EScanlon

Bryan; You've mistaken my post. I'm not attacking you specifically as much as the general idea of "locking the thread" to squelch further discussion. I'm not against what you have stated, either previous to my post or after. In fact, I agree with some of the things you have said, except locking the thread. Whether this is or isn't the proper forum is again another point where I do and don't agree with you. Many topics are never discussed because too many people are concerned with upsetting someone. Too many times people of like minds, as a car club may be wont to be, could and would find a common venue by which to rally around...if only they could discuss it. Then again, I don't think this is the proper place to discuss the Federal government taking Christmas day off but not Hanukah or Kwanza or NOT taking any of them as holidays. The situation in California is a good example of a conversation that would merit being held here. Higher taxes or car plate fees because your car is older and is presumed to be more of a pollutant than a newer car? Seems to me that a purely electric vehicle would then NOT have to pay taxes or plate fees...heck might even qualify for a rebate. But that's not what the intent of the bill is...it's simply another way of nickel and dime-ing the people of California for yet another tax. Seems like an isolated incident? Not according to Oregon's Governor, nor Washington's. They're looking into it. And the rest of the country needs to be careful....it could happen in your neck of the woods. Can we discuss that kind of thing here? Hopefully we could....but we can't if people insist that this forum should not allow that type of discussion. We also can't if people insist on demeaning the various points of view in personal attacks. I'm also not annoyed with you or anyone else. People with opposing viewpoints have always tried to "shout down" each other, in hopes of drowing out any opposition. You're right that this does not produce solutions....that's why I objected to "locking down the thread". FWIW E

Bryan, these kind of statements are exactly what causes problems with this type of discussion. YOU feel this thread has run it's course and YOU would impose YOUR desire that it be locked so that nobody else could continue discussing it. I'm not trying to flame you, I'm only pointing out that it is that specific attitude that causes the problems with this type of discussion. If you do not feel like discussing it....then don't click on the thread. You're more than welcome to continue discussing Z's in the numerous other threads that have been continuing while this thread has been posted and being posted to. Most people in the other threads both / either - ignore it, or don't care to post, but they aren't petitioning for it to be stopped. Just like the "Boobs" thread, if it would offend you to read/see the posts, surely the title of "What's wrong with the US Senate?" would be a huge red flag that the discussion would be political and controversial, possibly even argumentative. Suppressing discussion is a way of squelching ideas and a form of oppression. The freedom inherent in the Constitution of the US, and other country's Constitutions, who have taken and from whom the ideas for the Constitution were taken from, all share the concept of dissent and the freedom to discuss change. The right to defend itself from attack is separate from the right to work within the system to effect that change. This means that discussion is permitted, while active sedition is not. Car clubs both in person and on-line, exist not only because of the shared interest in a car. They are also because people can get along and/or at least tolerate one another. It's when you start attacking individuals and their individual beliefs that the discussion can get too controversial and must be locked down....to stop the fracas that could destroy an otherwise good group. The discussion has so far been civil, let's keep the personalized attacks out of it and this comment, again, is NOT one. 2¢ E

Darbji mentioned that it is the continuation of the body line that she initially objected to, but that she was beginning to warm up to it. (Post #14) The Chrome trim still hasn't met with her approval. The problem with trying to ignore the bodyline is that the hood and front edge of the sugarscoop are at a very distinct angle to each other, and if you continue either the top or front edge of the scoop/hood you need to have a transition from one to the other. The ZG cover doesn't have this problem because it doesn't have the transition from the top to the front edge. It's conceivable that you could force a curve between the two and just have it end at the top forward edge of the sugarscoop, but it would definitely look forced. Kind of like those bustiers that 17th century women are portrayed as wearing - tight, flattened and just plain painful to even look at. No offense meant Darb, just making a point as to how unnatural that curve on the Z would look like. The Chrome trim is how the OEM covers were held on with. The lens of the OEM covers doesn't end at the edges of the sugarscoop, it actually rests on the top and outer edges of it. The Chrome trim just provides the support needed to keep them down and in place. Now that's a piece that's conceivable to eliminate, but the problem is in either leaving the edge of the lens exposed, or feathering it out so that it does or does not "bulge" over the edges of the scoop. Either way the problem is in trying to leave the lens within the edges of the sugarscoop, or if over the edges, where to and how to end and blend it into the body. All of this of course is separate from HOW you mount it.... That's half the fun of designing / modifying / customizing cars. FWIW E

Here's the best compact explanation on dropping the tank I've found: http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5876 E

Here's the tech article on doing the POR 15 inside the tank. It's written by Dogma420 and it is quite thorough: http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19034 The fuel tank is pretty much straight forward, although I couldn't find one of the various procedural posts on it. If you're mechanically inclined, the hardest part is disconnecting the fuel filler hose and that is accessible through the panel in the right hand wheel well. Have you bought the Haynes or another manual on the car? They'll explain all the steps much clearer than a re-write by one of us here. Then again, someone may have already taken the time and written it up. Anyone? HTH E

.....so very true!!! I'd still worry about the threaded plug not having sealed it, but that compression washer is there for a purpose. E

In order to save you a bunch of hazzle with a big pan of gasoline, use a plain old syphon hose to drain out the tank into a gas can as much as possible. That way you'll only be dealing with at most one or two gallons of liquid, maybe less. Then after putting a pan beneath the drain hole, remove the plug. Allow it to drain as much as it will and then jostle the car to drain any that may still drain out. Replace the plug and then follow the suggestions on most of the fuel tank removal posts on the site (they're numerous and all of them explain what to do, no need to re-post everything here). The POR method has worked for me and others. It is truly a much cheaper proposition than the other processes available and in some instances the ONLY way to go since replacement tanks are .... unobtainable. Biggest problem you may encounter is that the 280 tanks had a screen filter inside the tank, that may be a major problem that will not allow you to POR the tank. But that's been covered on another post as well, even with pictures. 2¢ E

Zero Rust also recommends the use of a "properly fitted organic vapor/particulate respirator approved by NIOSH/MSHA for protection" from the MSDS for Zero Rust. Which is the same type of precaution for POR and should be applied to ANY type of paint/protectant of this nature. Both POR and Zero Rust are rust-encapsulators. You'll find testimonials for both abound here and other websites. Same with ease of use, both have their proponents. One note, while Zero Rust specifically states that it is NOT for submersion applications, POR on the other hand does not exclude that option. There is also another product called Rust Bullet that makes the claim that it dehydrates the rust and therefore stops the rust. It's "one step" process is actually two coatings done no less than two hours apart. Not necessarily a negative, but definitely something to consider. Additionally it states that if the material is scraped or breached to the metal that rust will re-occur. That would seem to be a given of any of the products above. Probably the biggest first question for you to resolve is money. How much are you willing to expend and just how much of the car are you planning on protecting. Then check for availability of the material you choose. Ask questions here, you may find all the help you need from people that have used one or the other or all of the products. E

Mike; It isn't the Senate that's at fault, it's the people who are fooled into believing the lies the candidates give out, and then vote these poseurs into office. While Obama's claim to not wearing a flag lapel pin because he didn't want to be confused with other "patriots" who wear but don't act as patriots (his wording)- may be plausible, it is also the perfect camouflage for someone who isn't a true American patriot and is only spouting "smoke" to dispel suspicion of his true nature. Just as Hillary's claims that the U.S. can't afford all her ideas really implies that she wants to change the whole system....don't they call that a dictatorship in other countries? And the whole avoidance of legal process during her husband's administration (and her involvement in that as well) as well as her obfuscation of all sorts of reports of ... well, let's just say that her abeyance of the whole legal sytem has a "pick and choose" flavor that says she feels she's above the law. Hmmmm, can you say "despot"? If we're looking at a Black candidate, I still think that Colin Powell has the brains, integrity and gonads, we need. (And no offense to anyone who prefers the term Afro-American, to me that just rubs the slavery issue into every reference of the term.) A woman? Condoleeza Rice. Forget that she's black as well, she has a lot of what we need and I don't see her BS'ing about with the laws or moral depravity the other potential female candidate seems to flaunt. But this is strictly my opinion, and if anyone gets obsessed or upset about it, remember that yours is allowed to differ from it. E

When you say "without that edge in them" are you referring to the body line coming from the hood edge transitioning to the fender side like Stephen mentions or are you referring to the chrome trim on the OEM style? E

Don't forget the barrel roller that mounts beneath the outer squeegee. 2¢ E

Ron; Here's where discussing two sides of the same coin can cause confusion even amongst those discussing it. While you are perfectly correct in the ease of sanding later and then applying your top coat, I was addressing the need to keep the metal from corroding beneath the primer. In my experience with PPG's Epoxy (remember the Parrot Sh*t green primer?) although it is an excellent primer for bare metal with only a minimum of surface preparation (it self-etches and is a great sealer for other compounds) it is still somewhat porous once the skin has been scuffed or even after it has aged a bit in the sun. That's where the problem lies. The non-porous skin is only good for a few weeks...unless kept in a garage and out of the elements and sun. If BKelly just uses the Epoxy primer as his one and only line of defense against corrosion, he'll have no choice but to leave the car in a garage or possibly face corrosion on the sheet metal THROUGH the epoxy primer. The one-step paints (Rustoleum, Krylon et al.) while a total PITA to remove later (and you MUST in order to topcoat with something else), at least do skin over well enough to protect the metal from corrosion. Heck, if BKelly were to apply ANY kind of metal primer and then top coat it with ANY kind of paint (except household or latex), he'd get the protection he needs...except at twice the cost. He would STILL have to sand it down later, but only as far as the primer (although in my book he should do Epoxy as a base primer and not a fill primer). Your receipt mirrors the ones I have for the Roadster I just finished painting. It's funny how people think that "it's just paint" comes cheap. FWIW E

One note about the Epoxy Primers, even they will not protect you for a long time, and a year + may be pushing it to the extreme limits. Most, if not all, recommend that they be topcoated for full protection and within a period of time after they've been applied. Otherwise, you need to sand /scuff the "skin" off the primer to promote adhesion of the next coat of paint or primer. It won't adhere properly otherwise and you'll literally peel it off. The epoxy will seal a lot of materials, and that is one of it's uses as a Sealer, and it will even skin up such that it will provide a layer of moisture protection...but only for a short while. I had that happen with a 76 Mercury Capri II. I applied Epoxy over my bodywork/sheet metal while I got the rest of the car finished, and within 6 months had rust showing through the primer. It was my daily driver, and winter, so undoubtedly that had a LOT to do with the primer failing to keep it protected. But the key point here is that you're looking to protect the metal for an extended period of time....at the lowest cost possible....while you do bodywork in stages. That is why I recommended Rustoleum, Krylon, or some other METAL paint in a can. You'll find that many of those types, while they recommend the use of primer, can and often are, shot directly onto bare metal. You'll need to remove it when you get back to completing the project as most are incompatible with automotive finishes and even the sealers can have problems with them. 2¢ E

ALL primers are prorous and won't protect the metal for that long a period of time. You would actually be better off using Rust-o-leum or some other "all-in-one" product and then sanding it off down to the metal next summer. Don't be fooled by the "skin" the primer gets after being sprayed, it will NOT prevent water from seeping through. This goes for Epoxy, Filler, and Sealer primers. All of those should be top-coated with paint. Do not forget to sand off the Rustoleum when you continue the project, it's not compatible with most top-coats and WILL require the use of a Sealer over it. The theme of over or under the primer is a subject of a lot of debate. Your best bet is to spray an epoxy self-etching primer and then apply the bondo or at least use a metal prep solution to etch the metal and then apply the bondo and then top with a filler primer. There are a lot of opinions on this subject alone. The "blue" primer you're referring to may be one of the epoxy primers, while the "tan" is more than likely a filler primer or a sealer. I put the colors in quotes because one person's blue is another's off-green. My filler primer when first put on looks "mauve" (yuck!) but then eventually cures to a pale "beige/brown/tan" and sands pale gray....go figure. FWIW E

Asta: I can empathize with your reluctance at taking the floor tar mat off. This is a double edged sword problem. It doesn't look like it needs it, and you don't want to invest the money and time into it. A knowledgeable Z buyer will know that the original tar-mat indicates a high probability of problems underneath. There will be some who will comment otherwise, but the vehicles they will be referring to will have been garaged, and kept "closeted" for the majority of their existence. Not saying that they won't have problems too, but rather that a vehicle that has been driven, both in the sun and rain, more than likely parked outdoors, and in general DRIVEN...will have a higher likelihood of rust below the tar-mat. That's just the nature of it. It wasn't applied after the paint protected the metal, but before the paint, hoping that the paint would seal the edges. It did not, and the majority of vehicles have some rust on the floor pan because of the tar mat did not fully adhere or remain afixed to the metal. Your option is to leave it as it is and know that a knowledgeable buyer will see and use that as a leverage point to talk your price down, while a non-knowledgeable buyer will not question it and may find rusted floors later if and when he does check into it. That's one edge of the sword. If you do address the issue there is the probability that you WILL find rust. If you address it properly and document what you do with pictures, it ~may~ help bolster or even help you raise your price. There are no guarantees on that. That's the other edge of the sword. What we've tried to show you is what we would do to preserve the vehicle. FWIW E

You might want to consider using Dry Ice. One of the other members on the board came up with this, and I helped a friend do it on his 1200 and it worked very well and quickly. Take a look at this thread: http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16546 FWIW E

You imply that the only way to enter this discussion is either by your pre-approval or by blind agreement with your views, which may be just the rancor I feel from your post. But the point I was making is that the basis of all the comments being made, was the price or value that people perceived THEIR cars would garner and therefore reflected the price that the vehicle under discussion should receive. And that is what I'm pointing out is wrong. I made no qualification regarding the individual comments, so the lack of respect you note is in your imagination rather than my post. The individual comments are valid as stand-alone comments and even as general comments...except that the ones that insist on denigrating the value of the car are yours and a couple of other ones. E-Bay has always been a place where caveat emptor applies, so values there are always a reflection of people's wishes, desires and pipe-dreams. However, they do tend to cause a general shift in the pricing and availability of items. Years ago I spoke to one of the parts vendors who insisted they would never sell on e-Bay... yet I've seen them selling regularly lately. Prices that years ago were ludicrous, are today the basis for opening bids on e-Bay and Craig's list, and other places. But my main point is that if this vehicle is the "low" end of the Z's range of value, then all vehicles that are at that end and higher have received a push in the UP direction of value. Whether that price is a tough sell today or tomorrow is not at issue, it is. However, if he does get that price then everyone benefits. Well, everyone except those that are quietly building up a collection of the cars while prices are low in hopes of selling them later at higher prices. While it is very likely that our cars will eventually be worth more, if every time a sale that tries to push up the value of the car is ritualistically eviscerated and lambasted as to it's foolhardiness then it WILL be a long time before the price goes up. And let's not forget that the 260 was only available in the U.S. for ONE year, whereas in other parts of the world it was available for several years. On that basis ALONE the 260 may eventually be worth more in the U.S. (and not the rest of the world). 2¢ E

Since this is split into two threads, I'll just summarize my reply from the other thread: You guys have it ALL wrong! I HOPE, I PRAY, I WISH this guy will get the $20k he's asking. Heck, if he were to get it FAST it would be beneficial to us all. 2¢ E

You guys have it ALL wrong! I HOPE, I PRAY, I WISH this guy will get the $20k he's asking. Heck, if he were to get it FAST it would be beneficial to us all. All this discussion as to how much better yours or mine or anyone else's is than the one in the auction is totally ... STUPID ... and no apologies if it seems offensive. Your car isn't for sale at this point, but if this sale DOES go through, you'll be better off for it. Especially if your car IS beter than this one. Think about it. If this car DOES sell for the $20k, that gives us all a benchmark to use with our insurance companies, and if the situation ever arises, a benchmark to use in pricing our own cars. And let's not forget possibly using a totally paid for vehicle as collateral for a signature loan. Denigrating this car because YOU wouldn't pay that much is short-speak for saying your car isn't worth that much either. Especially if you insist that your car is "better". Basic tenet of supply economics, LOW supply leads to HIGHER prices. If anything, the sudden glut of people "finding" and selling Z's that were stashed in barns, old fields, and in general disrepair has hurt the value of the Z. How? By simply increasing the supply of low end vehicles. Doesn't matter much in the top end of the market where the vehicles are recognized as being top dollar, except for the loss of replacement parts that go to refurbish those low end vehicles, since their value isn't measured by e-Bay auctions. It matters in that there are vehicles at lower prices available...period. If this car does sell for the $20k he's asking, then ALL of us can evaluate our cars. How much only matters at the time of sale. 2¢ E

Prior posts that may help: http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13929 http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1642 E

Here's a link on ABC News since it's no longer on the Aussie page: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Business/TenWays/popup?id=3770216&contentIndex=1&page=1 E

Asta, in the pictures you posted, if you'll notice the picture where you annotated "missing one of those rubber plug things, replaced with this metal thing" (I'll post a note on that metal thing later), you'll see that there is this "indent" in the general floor surface. That indent is the edge of the "tar mat" that Beandip is referring to. If you'll look further up the floor pan on the passenger side, to just below the firewall cardboard/insulation, you'll see where the tar mat did NOT cover the metal and you can spot a dash of surface rust. Also on the right edge of it, you'll see the tell tale signs of it starting to creep out from underneath it. The basic problem with the original tar-mat is that it was applied at the factory on unprotected metal. Some people have said they've noted it on top of color paint, others on primer and others on bare steel. Since it's impossible to detect whether it is hiding rust or not without removing it, it becomes a kind of "Russian Roulette" (no offense intended to anyone), with the bullet being rust. You could leave the tar mat alone and never have problems arise, or you could be masking a serious case of floor rot occurring right underneath you. I've posted a few pictures I took on a car I'm working on. The first 4 are from the passenger floor pan, and the last is one section of the driver's side. You'll note that while the under seat area tar mat looked okay, it proved to be the one hiding nastier rust than the general floor pan mat. Then when you look at the piece I chipped off on the driver's side under seat area you can see where the mat was put directly onto bare steel, and part of it seems protected and part is beginning to rust. This is an area of known problems on these cars. While the "originality" factor will be considered by some, it needs to be stressed that the rust is ALSO original. FWIW E

At the rearmost part, gently insert a wedge/prybar and lift the chrome piece up. Do it a bit at a time as you work your way forward and at one point or another it will come free. Works better with the window down. Interior felt gets stapled to the top of the door panel. E

EXCEPT, you don't want to put wax on fresh paint. Check with the body shop, and you'll find that they'll recommend between 30 and 90 days before you get your first wax job in. This is to allow all the solvents that will yet be exuding from the paint to do so and not be trapped in the paint itself. Here's a link to that question at the Meguiar's site: http://www.meguiars.com/faq/index.cfm?faqCat=paint%20care&faqQuestionID=54&section=_54#_54 Don't ruin that nice paint job with a too hasty wax job. 2¢ E

Jason; Did you note where he said the other side functioned normally? E