kmack

Like the title of this thread says, is this entire discussion for real? Does this topic really need to belong in this thread now? sblake01 is right, how are we to find relavent car information buried in topic-tangents like this? Now I don't typically speak out on flame wars like this one has appeared to become, but I'm really starting to get tired of the direction this site is beginning to take. So here goes... Carl, yes I'm singling you out, but only because you made it a point to single yourself out. What's with the "more Mike B.S.?" Go get your own site if you don't like the way this one is run. You make the point of trying to direct this now off-topic discussion to another forum, thread, even PM's, but only after a heated debate that shouldn't have been there in the first place. But thank you for the formal apology. Mike, this one's for you. Asking members to "stop pushing buttons," is not going to work. It's like quitely asking a classroom of screaming kids to "Please be quite." This should have never gone past the 2nd page. I hate to say this, Mike, but get stronger backbone or get more/better moderators to help out. You can't please everybody all the time. It's your site and you can deal with how you choose. That's just my opinion based on past discussions about how I thought I heard that this site would be run. Sorry. And for the rest of you involved, any continued discussion about politics in a forum entitled "Zcars on Ebay" is completely out of line. What ever your political views are, you are entitled to them. That's the beauty of the whole system. But please, air them out in a more correctly titled forum. This is to be my one and only post on this thread. You can reply if you wish, but I will not respond to this topic anymore. I have no apologies for what I have typed as I feel very strongly on my position. I have been keeping a close eye on certain directions that this site appear to be headed in and I'm not pleased. I am also not the only one. I'm sure that some of you won't miss me if I leave. I have been a member of this site for almost 3 years and a member of the email list for almost twice as long, and I will surely miss this site. I hope it doesn't come to that.

I replaced my original radiator with a 3-row replacement I got out of a 280ZX. Grabbed it from Pick-n-Pull. Radiator looked brand new inside & out, not even any of the fins were bent! Walked out the door for $39, including core charge! Granted, you might not always find a "brand new" looking radiator at Pick-n-Pull or your local junkyard, but at this price, even a decent one is better than spending $200 on one. My opinion of course. The 3-row radiators hang a little lower than the originals, but the extra cooling is very worth it. Especially here in Texas!

Just took a trip in my 240Z this past weekend. About 270 miles round trip, 75-85 mph on highway for about 90% of the trip. Calculated mileage at 27.8 mpg! Basically a stock L24 w/ headers and a K&N filter. Last dyno run said it was running slightly rich, too. Mostly in town I get around 22 or 23 mpg. Worst I've seen is two days of hard track use at about 15-16 mpg.

I have not seen very many stock 240's here in Texas. This post has my current setup: L24 Horsepower page 2, about half way down, posted 6/7/04. I agree it would be useful to see a comparison, but most people running a stock car, would not be likely to put it on a dyno. At least that's the way I see it. As for what my losses are, I'm not really sure. I just figure about 18%, which I guess is about standard. But that puts my crank output near 165 hp. Much higher than Nissan stated. So who knows? I do think the dyno was reading about right. There were a few Z32's that were they were supposed to be, at least according to the owners.

I ran my car that same day. 139 hp at the wheels, but it's not completely stock.

Back on June 5th, we had a local club member run his '74 Fairlady (L20) on the dyno. This is a totally stock, JDM car. Power at the wheels was 88 hp.

Are trying to stay stock with the car? If not, then you should get a replacement nut for use with standard strut inserts.

Have you had the tranny apart recently? If yes, something in the synchros for 5th gear is not right. If no, then something in the synchro for 5th gear is broken and not right. I've had something similar happen to a Ford tranny I rebuilt a few years ago. There are round spring like wires that help hold the detent pins and synchros together in the tranny. If these wires get loose, they can let the detent pins shift. Once that happens, the gear will not be able to go into gear or it won't stay in gear. You need to have the tranny pulled and opened up. This will be the only way to fix this problem. If the car is not your daily driver, I suggest trying it yourself. Manual trannies are very easy to work on, you just need a large enough space to lay things out and a little patience. This way, you'll know how to fix things if/when it breaks again. Btw, the Haynes manual has a pretty section on manual trannies. Get one.

I voted more than a gallon, but I used a standard spray gun (siphon). I hadn't purchased my HVLP gun yet. I sprayed 2 coats on my car, including door, window, and hatch jambs. Single stage Red 905 came to just over 1-1/2 gallons of paint. Haven't had a chance to paint anything big yet with the new HVLP gun, but I have a spare fender I'm dying to play with!:classic: EDIT: and regarding tinting the primer, I wanted a really bright red so I used a very light (almost white) primer underneath. the Red almost glows in the sunshine now!

Billcapp is correct. The piece that is mounted on the inner fender underneath the Master Cylinder is called the manifold. It is where the lines split to go left or right for both the front and rear brake systems. (The front and rear systems are already separate coming out of the MC. That's why the two reserviours) There is another small piece (kind of t-shaped) that will be mounted underneath the car on the passenger side just infront of the rear wheel. This is the proportioning valve. It helps to keep the back brakes from locking up before the fronts do. Can you be a bit more descriptive with regards to exactly where do you consider the mid-section of the car to be? If you're talking about being underneath the seat area, then you may have a broken brake line. Could have rusted through. Check the master cylinder in the engine bay (don't have to have the car lifted). Look/feel for any leaks. If you see a drip or spot on the floor, try to see what is directly above that spot and follow it from there. This will tell you what to fix first.

Ok, for you guys that have never worked on early-style motorcycle carbs, here is a brief explanation on why the synchronizing will not be difficult at all: Most multiple-cylinder motorcycle carbs have an air port that allows you to hook up a very basic, but extremely effective synchro tool. What this consists of is (up to) 4 separate tubes filled with mercury. When connected to the carbs, each carb will pull a certain amount of vacuum on the mercury. There is a scale behind each mercury tube (which, btw, is vented to atmosphere, so you need to be very careful). All you do is adjust each carb until all the tubes are reading at the same point. Doesn't matter where they read on the scale, just as long as they read the same. In fact this same type of setup can be used on the SU's as long as you hook it to one of the vacuum ports on the intakes. Just make sure you don't suck the mercury into the engine!

Now you're making me miss my old RD. '72 Yamaha RD250 w/ 350cc motor punched 1 over, cylinders ported, heads shaved .020", Factory (brand) expansion pipe race exhaust, ported carbs, Accell Super-Stock coils (hidden), 8mm plug wires, modified K&N air filter, cafe-style seat, club-man drop bars (like clip-ons), re-valved forks. It also had a modified, but stock-looking drum brake set-up from the original bike. Total sleeper!!:devious: 1st gear was only for show! Wheelies only!:classic: It would actually pull the front wheel off the ground all the way through 3rd. The bike looked totally stock except for the exhaust. I used to terrorize all the guys on 600cc & 750cc bikes. They had a bit more top-end, but nothing but a big-bore bike could beat me off the line. In the twisties, I could keep up with anything. Power on that little buzz-bomb hit hard right before 7k rpm and pulled like a train all the way to 11k!! I miss that bike... EDIT: This what the bike looked like before I made the engine mods and put the exhaust on. http://www.geocities.com/kenshobnob/RD_page.html

Initially, I was thinking round-slide carbs, like the old-style Mikunis from the early-mid 70's. Down side is most of those are a cable-type pull on the slide itself. I think it could be modified to work, but I'd have to see. The other side is you could use the CV carbs (Keihns, I believe) like the ones shown in the other thread Alan posted about. I know the idea about how those carbs work, but I've never had the opportunity to really work on those types much. I do know that you can pin the throttle open at low rpm's and the CV carbs will let the engine rev up at it's own pace, similar to how SU's work. The old cable-pull style Mikunis force you to have a bit of throttle control. Because if you whack open the throttle, you essentially bog the engine slightly. It basically forces you to be smooth with your throttle control. And that is very beneficial with old two-stroke bikes. On the choke issue, I grew up around the same thing. Pull knob on the carb activates the choke. But there are a couple ways around this. My old Yamaha RD had a simple setup. One pull knob activated the choke on both carbs. The two carbs were linked by a common rubber hose connected to the choke ports. A similar setup could be adapted. Or, you could go with no chokes at all. I know my 240 is a little cold-blooded at first start-up, but it can be started without the use of the chokes. And I also no plenty of guys that run without the chokes connected at all. Just takes a little longer to start, that's all.

Biggest benefit I can see is that you could perfectly tune each individual cylinder for peak performance. No sharing of carbs per cylinder. I know some would be leary of the tuning aspects, but I've tuned everything from single cyl, two cyl, to 4 cylinder bikes. All with engine modifications. The toughest part has always been access to the carbs. On an L-series engine, access would be nothing. Another question popped into my head last night. MY common sense tells me to use carbs with same size throat diameters as the intake ports. But when you stop and think about the throat size of the SU's, do you really need to have the same size throat diameter or would it be better to use one of a slightly smaller diameter? As long as the carb could flow the required CFM's of air & fuel to the intakes. Any more thoughts? Alan, what size throat diameters were the FCR kits?

Jetting wouldn't be any worse than the old Honda CBX 6 cylinder bikes. And if you stick with Mikuni carbs, you can get jets and needles at any old motorcycle shop. Synchronizing would be straight forward also. I've done sets of 4 all the time. Takes less than an hour. Fuel delivery would be no less than a typical SU setup. Low pressure fuel into a standard type float bowl w/ needle seat. Now that I think about it, my old KZ650 had a great throttle setup. All four carbs were linked together by a rod that pulled on the throttle slides. A single cable was run to actuate the throttle rod. A modified version could be made of the same setup. Man, my brain is working overtime on this one. Thanks for the idea, St.Stephen.

Here's an interesting thing for you mechanical types to ponder. I had this idea running through my head last night right before I went to bed. The quiet and stillness of the night helps me think up some pretty weird sh*t!!:stupid: I got to thinking about carb setups dual SU's dual Webers triple Webers etc. Now the intake ports on the L series heads are apprx. 40 mm in diameter. (This was measured on an N42 head off an L28) I have a small stash of motorcycle carbs laying around ranging in size from 30mm to 38 mm in throat size. I know for a fact that you can get individual carbs up to 45mm. (Anybody see where I'm going with this yet?) All of a sudden I had this wonderful picture of six individual carbs lined up in a row along side my L-series motor in my 240Z! What a sight that would be!! Now, the intake manifold would have to be custom built, but I don't see that being all that difficult. It would be nothing more than 6 straight little pipes welded to a flange. Pretty easy. Fuel lines would be easy enough, also. Individual pod filters would help sort out the dust particles. The only kicker would be how to run a throttle linkage. (I'm still thinking about this one... ) Now if triple Webers sound great while on the throttle, can you imagine what 6 carbs would sound like at about 5k rpm? Pure HEAVEN!! Imagine the tuning possibilities!!! So am I the only wierdo to think of this? Anybody have any ideas for a throttle linkage setup? Cables would be easiest, but how to tie all 6 together is the difficult part. Food for the thought processes....:cross-eye

I can see some reasoning behind this, don't want some speed-freak putting 800 hp into a car that could barely withstand 150 hp! Or it's just more Gov't control.... Anyway, is there some sort of power rating test that they apply to vehicles on a regular basis? How do they know that you've swapped an L28 in place of the L24? Both engines are visually identical, so if you stick with carbs on the L28, how would they find out? Here in Texas, most places won't even look under the hood. And they never ask questions about the car. They just want to know if the lights/signals work, wipers, brakes, horn, general stuff like that.

Bill, those are some of the good ones to have. They are the three-screw dome version from '72. I would get in touch with Bruce Palmer from Z Therapy. Order a set of fuel lines and the ZTherapy SU video. Those small fuel lines that run from the float bowl to the choke nozzle get hard over time. They need to be flexible so that your choke nozzles will move freely. Regular fuel line from the autoparts store won't work well. It's too thick and won't flex enough to make the radius turn. It will kink and then you won't get any fuel.

If the amount of the noise/virbation is less now, than it was before with the car in motion, then you effectively eliminate anything beyond the driveshaft. If the noise/vibration increases with the clutch engaged/disengaged will be a determinating factor if something is wrong inside the transmission. If the noise is uneffected by the clutch engagement and is the same as before even though the car is not moving, then you're left with it being soley in the engine. Does that make sense? I only ask because a lot of times, my head speaks clearly to itself, but not necessarily to other people!:stupid:

Hmmmm..... Vibration coming through the shifter throws a whole new ball into the pit. Was the noise/virbation the same with clutch in or out? I'm wondering if maybe there is something else along the driveline that may have "snapped?" Will the engine start as it sits now? If so, is the noise/vibration still there and as loud? FWIW, while racing my old '73 motor, I used to routinely wait to shift until between 6500-7000 rpm. Kind of trying to see how much that old oil-burning hunk of cast iron would take. It actually held up. Never heard any knocking or otherwise bad things coming from it. It even made decent hp figures on the dyno last year. How many miles do you have on this engine, estimate if you have to? Do you know the history? What condition was it in before this happened? Anything ever happen before that may give doubt to it's internal integrity? Either way, pulling the engine out is not too involved and rebuilding it is fairly easy also. Make sure you have at least one manual on hand while rebuilding. I'd also try to find a few fellow Zer's locally that might help diagnose and/or help with the rebuild. Good luck and let us know the outcome.

Unfortunately, this description is only somewhat useful, but mostly vague for an accurate diagnosis. Is the noise up high in the engine or is it coming from down low? Does it vary with engine speed? How is it under load or while driving? Is it a tap, or a knock? (there is a difference) First off, there is not much diagnosis that can be done by just pulling the oil pan off the engine while in the car. This procedure is used mainly for when you want to replace the oil pan gasket only! You might be able to visually see if your main bearings have spun, but if you have that kind of noise coming from the engine, you WILL be pulling it! As for the sound, easy/quick diagnosis says that the valves need to be tightened. When the gap between the cam lobes and rocker arms becomes too much, you can get a very noticable tapping sound and it comes directly from underneath the valve cover. Get your service manual, Haynes manual, or what-have-you and get the gap set to the right dimension. That may cure it. In one instance, I have had the fuel pump arm off the mechanical fuel pump make a bit of a tapping sound. It was an aftermarket fuel pump on my old '73 motor and the arm would not make complete contact with the drive lobe off the cam. Another fuel pump cured the problem. If the sound is a deep sounding knock coming from low in the engine, then we're talking about a bit more serious problem. That usually means that the lower bearings are "loose" and the piston rod is knocking around during power cycles. Time for a major overhaul then. But this usually doesn't happen to the L series motors until close to 300K miles unless they have been seriously abused. Try the valve adjustment first and see if that helps/cures the problem. If not, then see if you can locate from where the noise is coming from. If you can't pinpoint it, get a long piece of small diamter tubing to use a stethescope or you can use the old-timer screwdriver-in-the-ear trick, but that one never worked for me.

I like this particular one better: http://www.zcarparts.com/store/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=50-1409&Category_Code=7AD1 It still has the "thick" style bumper look, but it sits closer to the car, more flush look. It doesn't protrude out from the front of the car as much, so it's less noticable.

These are kind of hard to see since they are painted black, but I think this is what you are talking about. http://www.classiczcars.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=1261&password=&sort=7&thecat=3029 Basically, he had a bent bumper, cut the center section out, welded caps on the ends of the corners, and re-mounted them. Turned out nice looking. Sorry I don't have a better picture. Or You could do something like this. http://www.classiczcars.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=1262&password=&sort=7&thecat=3029 Here the guy took a flat aluminum bar, shaped it, and mounted it just like you're talking about. He also has a matching single flat piece across the back. This link has some good photos: http://www.z-sport.com/telmspics.html

I think it would look better if the "bumper section" was thinner, like the original 240 bumpers. The way it is just looks too fat. Other than that, I think it looks good.

That's kind of what I was thinking but wasn't sure. I have a full-height standing drill press so I can make it work. And I don't expect my springs to be anything even close to 300 lb springs anyway.