Captain Obvious

Me too. I didn't want halos around the gauges. I just wanted even brightness and maybe just a little brighter than stock. I reloaded a couple (crappy camera) pics of mine: Obey the speedo with no dead spot!!

Zactly. In the end, I don't care how far the float is from the lid is when things are dry. In the end, I only care about where the fuel level is when things are wet.

Threads are a funny thing... They go from "not going together at all" to "loose and sloppy" in just a couple thousandths. 13.65 mm major diameter is pretty sloppy for a 14 mm thread. The 13.8 sounds much better, but if both of them feel about the same when threaded into the female thread, then the female is sloppy as well? So I know you replaced the right outer once already... Can you tell if either of the outers are OEM or are they all aftermarket? You said the left felt fine. Can you tell if the left components are factory and maybe better quality than the aftermarket stuff?

And that should STILL only be used as a preliminary set-up method. A direct verification of the level is the only way to be sure, and is the gold standard for accuracy.

What do you mean by this? If you're saying that fuel came out of the back of the pump and ran down into the crankcase, then you've obviously got a bad diaphragm in the pump. That would explain both the lack of fuel, and the oil in the gas. Somehow, I don't think that's what you meant, but it's my job to check.

I'm no carb expert, but I believe that flipping the lid upside down and measuring the position of the float is to be used as a preliminary "ballpark" setting only. Just to get you "on scale". It only has a little bearing on exactly where the fuel level will end up because the final level is dependent on other factors such as the design of the needle valve. A direct measurement of the dependent variable is always preferred when compared to an indirect "inferred" relationship. Put simply: Q - How do you get the fuel level set correctly? A - Check the fuel level and adjust the float tang accordingly. So I suggest that the mechanical measurement of the float position with the lid upside down is a good way to start, but after you have done that (just once), you should always refer to a direct measurement using the clear tube method after that. If you get lucky and happen to hit the target level on the first try using only that mechanical method, then that's excellent! But just don't count on it!

Yeah, without a "go/no-go" thread gauge for the female thread, about the only thing you can easily do is measure the major diameter of the male thread. So check them with your digital caliper, and see what you find. You should get something a small nominal amount lower than the tread spec. I don't know offhand what thread they used there, but for example, a 12mm thread should measure something a little less than 12mm OD. Couple thousandths less (like maybe 5-7?). If it's more than maybe fifteen thousandths less than spec, then it's noteworthy. You can check the left side too for comparison, assuming you have some threads exposed beyond the lock nut. All this problem is on the right side, correct? That's the side with the right hand (normal) thread, correct?

About the only thing you could easily do is measure the outside diameter of the threads. At least that way, you could tell what metric size they are. If you look into the threaded hole in the outer tie rod end, do the threads look OK? I mean it's not like some PO ordered the wrong side (threads backwards) and ran a tap into the hole to "fix" it and make it sorta work? Nothing stupid like that?

Just like the mechanic said.... "Didn't do it when I had it."

I used needle nosed vice-grips stabilized with masking tape: The rubber bands must have been someone else.

Awesome! I'd love to make a pilgrimage to his shop sometime.

We will never speak of this again.

I have no experience with ring gaps, so I don't have any input into your original question, but I am curious... You keep mentioning the average center of the range for the specs of the gaps. Is that your target for when you put rings on? Why don't you aim for the narrow end of the spec? I mean, as the cylinder walls and ring wears, won't that gap just get wider over time? That's about a six thousandth wide spec... Seems like aiming towards the narrow end of the spec would be a better place to shoot for than the center. Like I said, I have no expertise here, but just wondering.

LOL! I opened the thread at the newest post (yours above) and that way I don't have to punish myself with that pic again. The methylene chloride based paint removers will eat anything the PO put on there. Even if it's powder coat. Of course, bead blasting would probably be faster.

Ewwwww. I'm really sorry, but I'm not going to open this post ever again. Not even the tastefully done artful presentation make that thing pretty!

As previously mentioned, it's for the BCDD. The BCDD is active when there is no signal supplied to it. so with that connector disconnected, the BCDD will be active at all times. Of course, depending on how you have the BCDD mechanically adjusted, there might not be any difference whether it's activated or not.

That sure looks like a ported vacuum source to me. My assumption is that the little brass dot above the "F" is the plug they pressed in after they drilled into the carb throat. It's actually convenient to be on the bottom, right? Shorter line over to the distributor.

I'm thinking the previous builder screwed up. I agree that it could have been a units issue. Or maybe his math was just questionable. Math mistakes can crop up in the strangest places...

I wouldn't be so sure that the "gouged" area of the spacer is the only part they messed with. There are clearly grinding (looks like belt sander?) marks on the remainder of the face of that distance piece. I'm thinking they were shortening it and they slipped once causing that gouge. It looks to me like there's a heat-blued mark around the entire circumference, and I wouldn't be surprised if they took material off the entire face. They just took a lot more in one area than another. And... The ends of that thing need to be SQUARE. You could have a small area of missing material, but the overall vast majority of that face needs to perpendicular to the center line through the cylinder. You could check the length of that messed up piece with a micrometer to see if they shortened it. If it's a "B", it should be between 2.067 and 2.069 inches long. And if you get even more energetic, you could check it a couple different places to see if the end(s) are square. However, all of that is academic if you are replacing it (and I think that's the right decision). As for the torque of the stub axle nut, my guess is it's what crashed one of the Mars landers... A units problem. The torque spec in the FSM is 181-239 foot-pounds. But the spec is ALSO 25-33 kilogram-meters. My guess is that they (or Chilton's) screwed up the units. Torque it till your eyes bug out. If the bearings are properly seated and the distance piece is the correct one for the strut housing, the bearings should see little to no load as a result of the high torque. If everything is in the right spot, those bearing balls are floating in the grooves of the races.

Beautiful. Clean enough to eat off! Did you replace the little rubber bumper for the brake switch? Mine turned to dust one night and my brake lights stayed on (even with the car parked and shut off).

To further what Blue said about the vacuum source... The Z's all used a "ported" vacuum source, but I do not know what the 510 used. Since it's so similar in lots of ways to the Z, I would assume it wants a ported source as well, but I guess there's no guarantees. Here's an old thread that discussed the differences and advantages, etc of the two: http://www.classiczcars.com/topic/41935-ignition-timing-theory-port-source-vs-manifold-source/ As an aside... I Teed in a vacuum gauge to my Z and routed the line to the interior. I drove around for a while like that with the gauge attached. It did exactly what I expected: Zero vacuum at idle. Narrow peak of highest vacuum just off idle at light cruise. About 20 inches hg at the sweet spot pedal position at 4000 RPM. Near zero vacuum at WOT.

I knew I couldn't possibly be the only X-Files fan! And I'm with you... I'm so glad they're back. There have been two really campy episodes lately with lots of references to other things like that. The one with the automation, and the one a couple weeks back where they were talking about the Mandela Effect. That one made me laugh out loud a couple times. Thanks for pulling me off "The Island of Misfit References". I've dropped a couple lately that have stayed dropped. I think I'm getting a little too obscure.

Haha! No, it wasn't quite that bad. Old friends as in I hadn't seen anything from them in quite some time. But after a long time away they're back.

Woof... If it's not one thing, it's another! Is this the same shop that bent your control arm? All else fails, I can probably make a new spacer. I can certainly shorten one up if you find you can get the longer length but need something shorter.

Some old friends of mine recently used these guys after a night out for some sushi: