Go240Zags

I can't find it in Windows 98, but I believe you can set slideshow in XP by going to Start, Settings, Display, Screen Saver, Slide Show and choosing the file folder where you save your pictures.

Me Too, are there any indepth tech articles, or alternate sites where someone has done a step-by-step replacement with photos?

I too call my Z "Zena" after the Warrior Princess of TV fame. Must be something about Red 1971 240Zs I guess. Altho mine's a bit older than owenk's, a Series I built 12/70.

Under bid history it says PlumpRandy retracted his bid of $11.5K because he couldn't contact the seller. Not a bad explanation if you needed additional info. I assume he finally made contact and then decided to rebid, because you can't tell how much his current maximum bid is because of the automatic bid feature (that is, until someone outbids his max).

Far Out Man, I'd drive it when I felt guilty about how much of the Earth's oil us Yanks are sucking up. Or when the price of gas hits $3.00/gallon. However, $40K buys a lot of gas/petrol/benzina. I guess I'd have to start telling the local bistros to start pushing the french fries. The paint doesn't bother me as much as all the advertisements on the thing. I'd be the hit of the Barter Faire. The Faire is one of the grooviest things I get to cover each fall for my newspaper. http://okanoganfamilyfaire.com/

The famous Veggiecar is for sale on eBay. Something for the BioDiesel fans: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=2490011598&category=6187

E-Racer Yes, I purposely titled it that way to get a laugh. Gramercyjam, I am still deciding what to put in my 1971 240Z Series I Car. It has an L24, but not the one it came with (altho I think I know where the original block is). I also have a L28 out of a 280Z and an entire 1983 280ZX Turbo (the whole car) except the turbo is gone because it was kaput I guess. Without delving too far into HybridZ territory, everyone says you can get the cheapest horsepower increases from the turbo, but the idea of an L28 out of a NA 280ZX with flattop pistons and the E31 and my early 4 bolt SU's sounds good as well. I've got them and I'd like to use them. I'm driving myself nuts trying to decide. Turbo sounds cool, but the swap and wiring it up to the old 71 sounds way beyond my skill level. And the old school SUs with the L28 sounds like a much easier swap. I'd like to trade the turbo car for a NA engine maybe, who knows?

I'd like your opinions on this E31 Head on eBay. The seller says it was recently taken off a 1970 240Z and has never been shaved. However, when I bought my E31 and posted pictures I was told since there wasn't much metal below the E31 stamping and the bottom of the head it looked like it had been shaved quite a bit -- this was confirmed for me when I took it in to have bigger valves put in. They said it had been shaved .60(?) and that it would need a special extra thick gasket to keep it from banging on the pistons and to lower compression somewhat (at least that's what I remember them saying. This head looks to be shaved at least as much as mine, what say you? http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7922679087&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT

I have no problem w/ people copying my images onto their hard drives for reference (why they'd want to I couldn't imagine, unless it was for not what to do or the "before" shot.) . People's images should not, however, be used elsewhere on the net or for commercial purposes without the owner's permission. I understand about people not wanting to have their creative property stolen. However, if you use the pictures for reference on how to fix up your Z or for a screensaver that should be okay (and flattering) IMHO. Sometimes you can't be hooked up to the internet, so having your reference pictures on your hard drive might be the only way you can refer to them. To each his own, if you don't want people to use your photos, maybe you shouldn't post them (I hope no one takes that to heart) or include a statement saying "Please ask for permission before using). I don't know, the whole debate seems to have caused some hurt feelings and I hope it can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction. I am grateful to all who have shared their images with the club over the years.

There is a 1971 240Z w/ full vinyl (fake leather) top on eBay. Car looks to be in pretty good shape, altho I don't think I could live w/ the top. It is at: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2489903776&indexURL=8&photoDisplayType=2#ebayphotohosting

Here's a site that will probably cause even more confusion! http://www.copyright.gov/ And that's only in the U.S., let alone the UK, Japan, Oz, Europe, etc. The web has opened up whole new worlds of sharing and debate.

I believe some statement about the copyright should be included with the galleries. Something like - The original creator/owner of the image retains all rights to the image, with submission to this site an agreement for use only on this site, no further transfer of rights is given or implied without written permission of the owner of the image. Lots of people will still want to share their photos/images, but may not want them "ripped off" for commercial use on clocks or in books, etc. If someone else wants to use the image for those purposes they should obtain written permission for the original owner of the image, not Classic Zcar Club. I'm no lawyer, but realize if you own the copyright to something it should be up to you how it is used. If someone wants to use your image in a book, for example, it would probably be flattering, but proper permission and credit for the photographer and/or image owner (may be one and the same) should be given IMHO. If a professional photographer was paid by the car owner for the image, then usually the person who paid for it owns the image. If a photographer took the photo for his/her own use and loaned it/sold it for a book or article it is up to them to ask for credit for the image if they like. In any case it is always best to give credit where credit is due - both to whoever captured the image and to the person who owns that photogenic Z. If people are present and can be identified in the photo then it raises other questions, but I tried to cover that in a previous post. Maybe we have a copyright lawyer somewhere in this group who can tell me if I'm on the right track.

All right, I'll try again, there is a US market 240Z on eBay right now with a full vinyl top, altho it is so peeled off that it's starting to look like the half-vinyl roof I posted before. This car is pretty ugly, whether with or without the vinyl/leather top. Looks like the top is a big rust promoter. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=2489272974&category=10076

Enrique, I've yet to attend a specific Z event, and am looking forward to doing so when I can get the chance. I'm sure you're right about some events being closed to cameras and photo shooting (unless under specific limitations maybe). I'm so used to gaining access to things where people want me to take and publish their picture I never really thought about restrictions. However, if the event was held say, in a public park, or on a public street, then it would still be open to photo taking. Unless however they had permission to close the park entirely to the public. I tend to bow to people's wishes to not have their photo taken, unless I consider it of importance to our readers (it's hard to cut someone out of a crowded public scene, though). I remember a bus load of Canadian Air Cadets drove into the ditch along Highway 97 once, just a couple thousand feet from the U.S./Canada border crossing on their way home from some event (I live just 4 miles south of BC). I took a picture of them all standing by the wrecked bus. Some adult told me I had no right to do so, so I had to give her a quick lesson in freedom of the press in the U.S. She wasn't too happy, but that was her right and I had my right to take the photo. She was probably more embarrassed than worried about the cadets. How are things in Vancouver, WA? Sunny Sept. Sunday and in the 80's here today. Gary

EScanlon "At this point, you have violated the agreement by which you took the pictures. Posting on YOUR home computer is fine, posting on the INTERNET is considered a PUBLIC display. That is no longer a personal use / enjoyment case. Now, you've disseminated the photograph. Unless they are pictures of items / people for which you have ascertained and received permission to post in a public forum (called a photo release), you cannot post them." As a newspaper editor/journalist/photojournalist, I know that photos taken of people or items in public for use in the free press of the U.S. do not require any kind of photo release. This doesn't matter if it is in a newspaper, on television or the internet. In the public you have no right to your own image or that of your car or other possessions, even if you are a child. Anyone can take your picture and anyone can publish it (as long as it is not for profit, say advertising). There are some gray areas and you are not allowed to hold someone up to ridicule by altering the picture to make the situation unflattering, etc. However, if you chose to go running (or driving) down the public street naked (starkers) I have the right to take the photo and publish it. In general in newspapers, the copyright begins when the article, drawing, photo, etc. has been published. I have had articles I have written lifted verbatum and have had a few of my photos taken as well. I usually find this flattering if I am credited, but if not litigation may be in order. If you are working for someone, i.e. a newspaper, the copyright generally belongs to the newspaper, unless otherwise specified. Of course, the internet has opened a whole new frontier in copyright law. Usually the internet, in this country, is considered the same as say a newspaper or book. If I want to insure my copyright is enforceable, I save the first published incidence as well as stamping (or writing) copyright C (encircled) w/ my name and the date. Do this and you have just copyrighted your image (you could do the same on the pictures you submit here). Something like suggested by Bambi, but it wouldn't have to cover the image. In the U.S. The wonderful thing about freedom of speech in the U.S., at least, is you do not have to be a professional journalist to take advantage of these same laws. Anyone can take anybody's photo as long as they are in public, at a Z show you would need to have it posted that no photos could be taken and/or if they are not used anywhere else. That would put a real damper on half the fun of the show I'd think and cause a lot of confusion to boot.

Here is a great site that tells you how to get both retractable lap and shoulder belts for the earliest Zs, by using parts from 260/280Z and a 2+2 no less. http://www.automedic.org/smzcc/tech_tips.htm This is the way I'm going to outfit my 1971 (12/70 build date). It took me just a few minutes in a small wrecking yard to put together the right pieces, now I just need to figure out the best way to rejoin the two halves. The nut & bolt idea seems a bit bulky, anyone have a better idea? Some sort of new rivit with the proper strength? I hope this helps, Gary

Here's one listed on eBay: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=7920724027&category=6763. I'm not the seller, just thought someone might be interested.

I have an automatic transmission off an L28 from a 280Z that is free for the taking. I have no how many miles were on it before the engine was pulled. I really don't want to ship this, but would rather just get it out of the garage so local pick up would be preferred. It is in Eastern Washington state, in Oroville (4 miles from the B.C. border). If you must have it shipped you will have to make the arrangements and pay shipping. I'm willing to help with some of the details, but don't want too much of a hassle over something I'm giving away. Any takers?

All right, I have gotten my hands on a 1983 280ZXT I am going to do some horse trading with. The body has its problems, but according to the previous owner the motor is in good operating condition with new injectors, only it is minus the clapped out turbo. I am in a quandry as putting a turbo in my Z sounds like a great idea, especially since my Series I car doesn't have its original L24 anyway. However, the wiring, etc. sounds more complicated than I might want to tackle, and I'd sure hate to see my 70-71 Roundtop carbs and E31 head not be used in my final rebuild. So, what I'd like to know is do you think it would make sense to keep the T5 tranny (to replace the 5 speed I already have) and sell the Turbo-less L28T and find a L28 with flat top pistons from a NA 280ZX? Am I on the right track here or crazy for thinking of selling the turbo motor. How much can I expect to get from selling the turbo motor? I'd let it go cheap or trade it for a good condition NA L28 from a 280ZX if the deal was right. As usual I write too much, comes from my profession I suppose. Any help you can give me would be appreciated. Also, if this is in the wrong forum section feel free to move it where it belongs.

Is the manifold from the 1973 240Z the same as the one in the 260Z w/ the flattop carbs? If so, won't he need to use the thinner spacers because the studs on the 260Z manifold are shorter, or do like I'm doing and swap the studs from the early 240Z manifold? I tried my early carbs with the shorter studs, but just barely got the nuts threaded on. Bought some of the thinner spacers, but decided to just swap studs and use my old thicker spacers. I'll post a couple pics with the carbs mounted on the N36 Intake from a 260Z to show how the nuts barely thread on to the shorter studs. Anyway, if the 73 manifold has the longer studs my question is moot. Gary

I just haven't been able to make up my mind on which way to go. Just when I think I am set on getting the Spook Air Dam, I start to think the one like 26th posted in his first picture has a more finished look. But then again I don't want to get too modern. Spook with the brake vents might be the best compromise between the two examples posted. Oh well, I'm no where near that point yet anyway. Repair panels is where I'm at now. Just ordered a pair of new seat brackets from http://www.baddogparts.com/ to go along with my new floorpans from Zeddfindings. Will report back when they get here.

Here are a couple pictures of the metal evap. tank I sold on eBay from 1972 parts car. My Series I tank is the plastic one I guess, never looked. Gary

Rather than start a new post on Z's in Television, I figured I resurect this one. Couldn't find this by doing a search, so I thought I'd mention that a red 240Z is one of the featured cars in an old McMillan & Wife from the 1970s. It is not a Series I car, so must be 1971 or later. However, I missed the first half of the show, but somehow when I saw the plot involved a car rally I remembered that a 240Z was in it. Can't believe the plot came flooding back considering the last time I saw that episode I was in junior high school in 1974. I tuned in just in time to see the car drive off the road and into a lake. The driver was trying to kill his wife and cover the crime by making it seem like someone was trying to use trickery to win the rally and the car collection. The car was red with a white 240Z sticker along the bottom of the door, etc. Other cars included Jag E-Type, Mercedes SL, MGTD (driven by Rock Hudson and TV wife Susan St. James). Got to love those old 1970s shows. Mystery Movies were some of my favorites w/ Columbo, McMillan & Wife, McCloud, etc. It was on the Hallmark Channel, I'll have to see if I can catch it from the beginning next time. Just did a Google Search and here's a website with episode info: http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/GuidePageServlet/showid-96/epid-60984

:mad: General Motors lost some serious goodwill and a potential repeat customer with me. Lots of people in my rural part of America own pickups -- Wild West and all that. GM definately had a problem in the 90's with their little Chevy S-10 and S-15 based pickups and vans as soon after purchase the paint started flaking off and seeing the small rigs looking like they had some serious skin disease was a common sight. GM did "make good" on these by paying for a re-paint, of course from what I saw the checks weren't for much more than $700 bucks. The problem apparently showed up within the first couple years of purchase. In my case, however, I had the full size K1500 Chevy Silverado 4X4 with a shortbox. Just like its smaller cousins the paint and primer decided they weren't compatible and my paint started coming off. Unfortunately this happened when the truck was six years old. First a 50 cent piece flew off my hood, then it really started letting go. My truck started to look like some sort of white Dalmatian with large gray primer spots. GM would not "make good" and said they'd check "goodwill" and still the answer came back no. I know six years is a long time to warranty something. But consider this, does anyone buy a new car or truck (which, in my case, cost more than my parents' house in 1969) and not expect the paint to last at least 10 years? The truck was well cared for and not abused. It would be different if it was a case of wear and tear, but this was a problem GM was aware of and should have to fix whether it was during a mysterious "secret warranty" repair period or not. I think I shall look at anyone but GM if I ever buy a new truck again. One last thing -- in every other way, the truck has been an excellent vehicle, not needing to have any major work done on it in 12 years, but a new fuel pump, alternator, and other minor things. But the paint thing really has me steamed, especially when I got the bill to have it re-done. :mad:

Yes, I was wondering why they posted that extra information. I don't think I'd want the whole eBay community knowing my personal info.