konish

Okay, isolated the alt issue to a loose belt. When revved to 2500 rpm and full elect load is introduced the volt meter read just above 13 volts solid. If I loaded the elect system first at idle, the volts would drop to 12-12.5 V. Then upon revving the car, the volt meter stayed at 12-12.5 volts but the belt was squealing a little from the load. I tightened the belt and the volt meter consistently reads 13 V under full load whether the the load was applied before or after the car is revved. However, I still have the increasing water temp under electrical load issue. At this point I'm betting it's just the gauge since I was told by one of the Speedhut techs that the Speedhut Series gauges are really sensitive to ground and/or clean power...probably not as suited for duty in a 40 year old electrical system. I ordered the Revolution series gauge to see if the problem goes away as it did with my Speedhut Series vs Rev Series oil press gauge. R/ Dustin

When I load the system and rev the car past 2000 rpm (or any rpm for that matter), the volt meter still shows something less than 13V and the water temp reads 20* higher the entire time the load is present. As soon as I take one electrical item offline, the volts go to over 13 volts (and in the case of turning off the lights and leaving everything else on) it'll go back to a steady 14. I was thinking that my volt meter acts very much like my old ammeter in that the load effect on the gauge is cumulative... My guess is that my alt VR is not working correctly...as in good on voltage but generating lower than advertised amps? R/ D

Gang, I was cruising along the other night after getting my Z (1971 240z 8/71 build date) put back together. I had just installed Speedhut gauges (volt, oil press, water temp and a remote mounted fuel gauge) and was really digging them as I drove through the night. Anyway, come up to a stoplight (as is the custom in Japan), I turned off my headlights but left my marker lights on. When I turned the lights off, I noticed the temp gauge needle dropped almost 10*. Hmmm. So light turns green, lights go back on and the needle jumps back up 10*. I looked over at the voltmeter and it read a rock solid 14V. Just for reference, I'm running a relay headlight harness kit the PO installed...pro-looking kit Today, I traced all the light grounds and cleaned them up, but the problem still persisted. In hopes of narrowing the problem, I turned the lights off/on, and noted the same 10* temp needle jumps so after confirming the light experiment, I turned the fan on high and the needle jumped up about 5*. Now, I figure it isn't just a lighting issue, but an electrical load issue. Anyway, by loading the electrical system (lights, hazards, wipers, fan on high) I can get the temp to jump up by 20*. What also has me worried is that the voltmeter drops from a solid 14V and bounces between 12.5-13V (the jumping stops when the hazards are off, but it's still just a hair under 13V). Also, everything runs slower...the wipers slow way down and the fan is noticeably slower and the car runs rough. More background...I installed the 60amp alt upgrade from MSA with the adapter plug about 8 months ago and so far everything seems to working fine. I bypassed the ammeter after installing the voltmeter. My gauges are powered by a switched 12v source (the fuel pump lead under the passenger side dash) and the gauge back-lighting is fed by on of the old bulb leads. Oh, and I have a brand-new sealed battery installed (literally yestderday). So, here is where I'm not sure, so in no particular order: 1. Even with the electrical system loaded down, should not the 60amp alt be able to handle the load without seeing such a huge drop in voltage? I don't remember the gauges or ammeter acting that bad with the old external reg and 40 amp alt. 2. Obviously, the loading on the system is somehow causing my water temp to read incorrectly...why? Does the lower power available to the gauge (with the elect system loaded) effectively make the delta between sensor wire voltage and the sensor itself larger creating a false higher water temp reading? 3. Are the two issues related? I'm thinking yes, but I don't know a lot about electrical systems. I'm also guessing a bad internal VR...? 4. I tried adding a bunch of different grounds in the engine compartment with the same result. I tried to power the gauges from a different sources and even created a remote directly to the battery with no change. I also relocated the gauge grounds all over the inside of the car, again no change. However, and this is where it got weird, when I made a remote ground for the gauges directly to the battery the condition REVERSED. With load on the system, the gauge dropped, and load off the gauge increased. WTF? I'd like to get to the bottom of this so any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! R/ Dustin

Jon, By failure of the mount do you mean the complete failure of the stock rubber isolators allowing the top plate and bottom plate to completely separate? If that were indeed to happen, the stud (still dampened by the urethane bushing) would still keep the top plate from separating completely which would at least prevent a catastrophic failure of the mount. But seriously, how likely is that anyway? I mean my stock mount is crusty and loose but it hasn't completely failed. Besides, I think failure of the stock isolator is more a function of having to take the entire torquing moment it's whole life. This design allows the load to be split between the urethane bushing in compression underneath the cross member and the stock rubber. I disagree that my design would act like a solid mount in the event of a total failure of the stock isolator. The urethane bushing between the mounting nut and the cross member will still allow for enough compliance to keep the mount from fatiguing the cross member until it could be fixed. Those pics of solid mount failures (ripping through the cross member) happened over time as the cross member became the "compliant" material in the drivetrain...it didn't simply pull the nut through the cross member on the first (or second etc) application of torque. If by failure you mean the stud, well yes, that would be a problem as it would simply fall out of the car and the mount would be completely loose from the cross member. Hopefully just the design of the stock mount (essentially a wedge) will keep it in place long enough to discover and repair the problem. Again, I find it highly unlikely as the mount can handle the torque all by itself for a long period of time...I'm not even sure my street-driven car could generate enough torque to pull that stud out of the weld without something else failing *long* before that event. I would think the torque load would have to overcome the stock isolator first, then the urethane bushing before the stud would have to bear the entire load. My intent was to make an easy mount (drill hole, weld bolt) that would control the torquing moment of the diff while offering all the benefits of the stocker. The RT mount looks awesome but short of having a welder and the knowledge to use it and/or having someone make it for you, this may offer another alternative to the same problem without the same level of fab work.

An RT mount just may go in there eventually but I wanted to see if this simpler idea worked any better. The one thing I don't like about the RT mount is that the end of the diff is always suspended by that big rubber GM snubber unless you install both the stock mount and the RT. If the GM mount *did* fail (tore away from the bracket) I'm guessing the diff could twist freely not unlike the pics you see of a failed cross member using a solid mount. I'm pretty sure the poly block would last a long time but my design allows for an easy replacement/inspection of any bushings and/or stock mount. Also, it should retain any fail-safe advantages of the stock mount enhanced by the bolt tying the top plate of the mount and the cross member together.

I thought about that but then wondered how much side-to-side movement the whole drivetrain experiences since the motor mounts and mustache bar mount should prevent that...(?) I like the shouldered isolator idea or I could just have a spacer machined up that does the same thing if I can't find a properly sized shouldered bushing and put the urethane under that, then nut.

I had this stock mount modified to use both the stock rubber isolation as well as an energy suspension sway bar bushing (donut) or old valve spring. The stock mounting stud was cut off and a hole was drilled in it's place. Essentially a bolt passes through both plates with the head welded to the top plate. It'll bolt up exactly like the stock mount with the suspension bushing/spring mounted between the nut and the differential cross member. The benefit here is that the top plate can still extend upwards, but is limited by the dampening from the spring or bushing. My hope is that the stock rubber isolator combined with the less compliant urethane bushing/spring will limit the upward moment while providing all the benefit of noise isolation and required compliance from the stock mount...without all the bracketry of the RT mount. If the stock rubber isolator was capable of arresting most of the torquing moment by itself without ripping in half in short order, the welded bolt head shouldn't experience enough force to tear it from the weld. I'm also hoping that the limited compliance in the bushing/spring will keep the whole mess from ripping through the cross member like a solid mount. However, if it does fail, then it'll be an RT mount next. EDIT: I guess you could just use a rounded head bolt and make it without welding the bolt to the top plate. With this method you could also jam 1/2 a polyurethane bushing (sway bar link bushing) in between the top and bottom plate then put the bolt in place. The benefit here is that you have a polyurethane bushing both in tension and compression giving the stock rubber pieces a break in both directions.

Thanks! My buddy blasted them and I immediately primered and painted with rattle can black. With the heat in Okinawa, the paint set and cured *hard*. I've never had that much luck with the durability of rattle can paint, but you could see the volatiles float off the paint as soon as it hit the hot metal. The foam pieces were a challenge because of the pivot point of the flappers cause the new foam to wedge the doors open. After trying every type of foam I could get my hands on, I eventually used was a thick, dynamat-like material instead of foam. Being waterproof, reflective (for heat management for my A/C) and sound attenuating it seemed like a good choice and it seals just fine (better than crumbling 40 year old foam anyway) and controls the "clunk" when the doors close. Besides, the adhesive backing sticks like crazy!

Speedhut. I have the Revolution series speedo and tach. The oil press, water temp, volt meter and fuel gauge are Speedhut series (economy line) gauges. I'll post more pics when I get the dash put back in but in the mean time, do a "speedhut" search on Hybridz to see some full installs. R/ D

Looky what I’ve been doing: First, strip entire unnecessarily complex dash from car Remove blower box components for rebuild Before After Install new gauges and re-wire dash Kinda proud of this… I had to locate the dimmer for the new gauges, but the dash is so thick it was going to be hard to mount it in the stock location. However, I took the old “trip” reset knob, coupled the Speedhut dimmer knob to it (via the long spring-snake) and pushed it back onto the dimmer pot stud. Makes for a really cool remote dimmer switch that uses stock pieces, looks factory and more importantly keeps me from drilling more holes in my dash. Sure, it’s technically on the wrong side of the steering wheel (the stock dimmer is to the right of the steering wheel and the trip reset is on the left). This is the snake connected to the stock trip reset knob.

Okay, my diagnosis of paranoia should only be made pertaining to my <perhaps> overblown fear of rust... After seeing 240dkw's pics of his on-going rust repair, I could not help but be drawn into wild thoughts after viewing the surface rust in the rear (de-skinned) 1/4's on his car. Assuming this was years of living in an obviously rust-prone area, with no previous attempts to deal with the rusty voids it really doesn't look *that* bad...i.e. no real rot to speak of. So here's my situation. I just moved to Okinawa Japan from Yokosuka which has high heat, and humid salty air. My car is a 1971 240z and pretty rust free in that it was a CA car most of it's life (although there are a few spots here and there). For the most part, it's the most rust-free daily driver I have ever seen and I want to keep it that way. It won't be a DD, and I keep it covered more than it's on the road. In my research I (oddly enough) found some old-timer tricks that the US Army used shortly after the invasion of Okinawa. Seems the USA had *bad* corrosion issues and started researching and experimenting with different techniques. The more interesting involved using some kind of paraffin bag dropped into voids that would deposit a waxy coating as it evaporated. Another was to use a fogging oil pumped into the voids also depositing an oily residue on the surface. I guess the most modern example of this is like Krown rust-proofing that is essentially an oil that gets sprayed into all the nooks and crannies. Of course I could not find any long-term results of said treatment but the concept seems sound. So, I'm wondering if any or all of these techniques exist today to protect unreachable voids from further rust. I was also thinking the bigger industrial type desiccant packs may work but not sure how I'd stuff them back behind the door striker panel. If I could get behind there reasonably well, I'd just treat it like the exterior, but of course that's obvious. Hell, I can't even get back there to reasonably even clean the surface for paint prep. OR, should I just not worry about it? I mean if 240dkw's car was no worse off than the pics depict, could I reasonably expect another 40 years from the old girl if I keep the exterior from rusting (which would introduce more ingress points for humidity and salt). Of course, it's just one more reason to add ZG flares, so I can cut open the 1/4s and have a look-see *and* have the cool flares I've always wanted :paranoid::classic: R/ Dustin

Fellas, Installing a Holley Red in the near future and before I order the wrong size fittings I was wondering what size fuel lines exit the fuel tank? Also, I'm thinking about 2 90* fittings for the input and output sides just from other pics I've seen of similar installs...any other suggestions? R/ Dustin

Steve, Awesome, thank you very much. During my mock-up, I didn't think to hang the box off into the hatch area...duh. I think I'll go ahead with this as soon as I'm done moving (relocating to Okinawa from Yokosuka). My 3-points are old and I consider them a liability as cinching them up tight enough to protect does not allow me to lean forward enough to look into traffic or reach anything else inside the cabin which makes me have to unbuckle them at the most inopportune times. Also, they slip over time and are generally a PIA. Thanks again! R/ Dustin

Steve, I read your link several months ago when I was bound and determined to replace my fixed 3-point harness. I appreciate the fact that you didn't want to post photos (I often feel the same when folk ask for pics on really obvious mods/improvements/repairs). However, having typed that I saw the measurement listed on the WESCO site for the roadster belt retractor unit and it's *huge* compared to the mounting point. I mocked up a 4x4x3 wooden block to see how it would mount, and in every case it wouldn't clear my trim plastic. Anyway, if it all possible, you think you could snap a pic or two to show how the mounting looks on your car? R/ Dustin

Translated to the number "34"