ezzzzzzz

Putting a carb on an engine is kinda like asking what kind of wine do you have with fish...any kind of wine you want the fish doesn't care...it's dead. In reality, it doesn't matter that the solex' were made for Lancia or Ford or whatever. If it bolts up and meets the basic requirements of your engine it will work and can work very well. Carbs ,sidedrafts or downdrafts, operate on the same basic principles. If the carb(s) is flows too much cfm or fuel for the engine requirements at given rpm's it won't be functional except at maybe WOT. Bigger carbs do not make bigger power by themselves alone. I'm not familiar with Solex but I make the assumption that the PHH is the non-emission (racing) carb while yours is drilled to allow more air across the transition from idle to WOT reducing emissions on production cars. That is not a big deal in a street car and many track cars. It could be a blessing if your exhaust is sniffed during inspections. What you never told us was did the car ever run or run decent with this setup. Did it? Do you suppose the PO installed these without tuning and sold out because it ran like crap? Every piece in these carbs has a number on it. You need to disassemble one carb, at a time, and write down these numbers as they apply to specific pieces. This includes the casting number of the carb bodies. If they do not match in all three carbs you need to address that first. Did you replace all of the gaskets? Where did you get the kit? Maybe that would be a good first source for more info. The reversion to SU's is viable and easy to accomplish but the triple look is great and the sound stirs the soul. The triples can be made streetable with the proper chokes, jets, etc. You may be very close already or way the hell off. It sounds crazy but try your local book store or library. I find information much quicker there than on the web. The web is a big place though...type in 'solex' in various search engines and do a LOT of reading. You will probably find some basic tuning principles that will point you in the right direction. As for bits and pieces and additional info search for Alfa and Lancia forums. The truth is out there.

Cool...thanks for the info. I have a couple friends in the business too. Maybe I'll give that alternate freon a chance. I'll look into the temp curves of this as it compares to others. I never doubted the use of R414B as it has been dicussed in many automotive a/c forums. I just questioned why it never made it into production for cars.

I stand corrected on the expansion valve. A receiver/drier is nothing more than desicant in a bottle (to absorb moisture) and a tube extending down into the bottom of that bottle to supply only liquid to the evaporator. R12 will not look milky/bubbly unless there is insufficent or contaminated freon allowing a gaseous or contaminated mixture to proceed past the sight glass an on to the evaporator. The newer kits do use barrier type hose required because the R134 molecule is much smaller than it's R12 counterpart and will bleed through non-barrier hose and past flare fittings. If the kits were produced prior to the conversion years then you may not get a R134 compatible system. If it has o-rings you can assume it is compatible. The gaskets used in the Sanden compressor also play a part in effective sealing of R134. When you see a label for R12 it only means that the schrader valves are on the compressor or could have been. It also likely has flare fittings (not R134 friendly). The R134 label means no valves, o-ring fittings and probably the proper gaskets on all but the earliest compressors. R414B will work as I understand it but has never been applied to the automotive world for reasons only the major manufacturers would know. There must be a good one though.

I'm looking for the Sanden type axial compressor bracketry as found in the MSA kit. It mounts on the block below the intake/exhaust manifolds. Does someone have these bits lying around and for sell? Alternately, I could use some photos and accurate dimensions to reproduce these parts. Thanks in advance for any help!

Search over at Hybridz.org for this info. As for this a/c system, I'm assuming the compressor is the Sanden type (axial) located on the driver's side of the block. The original setup used a large York compressor on the passenger side. If it is the old York compressor, R12 orifice (evaporator) and the hoses are not "barrier type" with o-ring fittings then you're wasting time and money running R134. It won't work well or for long. Whether it is R134 or R12 compatible is dependent upon the hose material, fittings, drier, condensor and evaporator orifice valve. The quickest way to determine if it's been comverted to R134 is look for the service ports in the hose fittings. These are much larger than the 1/4" schrader valves used for R12. If there is a sight glass in the drier the R134 freon will look cloudy or milky. R12 is either bubbly (low) or clear (full). There is plenty of info on the web that goes into the details which I won't bore you with here. A for the blower, the Honda will perform better. The problem with the stock add-on a/c is the blower must suck air through the evaporator coils instead of blowing through both the heater/evaporator coils. Blowers aren't designed for this restriction to flow. It will work but never be optimum.

Was there ever a third pulley option on the 240Z pulley (has two bolts in front and smaller overall diameter)? If so, does anyone have such a piece lying around and gathering dust? I'd like to acquire it.

I hadn't considered the timing marks but that's easily resolved. The front cover is another issue all togather. Is that because of the seal surface diameter, timing marks or what? Is the crankshaft snout the same diameter on all L6's?

Testing picture resizing... WoooHooo I finally firgured out how to attach images smaller than the Sear's Tower in Chicago!

Are all crankshaft pulleys physically interchangable on all L6 cranks (240Z to 280ZX)? I need a 3 pulley arrangement to replace the 2 pulley on my 11/70 240Z 2.4 L6. I have a 3 pulley from a 280Z (possibly ZX) and don't want to jump into a pulley swap unless I know it will go okay.

Here's the skinny... The cost of molds for either material is $500. The big difference is the end product. ABS will cost $125(cost could go down with greater production). The grain structure of this will be slightly grainier than stock (look at most any ABS molded product). I can use my original console or the reproduction for the mold. It is made using a CNC program to create the mold and then vacuum molding of the finished product. Fiberglass will cost $300 due to the extra labor involved. Bottom line, if I can get eight persons interested in the ABS piece at $125 (plus shipping) we can get this going. If the interest is in the fiberglass then we'll look into that also but the cost is going to require about ten persons interested to start. There may be other options regarding fiberglass but I'll need to investigate further. Lastly, this does not take into account the metal brackets. I feel I can get these made at a very reasonable cost and then epoxy these into the consoles. Whatever that cost is would be added. Alternately, you could remove the pieces from your damaged console to swap over. I'm playing with ideas to keep cost under control. There is no source otherwise. I suspect that MSA, VB or the others would charge dearly for these pieces if available. Comments??? NOTE: I need to clarify something. It was pointed out to me that the prices seem quite high for production. These prices are based on two local companies with no competition. I want to pursue this further with other businesses outside of my area. Based on the local companies, the first run of 8 ABS consoles includes the share of having the mold created. Afterwords, that cost would come down. I have no intention of making these myself as the time involved is more than I could possibly spare. The price after mold cost are recouped would be around $80. I am willing to cover the cost of the mold if there is enough interest where I could recoup the setup fee with a minimal change over time. ABS is cheap but the price includes material and labor of the manufacturer. Also, the material is of substantial thickness such that the tight curves and bends would still have good thickness. The cost of the fiberglass also includes initial setup cost and then would drop to $250 if made by the manufacturer. That is their quote exactly. I feel this is too expensive overall and will look for another operation to create these at a lower cost. Again, I could produce these myself but haven't the space or time to even consider it. Heck, I have two good consoles but thought there would be a need for the early Z owners.

I wish I was. I'm suppose to be getting together with my fiancee. We are at odds right now though (hope it works out but that's another thread). My Z is sitting on stands getting springs, struts, upgraded brakes, dellortos, etc. One day........ :disappoin I'll have to contact the two local companies that produce plastic and fiberglass parts. When I have more information, I'll pass it on. The only real difference I've noticed is the lack of extra material around the rear three screw holes. That could be corrected.

The only thing that comes to mind is the ignition and the ammeter. The wiring would have to in place for both to operate. I'd have to look at a wiring diagram. I think most stuff is fed through the ammeter (could be wrong here). You'd lose turn signals and brake lights too. All of these are in the dash harness. If I did this it would be with an escort behind me to block the cops and prevent someone slamming into me at a stoplight.

A mold is a mold. I guess it could be made in both materials if the numbers were right. Here are pictures of the original and reporduction side by side. I tried to get a close up of each to illustrate the grain.

I run a red top Optima and it fit in very well. I still use the original frame to hold it in place. Best part is NO batttery acid to eat paint or metal. You could mount it upside down or sideways if you wish. The down side is roughly three times the cost of a regular wet cell.

I'll post some pictures of the console tonight. It will allow mounting of the external pieces (has metal brackets installed). The wire holders would have to be epoxied in or left off. The old console might need to be salvaged for brackets. I could get the metal pieces made too. I don't know at this point. I'm surprised that one of the aftermarket suppliers don't offer this piece anymore...

I have a really nice reproduction center console (fiberglass) that I intend to use in place of my original console (still in decent shape). Anyhow, I was considering looking into having reproductions made using ABS instead of fiberglass. The benefits are obvious and would be acceptable to all but concourse entrants. Before I go any further I'd like a show of hands of those interested in availability of this item...that is assuming the cost is within reason to have them produced.

I've though about these too. I have Dellorto's bolted up to a Redline long runner manifold with only the paper gaskets. It's the $100 investment for these small items that keeps me from jumping on board. I fabricated an aluminum heat shield which runs to full length of the intake and blocks out all direct radiated exhaust heat except the very most top of the headers. I hope that is enough to eliminate fuel boiling or vapor lock. These haven't been run in yet because I'm just finalizing the choke setup. Time will tell.

All cars use a window 'squeege'. Isn't it viable that replacement rubber could be found on another generic vehicle (Ford, GM, etc) at low cost? There are adhesives that would work but they aren't generally accessible. They would far into the catagory of polysufides. I've used them extensively on naval weapon systems joining rubber shields to metal parts. A mechanical clamp would be needed to allow cure time. Once set, these products are a total PITA to remove. If you get it on your clothes it never comes out and the cloth will deterioate before it does. Maybe McMaster/Carr or another industrial supplier would have such an item?

Just disconnect the 12v to the pump (fuse, connector, etc.). Start the engine and let it idle until it dies. This appies to EFI where pressures are hovering around 50 psi. If we're talking about 4 psi (carbs) then just open the fuel line...a little spillage at best.

There should be no reason the overtighten the retaining bolt. It's only purpose apparently is to prevent the shaft from rotating and causing excess wear in the spindle assembly.

Only the need to replace the bushings would dicate pin removal. I need to clarify some bad info about my Z. It was not a BRE car as confirmed by Carl Beck. It was modified and raced by someone outside of the BRE community. The pieces installed were BRE inspired, Interpart, Mulholland, and early NISMO. It is still a great car just without the history.

They are reservoirs. There is no pressure. They gravity feed the MC bores when in the "at rest" position. A tip valve closes off the feed holes when you depress the pedal forcing fluid down the brakelines. When released, the fluid is forced back up into the MC. As the pads wear down the reservoirs replace the displaced fluid. That's why the fluid level goes back up in the reservoirs when you put in new pads.

Regarding the Mack truck BBC, I think you'll find this engine to have a higher deck height to accommodate a fourth ring on the piston. I can't be sure of this as it's been a loooonnnnggg time since I dealt with an early Chevy V8. These things weigh so much that it will be nose-ploughing in every turn. I'd be more inclined to look at a LT1 or LS1. Even a stroked small block would be a viable choice. The other major issue is the rearend. It isn't going to like the torque you'll be putting into it. A R200 conversion will be a neccessity(sp?) or a solid axle swap (LOTS of work and fabrication)!

I want A/C too. The earlier dealer kits used the York compressor. The Courtesy and MSA kits use the Sankyo compressor. It is the better choice as it is less efficent at idle but draws a lot less hp off the engine at idle too. It is also much smoother in operation. The compressors come in different displacements. I don't know what these kits use. R134 is very efficent and cheaper than R12. The condensor (as big as practical) and evap orifice MUST be designed for R134. Conversions don't do the job if not properly designed. I've run a 9 c.i. in my early Land Rover (with NO insulation at all) and it took the edge off when on the NC beaches in July/August. I'm thinking of fabbing my own A/C again but using an evaporator from OldAir or VintageAir. It isn't all that difficult if the compressor/pulley brackets are available. Back to the original question, I'd also like someone firsthand experience with one of the complete kits!

Thanks for the insight. My car is in exceptional condition other than the floor pans being pushed up a little from floor jacks(?) as a 70's BRE car way back in California. I've built a spindle pin puller for the task. There is little, if any, rust so I hope the removal will be relatively painless for me and the car. I'm the third owner (I think) and the car appears to have rarely seen rain. It was mostly restored and kept garaged over the last 21 years.