aarc240

Remember to stuff some 'mastic' type sealer in the holes after painting. That stops water travelling into the frame rails. You can paint over the mastic afterwards to tidy the appearance. Don't use silicone - it won't remain stuck to the body and will eventually allow water to seep in. The same problem occurs with windows, windshields etc because silicone rubber (RTV) doesn't like staying stuck in areas that are flexing or vibrating.

Two possible dissies: 1. a black 'block' attached to the side and two wires OR 2. a two way connector on one side and a four way connector at about 3 o'clock to that 1 is an L28 part and should do nicely, 2 is an RB30 part and is no use to you

Don't see that it would do any damage but I can't see that there is any difference between RB30's from ANY source. The Patrol RB30 was FI just like Skylines, used a similar ECU. Are you sure it was an RB30 powered Patrol? Early 80's would have had an L28 with electronic ignition like the 280ZX just not FI

That's the one. I've got one running on a gas motor for ignition with Ford EDIS6 module and Chrysler coilpack, works a treat.

Unless the R31 version is LOTS different to the VL one then you're plumb out of luck. It appears that you are right that the dissy will physically fit, doesn't seem to be any issues with drive to it or anything else. Electrically is where it all comes unglued - the RB30 uses an ECU which does all the calculations for spark timing and fires the coil. The dissy then puts that spark to the appropriate plug. You would have to emulate the functions of the ECU. Have look at http://picasso.org/mjlj/?q=taxonomy/term/1 as you might as well go crank trigger and wasted spark in that case!! Another alternative would be a HEI kit from Jaycar or D i c k Smiths (as published in Silicon Chip magazine) which can be triggered from a standard L24 distributor. (pardon the spaces in **** Smiths - the thought police are obviously alive and well)

I recall seeing something pretty similar in a Honda S600 or S800 years ago. Still might not have been OEM though!!

Forgot a couple of minor points. Make the hat section as deep as will clear everything inside the door. A length of rectangular timber makes a good test gauge for clearance. 35 to 50mm wide plus the flanges is pretty good. Put a curve in them to get a close match to the skin shape and dab plenty of bitumen body sealer into the resulting gap after installing. No sealer and they will drive you crazy when the skin and bar start vibrating against each other.

Not too hard in the doors, basically a 'hat' section with the flanges against the skin and 'ears' at each end which are either welded or rivetted to the front and rear of the inner door shell. I use 1.5mm thick C1030 bright rolled steel sheet to make them. Lot's easier with the skin off but doable, just takes a bit of wiggling and swearing to get them in position. They need to be reasonably close to the door latch mechanism (not the exterior handle) and work better with the later 'bear claw' latches. Dash area, I really can't see much advantage. However if you are referring to the A pillars being pushed in then that may be worthwhile although a lot of work. Only way I can see would be to lift out the dash shell, add folded/formed sheet steel sections inside the bottom edge and some decent folded sheet steel corner braces / mounts from each end of the shell to the A pillar. That way a side impact pushing the A pillar in would dump some of the load into the now strengthened lower edge of the shell. Take more to bend the shell so more energy would be dissapated in doing that rather than pushing the A pillar into the space your legs need. The doors sound like a pretty smart move which I hadn't considered even after done them for compliancing grey imports. Most all the mods on ours have been the old story - less weight more speed and bugger the consequences.

Technically it's a roll bar with rear support legs, which is how it's viewed in NCOP documentation. We use a similar setup but include brackets welded to the body sides and to the roof rails. By positioning/shaping the rear legs to stay out of the rear seat occupant safety zones you can retain the 5 seat certification when lap/sash belts are installed in the front Remove the rear seat when using harnesses to comply with the law. Those holes are interesting! Our earlier hardtop doesn't have them so unless they are obviously blow-throughs from welding I would suspect that Nissan changed that area to comply with crash testing. Be careful with reinforcements - you will likely need to talk to your engineer as any changes there are going to need a good deal of thought to ensure crash loads are distributed properly. Or at least in a manner that Transport will accept.

Have a look at the frame rail from below and you will see a vertical edge. If you have a factory manual, go to section 'Body and Frame', 'General Description' and there is a detailed line drawing of the body. Fig BF-1 for sedan, BF-2 for hardtop. Section D-D is the relevant view. The bottom of this could be welded or 'fused' to increase the strength but I've yet to see a car that needed it, even after extensive use on VERY rough dirt roads in Central Australia. The price for the strut bar is within reason given the labour involved in making the part. I sure wouldn't do another for any less! The roll cage might be good for strength but keep in mind that as soon as you install one then the car can only be registered as a limited use dedicated rally car. That unfortunately is a fact of life throughout Australia now under the National Code Of Practice unless you are prepared for the expense of type approving the car (and therefore any other with the same body) with a specific design of cage installed. What sort of 'large holes' remain?

Yeah, vacuum gauge. If it was boost then it would have a 'zero' position somewhere within the scale and the pointer would sit on that marker with engine off. Has to be done that way so the gauge can display both below and above atmospheric pressure. Possible that JDM had a L20E that early but very unlikely an L20ET I wouldn't mind that steering wheel either!

Re the 10mm vs 12mm bolts in R200's. Don't make the mistake of assuming that the later Z31 and 200SX units are 12mm versions - a some Z31's delivered in Aus have 10mm bolts. I've seen the occasional 12mm version in '83 280ZX 2+2 non-turbo cars in Aus so Nissan must have been upgrading a bit earlier than the intro of the Z31. Presumably they then used up whatever was in stock with the earlier Z31's. Anyway, it is not as critical these days. ARP make some really nice 10mm bolts that can provide MORE clamping pressure than the 12mm bolts from Nissan.

I thought that only the TT version of the Z32 had the R230 and that all others had an R200. Since the Z32 in Aus was never available TT then wouldn't it be an R200, with a revised rear cover for extra oil capacity and possibly a little extra heat dissipation? Anyone know for sure? btw, that rear cover is apparently the exact same part that NISMO was selling at some ridiculously inflated price!

An R180 is a 7" diff so not surprising you're breaking them! Unfortunately Ford Oz use a BW diff in all the 'coons so that is no use (p*** poor ratio selection for one, poor quality control for another). There WAS an engineering firm in southern NSW making aluminium housings etc to create an independent rear suspension 9" diff for Cobra's but haven't heard of them for a while. Do a search in the Cobra kitcar line, someone must still do one! Failing that, try Hollinger Engineering and Harrop Engineering, both in Victoria Oz but be prepared for a sticker shock. Don't overlook the R230 diff out of late Nissan Patrol. If you can bust THAT then you need a Dana 60, not a Ford!!! On choice of engine, why even bother with where the dizzy is? Convert the engine to use a MegaJolt Lite Junior with EDIS so NO dizzy.

A V8 makes sense, but why a 1950's design live rear axle when you can use an R200 and stay independent? For that matter why even use a V8 when engines like RB25DET & RB30ET are available?

Don't fret over the 280ZXT axles, they are the same part as used in the later 280ZX 2+2 in Oz (same story as the 280Z axles - they were the same as our late 260Z 2+2 axles).

I've got a similar one out of an Australian delivered '73 240K GL hardtop (chassis #907) yet a '73 240K GT hardtop (chassis #302) was mph only. I guess it depends on when the destination country was converting to metric. That yours is calibrated to 150mph may be an indication that the car was to be a 5 speed or was at least close to the introduction of that box. All the early publications I've seen say the earliest 240K GT's in Australia had 4 speeds and 120mph speedos. The later 240K GL's all seem to have 240kph metric speedo's.

I believe it is actually silver. Sure would be unusual badges over there!

Just gleaned a little more info on the F54 vs N42 block saga. This is from some old notes scrawled in a scrapbook by a gent who used to be the top machinist with one of South Oz's best engine shops in the 60's thru to the late 80's, said scrapbook getting into my hands from his widow. F54 will take a max overbore of 3mm, SOME N42's will take 4mm. Total bare block weight is almost identical but the F54 is a little heavier at the rear of the block. He attributed this weight bias difference to the F54 being the only L6 to have the reinforcing struts bolted under the back of the block and onto the front of the transnission. He noted that the lower rear area of the F54 was a thicker casting than the N42 but the water jackets were a little more open. Curiously, he recorded an observation that the F54 was less likely to distort the cylinder walls when overbore was kept to 1mm and the engine was to be turbocharged. He noted that for an N42 overbored 1mm and turbo'd the owner was to be told it was 'not as good'. Interesting related note was that those reinforcing struts are aluminium in 280ZX and 280C autos but steel in 280ZX manuals, 280ZX turbos and L28 powered Nissan Patrol 4WDs. Makes you wonder whether Nissan just might have changed a fair bit in the block to suit the turbo application!

Oops, got that wrong! Quoting from reply from Alan Whitaker Coordinator Vehicle Standards Vehicle Services Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure Regency Park "All you need to do is notify Customer Service (Motor Registration) of the engine change on the MR7 form with the new engine number recorded and we will send you out a new registration label with the number recorded on it." Of course that is assuming the engine is a code LA1 replacement not requiring certification!

I think I did refer you to this publication before: http://www.dotars.gov.au/transport/safety/road/bulletin/vsb_ncop.aspx This is NOT binding on any state or territory authority but in general is being followed pretty closely with the occasional adminstrative or terminology differences. Have a look at NCOP3 Section LA and then talk to Transport SA. An L28 is considered an 'optional replacement engine' and doesn't need certifying. I even have that in writing! A standard RB30 just fits within the guidelines so again no certification provided there are no chassis / body mdifications made. An RB20DET is a different ballgame and WILL require certification simply because it has a turbocharger. New engine number over the phone - that's a new one on me! Usual process varies for country vs city clients but requires written advice (a standard form). Next is inspection to verify engine number - SA Police if country, Transport SA if city. Not in SA you won't (and very likely in any state or territory). If you use a 'pollution' motor like an RB30 then ALL the original pollution crap has to be retained. No way are you going to modify Webers to comply!! btw, just about any 'performance' modifications WILL require that an L28 in C110 be certified with the sole exception of header exhaust.

This would be relevant to this forum if the MSA fuse block was actually for the C110 Datsun 240K and not the HLS30 Datsun 240Z. Wrong forum guys - try the 240Z as in ZEE or ZED instead of 240K as in KAY

The blue is a 'body' tint in the glass - no film or other surface treatment involved. If you get a new replacement windscreen for many cars nowdays it will be body tinted neutral grey. So far I have not seen or found anything in written law applicable to in-glass tint and the use thereof in vehicles anywhere in Australia. Some places (South Aus for one) will try to bluff a car owner into accepting that the 80% light transmission rule applies to body tinted as well as film tinted glass but the actual wording they rely on is lifted direct from the legislation that specifically and only addresses tint film on automotive windows. In essence, keep the tint level sane, above 75% light transmission, and you can run body tinted windows including the windshield. Now all you have to do is ask your friendly Autoglass supplier for 'toughened glass tinted neutral grey to a level of not less than 75% light trnamission' !! Edit: and don't forget to tell them that the windows MUST be supplied engraved or etched with the type markings in accordance with Australian law (have a look at a late model car for examples)

Factory data for GT says 423mm max length and 150mm stroke. No difference for soft or hard suspension (ie standard or lowered).

Sorry, I missed your question on the position of the pump - not that it mattered as you worked out the preferable position anyway! Once it's on the road check the pump and surrounding area for gravel rash or any sign of stone/debris impact - just add a simple steel shield if you spot any. If you had the luxury of painting the entire underfloor not too many would even realise that pump wasn't a standard fitting. Looking good on the EFI conversion!