removing the chain tensioner holding block, and don't turn anything until those are aligned.

1976 has a "tin cup" attached to the frame to support the bushing. Looks like yours doesn't have it, in the first picture. Attached a picture. As I said, I'm not familiar with 73. If you find it and it's supposed to be there, it may not need to be attached, you could just take the rod out and re-insert it. Also, you do know that the easiest way to remove and replace the rod is with the suspension loaded? Mentioned in case you fought it with the wheel in the air.

I spent some time trying to figure out which way to install those bushings also. I've attached a copy of the drawings from carpartsmanual.com and the FSM that seems to show them with the smaller diameter pointed away from the body. Like your "wrong" picture CO. But, I just checked mine to see what I ended up doing and find that I installed them with the big,thick part away from the center. I remember examining several TC rods that I had acquired and they seemed to be installed that way. I vaguely recall then rationalizing that with PU in the front, there would be less stress on the rod end with the small end in the cup. I'm going to leave them that way since I'm already non-factory with the urethane. Nobody has really addressed the other odd thing about the OP's issue though - what is the brass-colored metal piece attached to the bushing in his first picture? Did somebody add a washer? I've not seen a piece like that that fits in to the bushing cup. If there was one on the other side that would have created about 3/4" of steel that the rod would have been fighting against during use. Blue's first comment might be the main reason it broke. Edit - I think that metal piece might actually be the factory cup that was welded or brazed to the frame. Maybe. I don't know what they were doing in 1973. Hopefully not, but if so, it should probably be fixed.

I'm going to guess that the "concavity" is just the result of adding a stiffening ridge to a big flat washer. The ridge keeps the washer from flexing, making it stronger. I don't think that the rubber bushing outer dimensions fit inside the inner cup dimensions of the washer, so there would be no real containment if they were flipped. Check post #20 in this other thread - http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/suspension-steering-s30/50438-uhm-i-think-thats-supposed-attached.html

Hope you didn't get things mis-aligned with the banging. Nissan actually sold, or still does sell, sets of matched C clips of various thickness to get the joint perfectly centered and toleranced. It may be that your yokes were just on the narrow side, not bent at all. Probably could have sanded or ground down the clips instead. For future reference, if you get some vibration. Also, if you heat the yokes up while removing the old joints they come out much easier, and less likely to bend the yoke. Future ref again. On the TC rod bushings - I fought mine also when I first installed them, then found out later that they drop right in if you install them with the car on the ground. There's room. You could probably get the same effect by jacking a wheel up partially. With the suspension hanging the alignment is not right for installation. Looks great.

As noted, there's parts still on that rod. Get the big washer and the sleeve removed and you'll have a better idea of condition. The weak point is at the base of the shoulder of the transition from the smaller diameter threaded portion to the main rod. If that part is not cracked and about to break, or totally chewed up from rust, it might be fine. Polish it up and see how it looks then.

Congratulations. They're fun. Did you actually measure at the injector connections or are you guessing? You'll need a voltmeter. Even a $4 Harbor Freight meter is better than nothing. Several things have to be in order for the injectors to open and close correctly. You can't go wrong reading the Engine Fuel chapter. Start here - Index of /FSM If you're working from a tiny phone screen, that's another problem.

Put an ad in Parts Wanted. There are a few guys on the forum that part out cars. The rods are expensive new, but don't break often so demand is low. They should sell for cheap.

I see them in in the wrecking yards. Many are slightly bent though, as jmortensen has noted in previous posts. They seem to be available new still, but expensive - Datsun 240Z/260Z/280Z Front Suspension (Strut & Shock Absorber) ROD-COMPRE :: Nissan Parts, NISMO and Nissan Accessories - Courtesyparts.com Then there's aftermarket, more expensive - https://technotoytuning.com/nissan/240z/tension-control-rods-datsun-240z-260z-280z

Mine broke the exact same way after I installed urethane bushings on both sides, front and back. It's why many recommend rubber on the back and urethane in front. When the suspension moves and the TC rod moves with it, the end of the rod (that's missing in your picture because it broke off) has to move also since the pivot point is between the bushings. As the rod moves down, the end moves up, and vice-versa. The back urethane bushing doesn't allow free movement, and has a good lever length on the tip of the rod, plus it's very strong so eventually a fatigue crack starts at the thread shoulder and the threaded portion breaks off. If you decide to go with the stock TC rod, put the stock rubber bushings on the back (you can get them at RockAuto). It's only stressed when braking in reverse or when you back the front wheel in to a curb (that's when mine broke) so you'll still get the benefits of tighter suspension when driving and braking. You'll notice that some of the groaning and creaking from the front end disappears also. Here's a thread I started when it happened, with more details. Note the part about the control arm bushings. My arm bushings were shot also, which probably contributed to the breakage. http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/suspension-steering-s30/37660-1976-t-c-rod-broke-polyurethane-bushings.html

Isn't the rectangular box the ECU? Looks like a Nissan ECCS system with the ignitor on the coil and the YEL/GRN wire as the amplifying signal wire. The two wires from the distributor would probably be LED or Hall effect since they're powered from the coil negative post. The sink would be on the coil/ignitor bracket then. "Engine Speed Switch" looks like an input to the ECU, with the drawn line missing or on the next page. And the instrument cluster would be the tach, counting current pulses on the coil negative side. Just some guessing.

Considering the agony of trying to diagnose a problem after everything's installed, you can't really over-think it. I got lucky on my first clutch maintenance because my car was factory stock and the clutch kit came with its own collar and bearing. Since then I've read the painful stories and collected a variety of used pressure plates and collars, so I can see where you can go wrong. I will always measure first in the future.

Should be the 71B, not C, according to the attached from the FSM. European, correct? Factory stock 240Z? Is it working now? If so, there should be no major problems. You're changing the clutch, nt the transmission. Just make sure to measure before installing. Where people go wrong is when they change the relationship of the throwout collar ears to the slave cylinder position, accidentally, by trying to match a combination of aftermarket parts to the year of their car. Measure before installing. The various web pages, like the one I linked above, are just starting points to help find the right parts, to get started on a swap.

Here's a link to that picture that Jeff G might have been referring to. You can see the bearing on the bottom and the collar on the top, with the important measurements. Nissan Throwout Bearing Collar Specs Comparison Measurements

I picked up a Rhinopac off Craigslist last year and it works great. Smoother engagement than the Zoom Perfection kit I had from Napa. The Perfection clutch would chirp the tires, the Rhinopac not so much. On making sure the new parts work correctly - the throwout bearing collar height needs to work with the pressure plate height, which would be independent of the transmission year (no offense intended Jeff G). Essentially all of the transmissions have the same mounting point for the slave cylinder. It's the stack height of the flywheel, pressure plate and top of the collar ears that must be right. ~92 mm from pressure plate mounting surface to the top of the collar ears seems to be the number to shoot for. My Napa kit came with a collar. Some kits only provide a bearing. Make sure that the height of the stack of parts, from the mounting surface of the pressure plate up to the ears that the clutch fork rides on, is the same.

what kind of car? diagrams in FSM.

Just get the same part number for the Illuminas and they should drop right in. One starts with HZ, the other with BZ. They're the same dimension, the difference is the adjustability of the Illuminas. The main consideration with sectioning is that you have to get a shorter insert to work right in the shorter strut tube. Illumina vs HP isn't relevant, it's the length of either that matters.

The rear gear usually is matched to first gear since that's where you'll really notice it. And most of the replies here are about freeway cruising which is not really why you would modify to a turbo. Plus the fact that turbos aren't really known for being an autocross modification, as far as I know (I don't know much about autocross). Doesn't seem like you're any closer to an answer. I've seen several posts on Hybridz about keeping a taller rear gear (like the 3.54 instead of 3.9) because the torque builds sooner with a turbo when you get in to boost and you get more time "on-boost" in first and second gear. But those guys are looking for raw acceleration. Seems like the close ratio might help your autocross and the 3.54 might help the road-racing, depending on what your top speed is. Trading off ease of leaving a stop light if you use the 5 speed with its 3.062 first gear.

There's a guy on Hybridz who makes one - Steel Brace for R200 CLSD Finned Cover in S30; New List and design... - Vendor's Forum - HybridZ You bought the cover but not the CLSD that goes with it?

Len, your question can't be understood. There is a transverse link on the Z's, often called the lower control arm, and there is a differential case mounting member ,often called a mustache bar, but there is nothing called a transverse bar.

The one that broke could just be an open diff that broke its spider gear shaft (might be called a pinion shaft also), and the broken piece bounced around and tore up some wire and a bolt head. I had one shoot completely out of the diff, on a GM car. Left a scary looking hole in the diff cover. A picture of the differential itself from the other side of the ring gear might show something. Take one each of the broken and the new/old.

I've remembered another problem with using the 3-1108 with the RT design. The heads of the long bolts that pass through the differential might interfere with the top of the crossmember. Some people grind the GM mount to get clearance, others drill holes in the top of the crossmember. You might get on to Hybridz and search a little, you'll probably find some pictures. The design really needs to be modified to use the 3-1108 for L6 use. Ron Tyler put the dimensions on the web and they're just been copied directly, for V8 applications. I have a mount similar to the RT design with a GM 3-1108 mount but it sits higher in the tunnel. I made it myself though. You'll have to put a lot of extra work in to use one you buy off the internet, unless you use a snubber. For the cost and trouble, in retrospect, I would probably just buy a new stock mount. New rubber is tough. It's fun to modify though.

Funny, in retro I see my mistake on what Leon replied to (Post #56). 180 on the camshaft is 360 on the crankshaft as I've noticed every time I adjust my valves. Turning the camshaft with the head on is a no-no though. $5,000 for a 1978 2+2 with an extra low compression engine is pretty good money.

You can. The design that everyone copied though is the original Ron Tyler design, which he intended for a small block chevy engine application. Word is that it lowers the nose of the differential and may or may not lead to vibration from drive shaft misalignment when used with the L6. I'm surprised that none of the guys that sell these haven't tweaked the design to work best with the L6.

It's already got one star! I had to click on some words I don't understand to get on to the web site, hope I didn't download some sort of Dutch virus. Here are the links from CL for when the ad dies. IMCDb.org: 1977 Datsun 280Z 2+2 [s30] in "Safety Not Guaranteed, 2012" Safety Not Guaranteed (2012) - IMDb