Arne

To verify my levels, I generally put a clear vinyl tube on the bottom float nipple (instead of the normal tube to the bottom nozzle). Then I remove the power to the coil and crank the engine over a couple of times to fill the float bowl. (If you have an electric pump, just hot wire it for a couple of seconds.) You will now be able to see how high the fuel sits in the float bowl under operating conditions. The fuel should be 23-25 mm below the top of the float bowl when measured this way.

I'm with Bruce. You don't "set the float level" by turning the mixture adjuster nuts. Sounds like the real float level (set at the float inside the float bowls) are not the same in the two carbs.

No, I just missed that you added pictures later last night. In large, I agree with your assessment. I like the idea of using the bumper mount holes for round exhaust tips. Not so hot on the second example.

Hooker Super Comp.

I probably don't really want to know. I still think I'd rather have a 919 yellow 240Z, but really don't think I should be pursuing that right now...

Seriously, no clue without pictures.

This type of relationship between US distributors and overseas manufacturers regarding standard and optional equipment was not at all unusual in the '60s and into the early '70s. Similar examples of this type existed with many European imports as well. I've run into this in the past with British and German imports. Part of it may have been to simplify the inventory headaches for the US distributors. For example, as popular as the 240Z became (waiting lists that were often months long), imagine the complications that the availability of numerous true factory options would have introduced. When the only US choices were color (and later automatic transmission), it really simplified the delivery process to the customer.

In my experience, nothing will attract more good comments than dual exhaust on a car that everyone knows didn't come with dual exhaust. I drove a graymarket '81 BMW 323i for more than 5 years. Imagine a 320i but with tidy, small chrome bumpers and a small inline six. It had staggered BBS rims, lowered Alpina suspension, the lighting was obviously non-US-spec, and the only thing most people could talk about was the dual exhaust. Which was actually factory, in this case. But compared to a 320i, that was what they noticed, not the bumpers.

Not before 8/70 production for the North American market.

Your Mileage May Vary. I don't know that I've ever used that when really talking about mileage!

Dimensions are listed on the page in the specs - 25" L x 17" W x 9" H. Stock tank is ~16 gallons. Figure 25-30 MPG on the highway, depending. YMMV!

Not at the present time. I know that Will has it on his list of future repro items, but no ETA. Not too soon, I suspect.

I think the idea for the exhaust would look great. Might as well put those bumper holes to a better use. This might be more suitable, especially if you remove the spare well. http://www.summitracing.com/parts/SUM-290108/

Realistically, I can't see many downsides at all for a non-stock car. Safer, no tank rust issues, and a lot more flexibility in other mods at the rear of the car. No personal experience with, or recommendations for any particular makes or models, though.

Hmm. My clock not only works, but it's actually quite accurate. Within a couple minutes per month.

Well, after crunching all the numbers, every part of the project came in under budget! So a significant donation to CZCC.com has been made, on behalf of all of us.

Good idea, I moved the thread to Wheels. I don't think it was Carl, I think he was after a spare ARE LeMans for the Baja car. But I too seem to recall someone looking for a Trans Am. Let me think on it a bit... EDIT: I think I found it, but it is the other way 'round. RHChew has three Libres and one Trans Am, and is/was looking for another Libre. http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28004

I installed the third brake light I got from Dave today. But I did make a small change in mine. In an effort to make the installed light less obvious when it is not lit up, I added a red lens in front of the LEDs, and also extended the top cover to ensure that the LEDs can't be seen behind the lens from above. The red lens over red LEDs does not change the brightness noticeably, but actually tends to widen the angle a view some, which can't be bad. I like how it turned out, the picture on the car was with flash and so it lit the red slightly, it's not this visible in most lighting conditions.

Jonathan, if your end goal is to restore a car to factory original, you are correct in that this car may not be the best car to start with. But if your goal is to have/build a nice driving early Z with a few period-correct mods, an early 260Z that is already partly modified is a great starting point, especially if it's not particularly rusty. Don't let us 240Z owners dissuade you from working on the car you already have.

First two pics deal with the hood. While the drawing shows the vents, note that the vents themselves (#85 & 86) were not used until 8/76 production, and then note that the hood panel itself was also different at that break point. US 260Zs did not have vents in the hood as delivered to the distributor here in the USA. Definitely added later. Third picture is of the front bumper. No additional bar shown. Dealer added at best, never installed by the factory. The factory page on the carbs is too poor a drawing to make conclusions from, so I didn't attach it.

The early carbs are a very common swap to replace the trouble-prone emissions carbs on the '73 240Z and all US 260Zs. You'll probably find more 260Zs with 240Z carbs these days than you will see with their original flat-top carbs. Very common mod to make them run better. You should be happy that yours is so equipped. (BTW, they appear to be four-screw carbs from a late '70-71. Not from a '72.) The hoods and bumper bars are similar stories, although perhaps not for the same reasons. The front edge of 240Z and 260Z hoods are very prone to parking lot damage, and over the years many have been replaced with used 280Z hoods, since there are a lot more of those in decent shape due to the large bumpers of the 280Z. As noted, the bumper bars were also a very popular add-on (partly to try to prevent damage to the edge of the hood), and many were installed by the dealers when the car was brand new. Trust us on this, neither your vented hood nor your bumper bar are factory original. Dealer mods prior to first sale, perhaps. But not original. Also, after looking at the pictures, I'm not convinced that the hood really is a 280Z hood, it may be the original 260Z hood with aftermarket vents cut into it. Can't tell for certain without better pictures.

Back on topic - have any NW Washingtonians seen this car in person?

Yes, the Summer/Winter flap was present on the later '71s, and perhaps even on some of the late Series 1 cars. My understanding is that the flap was added to all cars that had the 1971 emission sticker under the hood. If so, my earliest parts car (12746, 10/70) probably came with the flapper air cleaner since it had the '71 emissions tag. But the original air cleaner for that car was long gone by the time I bought it, so I can't confirm that. My red car (37705, 7/71) does have the flap, and it is the original.