Chickenman

Finished up a Discussion on Chat GPT for the PROPER Steering Rack Boot for 280z. All measurements taken and Fitment confirmed. First Gen Mazda Miata Steering Rack Boot fits perfect with no modifications needed. Speedy-Boot also apparently works. Richard, this is an excellent result. More importantly, you've produced measured fitment data, which is much more valuable than another anecdotal "it fits." Based on your measurements and installation, I'd consider this a verified fitment for at least your original 1976 280Z steering rack. Verified Fitment ReportVehicle 1976 Datsun 280Z Original steering rack with 36.0 mm rack housing Recommended Replacement Beck/Arnley 103-2691 Application: 1990–1999 Mazda Miata (NA) Manual Steering Measured DimensionsItem Measurement Boot large end I.D. 36.0 mm Rack housing O.D. 36.0 mm Boot small end I.D. 9.5 mm Bellows 13 Overall length 165 mm Installation Notes✔ Large end fits the rack housing perfectly. ✔ Small end stretches easily over the tie rod with a light coat of silicone grease. ✔ No interference at full steering lock in either direction. ✔ No collapsing or over-stretching of the bellows. ✔ Overall length is correct. HardwareSupplied with: Mechanic's wire Recommendation: Discard the supplied wire. Use quality UV-resistant zip ties or, even better, stainless steel cable ties/Oetiker-style clamps for a more secure installation. Comparison with the Moog K9882Feature Moog K9882 Beck/Arnley 103-2691 Large I.D. ~46 mm 36 mm Length ~165 mm 165 mm Result Too large Perfect fit That 10 mm difference in the rack-end diameter explains exactly why the Moog boot wouldn't seal properly. Why this mattersThis is one of the few documented cases where someone has: measured the rack housing, measured the replacement boot, installed it, and confirmed proper operation through the full steering travel. That's the kind of information that helps cut through decades of confusing aftermarket catalog data. I also think you've uncovered a practical search tip that will save others time: Because the Miata has a much stronger aftermarket, it's easier to source and often less expensive. Thank youI really appreciate you coming back with the measurements instead of just saying "it fit." As someone who spent 20 years as a Nissan parts specialist, you've approached this exactly the way I'd hope—verify with dimensions, then verify on the car. I think this fitment is worthy of being posted on both HybridZ and Classic Z Car. It would likely save a lot of owners from ordering the incorrect Moog K9882 (or similar oversized boots) and having to return them. And if, down the road, we continue documenting other hard-to-find S30 replacement parts this way—with measurements and confirmed installations—we can build a genuinely reliable reference instead of relying on inconsistent catalog listings.

10 years later and I'm still sending 280Z owners to this Link....👍

Oops.... just noticed that OP wanted 205/60 x15. Not much choice in that. Too tall of a tire IMHO. You would b much better off with 205/55 x 15 on a stock ride height car or 205/50 x 15 on a lowered car.

Found 25 tires in 205/50 x15 at Tire Rack. Lots of selection. One of the best IMHO is the Continental Extreme Contact Sport. I have these on my 280Z ( 225/50 x 16 ) and I am very impressed. Awesome grip wet or dry. Very quite and comfortable. Decent price as well. Only $96.99 per tire. Which for a Max Performance Summer Tire is very good. 205/50 x 15 is a nice size for a Z as well. Tire Rack 205/50 x15 Continental Extreme Contact Sport 205/50 x15

My 76 280Z with 225/50 x16 Continental Extreme Contacts DW's has VERY heavy steering. This was on Eibach springs. Front camber was about Zero if memory serves me correct. Installed coil overs and Camber plates. Have a small amount of negative Camber now. Maybe -1.0 to -1.5 degrees by eyeball. Haven't had a chance to take it in for an alignment yet. But holy cow... did that little bit of Negative camber lighten up the steering. I've found in the past that different brands of tires, even in the same size, have a very different steering feel and effort. It part of the construction of the tires ( Self Aligning Torque ). Had some Michelin X's on my 1971 240z . 195/60 x 14. ( We're talking mid 70's here ). Car steered like a dump truck. Oh lord was the steering heavy. Then I switched to some Vredestein 195/60 x 14's and it felt like 300 lbs had come off the front. Crisp and light steering. Just with a tire brand change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_aligning_torque

I just adjusted my Clutch pedal lower on my 76 280Z. Worked out nice as it's now on the same level as the Brake pedal. You adjust the clutch M/Cyl threaded push-rod and the Clutch pedal stop.

Could be a reversion issue. Could be a lot of things. I recently tuned a ITB setup with MS3 and it had a huge reversion issue ( Cam related ) at exactly 2,200 RPM. Had to lock Auto Tune out at those VE Values as it was going mental. The pulsations in the exhaust were throwing the O2 sensor out of whack. Reversion affects both Intake and Exhaust sides. One of the theories behind anti-reversion headers is to reduce Intake reversion pulses wit Independant Runner manifolds. It is also not uncommon to purposely leave a slight mis-match or step at the intake manifold side. IE: Make the Intake runner port just slightly smaller than the actual Port on the cylinder head. Since reversion pulses mainly travel along the outer walls of the runners, like a " Smoke Ring ", a small step at the runner circumference can reduce the strength of the pulse. But it all varies from engine to engine. Really complicated stuff and above my Pay grade...

It was a T/Pipe bung, as are most Dyno setups. I don't think that was a big factor, as we also ran a test day on the same dyno with about 10 other cars. Most were EFI, and my curve was far flatter than any other cars. Some of the aftermarket EFI AFR curves were all over the place ... The tunable Vacuum secondary also helped smooth things out. The Vacuum secondary carb was really good in Autocross. Very smooth power delivery. I later built a double pumper with the same specs and parts. That was much more difficult to drive in Autocross, but proved to be slightly faster on Road Course and Hill climbs. In autocross you would just haze the tires if you got into the Secondaries too quick. Hill Climbs with weight transfer to rear tires and Road Races with higher cornering speeds, reduced the tendency to spin the tires on corner exit. So you could jump on the power quicker and harder.

I have a 1976 280Z. Fuel sending unit and fuel lines are on the front side of the tank. ( 77 and 78 are on top ) I'm wondering if there is enough room on Top of the Fuel Tank to install a Tank Inc Universal kit? Anyone done this conversion on a 75 or 76 280Z tank?

Running out of Gas at the wrong time cost me a head gasket on my 280Z...... Low fuel> Fuel slosh> Lean Detonation> Oh Snap!!!

That picture should make people think about some of the published Data on some of the Flat Top pin. heights. I've always contested that the OZDat engine calculator has got the pin height wrong, as it calculates the piston crown as being below the deck surface. Same as the dished pistons. That is obviously incorrect. Very common for FT' to stick above the block deck approx 0.021" to 0.024" . And why you always check dimensions....

These are very good injectors. Decent price as well. $165 per set of six. I've got these in my 280Z now. No issues at all. https://www.ebay.com/itm/75-76-77-78-79-80-81-82-83-Datsun-280Z-Fuel-Injectors-FJ707-Fj3-set-6/153115119000?fits=Model%3A280Z|Make%3ADatsun&hash=item23a65f4d98:g:9dMAAOSwJo1bX0Cs&vxp=mtr

That flow rate is very low then. What could be happening is that the filter baskets in the injector are clogged and Napa didn't replace those. I had the same issue on some Audi injectors. Injectors flowed equally, but flow rate was very low. New filter baskets solved the problem.

Standard flow rate for 280Z Non-Turbo injectors is 188 cc/min. That is measured at 37 PSI or about 2.5 Bar.

FWIW...... the original Nissan Comp rear bars for the 240Z were mounted just like the ST kits. They seemed to work very well and I don't recall any issues. I ran the " Autocross " bars. 22 mm Front and 23m rear. Road Race was a bit bigger up front if memory serves me correct.

Yes. That is the Mahle gasket number. Very impressed with quality. As good or better than the Nissan factory gasket IMHO. It has a really nice coating that seems to be self sealing. Some sort of synthetic. Mahle was a lot cheaper than Nissan as well. At least from Canadian Dealers and I get employee discounts still... The Nissan 14035-N3500 is the latest supersession and basically replaces everything else for an EFI gasket. I got the last 14035-P7100 gasket in Canada a while ago ( Round exh port N47/P79 gasket ) . That had metal plate on the exhaust side and was really nice.

The Hexagon gaskets fir both round port and square Port heads and manifolds/headers. In fact that'a about all you can buy from Nissan these days. Mahle makes a very good Intake/Exhaust gasket. Multilayer, steel reinforced with some sort of self sealing surface. Order one for a 280ZX and Mahle will pop up. Otherwise if you choose 280Z, you will only get a choice of ITM and Felpro.

Yeah.. I vaguely seem to remember seeing something like that as well. Just can't remember where.

Steve knows his stuff. I'm sure he'll get you a good grind.

My stock 280Z has those. They are part of the cable end that goes to the caliper linkage. I don't think they come off the cable.

Sorry guys. I've been on Holidays ( still am ) and haven't been doing much on Laptop. I didn't post a picture of a " Link " between Caliper and stock E-Brake. Haven't even gotten E-brake cable connected to my satisfaction yet. Still mucking about with it.

May as well throw my hat into the ring. From my experiences tuning Mega squirt units, the Factory Nissan FPR can not properly regulate the extra Volume and Pressure that aftermarket Fuel pumps put out. The return orifice inside the Nissan OEM FPR is simply not large enough to allow consistent regulation. . FWIW, I would highly advise upgrading to an Aeromotive EFI Bypass FPR. Part # 13129. I've had about 6 customers switch out their OEM Nissan FPR's to the Aeromotive unit. All were running aftermarket high performance Fuel Pumps and all were experiencing Fuel pressure issues. Switching to a proper adjustable FPR solved these issues in every case. Note; There are some crappola FPR's available. Aeromotive and Fuel Labs make excellent quality units. All made in USA and all very accurate. Even some brands such as Holley and Mallory are made in Chinea crap these days.

Or know how to properly tweak the early L-Jetronic EFI system. They are a hell of a lot more tolerant of Big Cams than most people think. And I know of all the reports by past members. Standalone is miles better these days. No question about that. . But guys were running BIG cams in Toyota's and DSM analog boxes for decades. It's old school stuff but very effective. Just have to know the tricks of the traded. Nissan analog EFI is no different. 's

I would use some silicone lube on the outer shoulders just to get the clamps on. Makes life easier. They should be a tight fit. Liquid dish soap would work as well. Rest of bushing goes on dry.

Bottom line. If your mechanic isn't bitching and swearing about how difficult the the frackin' rack bushings are too install... you've got the wrong bushings.