Arne

No problems at all, my ammeter works perfectly. What type of device generates and regulates the current should have no effect on an ammeter, all it does is measure the current flow.

Looks like the standard 280Z rear bumper filler.

Randy, I think that refurbing it will be more work than it's worth, so you should send it to me instead. Seriously, I'd love to have one, but it's not high enough on my priority list to convince me to pay the current prices. I thought that the originals were matte silver on both sides. Not certain of that, though. If it turns out that black on the bottom is correct, I've painted powdercoated parts in the past without issues.

Picture to go with my PM.

Not too bad. Stick a set of Michelin redlines and a new top (with the reflective strips) on it and it'll look just right.

Rears from a '73.

Oh. Different issue then. Make certain that the points are properly mounted and gapped, and also that the small wire that leads from the points to the terminal on the outside of the dizzy is connected properly and that its insulation is in good shape. If you are testing this by cranking the engine, make certain that the dizzy shaft is actually spinning. You don't have to crank the engine to test this, just turn on the ignition and manually open the points. When the points break (spark) the coil should fire.

Bad distributor cap, perhaps. Make certain the cap and rotor match, too.

Can you run a P90 or N42 with dished pistons? Yes. Are those two better flowing heads than the N47? Definitely for the P90, maybe for the N42. But in both cases the flow improvement might not be noticeable without a lot of other mods. The big issue is that neither of those heads will give you much compression with dished pistons. The N42 is probably the better choice, it will give a CR in the low 8s, or about stock for an L28. The P90 with dished will only give around 7.5:1 or so - fine for a turbo, but lousy for a naturally aspirated L28. I'm going to assume that budget is an issue, otherwise you'd probably be looking at flat-top pistons instead. If that's the case, I'd skip the head change and put your money into a good valve job and cam for your N47. There's lots of good running motors with those "poor-flowing" round port heads on them.

Welcome, Ed. This thread covers this topic so thoroughly it really should be a sticky. (Hint, hint, moderators.) http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22619

Yes, there are reasons for the 140 amp upgrades, but very few of us really need them. Those few that do, generally know enough that they prepare properly for them. Your car sounds ready to handle it, Bo. But I didn't know that until now. Worse, I have no clue what the condition of the wiring of the 240Z recently purchased by a 17 year-old newbie who might read this thread in 2011. All he sees is "more amps = better", which may not always be true. I'd rather err on the side of caution. If you have beefed your car's wiring to the point that you know you're good for it, my replies weren't meant for you.

Yes. But is the 35 year old wiring on your 240Z good enough or heavy enough gauge to move that much current? Maybe it is, but do you want to chance melting something in your harness when 60 amp units are easy, simple and provide more than enough?

Turns out we're both right, E. The automatic console for '71s had material removed from both the front and the rear of the shifter opening to accommodate the auto shift selector. The first picture I attached is a normal manual transmission console in place, with it's boot. The second picture is a manual transmission console in place, w/o boot. (The fact that the car pictured was converted from auto to manual is immaterial. The console and boot and such all attach the same.) The third picture shows an auto console w/o the shift selector or a boot. I marked the places where material is missing (when compared to a manual console) in red. The key to this original question is this - a manual transmission console will attach to an automatic transmission tunnel exactly the same as the original auto console did, as long as you have the proper one. If the automatic car is a '71 (through 8/71 or so), you need a manual console from a '70 or '71 car.

I'd call that a firm maybe. Note that the 240sx alternators need a pulley swap to work on an S30. If the Quest alternator needs mods of any kind to go on an SX, you're an extra step farther removed. I guess my question would be, do you really need more than the 60 amps of a normal ZX conversion? The fact is that much of the wiring on a 240Z is not all that heavy-gauge to begin with. Start pushing really serious amps through it sounds like a possible recipe for trouble to me. My 60 amp ZX alternator easily keeps up with everything running at once - H4 lights, wipers, radio, heater fan, rear defroster, turn signals and brake lights. It has no problems supplying all this at idle. Lights don't dim, blinkers don't slow down, etc. Why would I need more?

Close. I've had both styles, and did swap a manual console into a formerly automatic car. The cut that will turn a manual console into an auto console is at the rear of the shift opening, not the front. Other than that, E is right on the mark. The manual console you have is for a '72 or later. The proper '70-71 console will still accept the two-lever choke/throttle assembly you had on the automatic console.

Interesting. My car isn't an early car, but I can confirm this as well. Mine are stamped '1-6' (June 1971) in a 7/71 built car.