Michael

Have a look at the "suspension" chapter of the venerable JTR V8 conversion manual, where there's a discussion on re-drilling the K-member to move the LCA outboard (and slightly upward). There's also been discussion suggesting (sorry, the context escapes me) the benefits of a "slightly" wider track in the front than in the rear. As to the 5x114.3 vs. 4x114.3 dilemma, both aesthetics and wheel selection-options suggest the benefits of swapping to 5-lug in the front, if that's already been done in the rear. Given the cost of the Ray's wheels, the additional cost of new 5-lug hubs (around $500?) is not outlandish. 275's on an 8" wheel... is that advisable?

Having spent 20+ years trying to do it myself, I realized that my skills are woefully inadequate. I've also garnered a respect for professional workmanship, even if it's costly. The frustration is that most pros are into the show-circuit... $20K paint jobs and that sort of thing. I've also learned to never argue with a seasoned pro... that's one context in which it is assuredly not the case, that "The customer is always right". But you're quite right about the importance of patience. Today Datsuns are expensive. In another 20 years, the generation that idolized them in their youth, will likely exit the car-acquisition phase, and prices will fall. One perhaps counterintuitive observation is that displacement and engine weight don't strongly correlate. A pushrod-valvetrain V-block is remarkably compact and light, for the displacement. An example is the Ford "Modular" (more recently, "Coyote") V8... overhead cam, vs. the venerable 5.0 pushrod engine. Compare weights and exterior dimensions, for the same displacement... uncanny! Engine designers might brag about wringing the most hp from the least displacement, but from a vehicle design viewpoint, what matters is the overall engine weight, the external dimensions, and torque curve and the fuel efficiency. These can be surprising. One data point is my 1991 Miata (engine swapped from a 1996 Miata). It's a 1.8L 4 cylinder, DOHC... makes all of 110 hp, weighs >300 lbs, and is lucky to get 25 mpg (in a 2200 lb car). Overall it's a great car, but nowise because of the engine. The engine power to weight ratio is horrible... on par with 1970s emissions-strangled GM and Ford land-yachts. Anyway, without rambling ceaselessly, this: it's good to be on the lookout for cleverly-built, one-off gems... the weird cars, the complete tube-chassis ground-up customs. That, and not a faithful restomod, is my ultimate objective.

Not to range too far of topic, but that's a 150-pound block. I chose those attributes intentionally, to result in surprisingly light engine. It's the sort of thing that powers the winners of the Hot Rod Drag Week contests... things like 1962 Novas that weigh 2100 pounds. But the big-block people or the Nova people won't countenance one of that them thar Datsuns... and vice versa. Just like it was, 21 years ago, when this site first started. The point is, that great things are possible by dispensing with OEM stuff and replacing it with high-end, specialized parts, tested and installed and tuned by expert craftsmen. As goes without saying, this is expensive... deep 6 figures-expensive. The irony is that if the sort of Datsun that I described were today for sale for $70K, I'd immediately whip out my... checkbook. But we don't really see such animals for sale anymore.

Not to be provocative, but I wonder how much of the price-escalation is from a cultural affinity to "keeping it Japanese" or "all Nissan"? In other words, if the engine were a Donovan aluminum big-block 572, with AFR heads and a big mechanical roller cam, backed by a T-56 transmission and a Ford 9" center-section (duly converted to independent half-shafts), then might we find ourselves with a car that cost $100K to build, but only fetches $40K at auction?

Plausible and intriguing, but would the bending stresses (cantilevered load) be acceptable? Miata 15x8 wheels are typically around 36mm offset, whereas a Z, if I'm not mistaken, would be 0 offset (4.5" backspacing on an 8" wheel... that is, 9" lip-to-lip, is 0 offset). So that's a 36mm-thick cylindrical slab of aluminum, drilled 4x114.3 and counterbored to accept lug nuts and the head of a socket-wrench (what is it, 21 mm?) ... and then drilled and studded at 4x100, to accept the Miata wheel. 1" adaptors: https://usadapters.com/collections/4x114-3-4x4-5-wheel-adapters-wheel-spacers-4-lug-hub/products/4x4-5-4x114-3-to-4x100-usa-wheel-adapters-12x1-5-studs-1-71mm-bore-x4-spacers . But 36mm = 1.417", so perhaps we'd need 1.5" adaptors? Interestingly, the same company ("USA Adapters"; correct spelling would be "Adaptors", but hopefully they're better engineers than English majors) makes 4-to-5 lug adaptors. Is this a possibility worth considering?

If you've done the 5-lug conversion, the world is your proverbial oyster (at least as regards wheels). There appear to be lots of OZ wheels in 5x114.3. It's us poor 4-lug schlubs who lack options. Were I to have done the 5-lug conversion, I'd just order some Weld Draglites (https://www.weldwheels.com/street-strip-wheels/draglite.html) in a custom offset. Problem solved. Maybe this is classic paralysis-by-analysis, but here's the problem: 1. Car has been sitting for decades, and tires are completely unsafe, even for pulling out of the driveway. 2. Choice of new tires that fit, is somewhere between woefully bad and completely zero. 3. "Good" new tires would require new wheels. 4. "Good" new wheels, to have a proper selection, probably require the 5-lug conversion. 5. Ergo, just to get this [expletive] thing back on the road - I mean, just to do a vanity-lap around the block - entails a massive customization and re-engineering project, which I have neither the patience nor the resources nor the motivation to do.

There is of course the adage of getting that for which one pays. I don't expect forged wheels for cast-wheel prices. The quandary however is that even among comparably built and comparably designed wheels, there's wide range in weight and price. One would like to get "the best" within a certain class of product, realizing that "best" will differ between the different classes... or applications. Another example is Konig wheels. Several appeal to me, in price, design and even weight. But good luck getting a 4x114.3 pattern with the right offset for a Z. Another example is 6UL (https://www.counterspacegarage.com/949racing-6ul-15x8-4x100), with which I'm familiar from the Miata side (my daily driver is a Miata). Great wheel, good price, well-deserved good reputation! But by design, it's only available in the Miata 4x100 bolt pattern; there's simply no "meat" in the hub-area to accommodate redrilling for the larger bolt pattern.

This is precisely why a crowd-sourcing approach of gathering data - even anecdotal data - is so important. Until brands build a reliable track-record, we can only rely on word-of-mouth. By way of example, I bought a "Central Machinery" drill press from Harbor Freight Tools, about 20 years ago. It still works great! Best $150 that I ever spent on a tool. But the purchase was blind... no knowledge, not even anecdotal data. I dislike Rota for two reasons. First, they're heavily advertised, which to me suggests more sizzle than steak. Second, they tend to be heavy. Vors caught my attention because for the same size wheel (15"x8") and essentially the same design, their advertised weight was 2-3 pounds lighter than Rota. But without a track-record, can one tell, if this advertised weight is correct? I wonder how much of the price of something like TE-37 is for exclusivity, branding and so on... a Hermes scarf, a Louis Vuitton suitcase and so on. I am looking for low weight and OK (not necessarily outstanding) durability, at an acceptable price. I just need to get my car back on the road. Not the track, just the road! My current tires were already old when the 21st century started, and finding tires that fit the wheels (14x7) seems like a dead-end. For 14x7 BTW, the only "acceptable" tire that I could find is this one: https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Toyo&tireModel=Proxes+R888&partnum=25VR4R888&vehicleSearch=false&fromCompare1=yes . And while this is great from a traction and tire-weight point of view, it's an awful short tire, resulting in some pretty frenetic rpms at highway speeds (5 speed transmission without overdrive).

It occurred to me, that after thirteen and a half years, a reply might be judicious. Or at least amusing.... The vendor is/was called "Cam Motion", from their "low lash mechanical roller" line. A modern internet search reveals this: https://cammotion.com/low-lash-solid-roller ... but that's for LS-series engines, and not for Mark-IV big blocks. I can't find anything about big-blocks on their current web site. Back in the day (winter of 2006-2007), the part number was L2402-2501-12+4. That's 239/249 deg @0.050”. Lift is 0.642”/0.646”, 112 LSA, installed +4 deg. Springs are Comp Cams PN # 933: 185@ 1.920" (valves closed) and 490-500 over the nose. Valve float was, if memory serves, nonexistent. The real rpm limit was piston speed, or in other words the structural integrity of the rods and rod-bolts.... 3/8" ARP bolts, but stock (resized) GM rods. In hindsight I ought to have redone the bottom end... maybe even gone with a stroker crank and 6.385" rods

Any updates on this? Those Jongbloeds are beautiful wheels, but what of cost, weight - and most importantly. fitment? A quick search reveals that just over the past year, we've had multiple threads on "Help, all of the Datsun wheel links are now 10+ years old, and there's no comprehensive spreadsheet anyway". Then there's the inevitable question of stock springs (cut or otherwise... assumption is that the spring perch is NOT relocated) vs. coilovers. The result is inevitably... inconclusive.

Thanks for the kind words, fellows! The Z completed its transcontinental journey on a trailer behind a Penske box-van, and is now "safe" in the general locale where it started its American life... California. Pro tip: towing is exhausting... tough on both tow-vehicle and driver. Our box-van was lucky to get 10 mpg, especially on hilly terrain (Missouri Ozarks, Arizona mountains). En route, the Z received smattering of compliments at gas stations, truck stops, hotel parking lots,... Here's a photo from the rear, in the car's current resting-place. License plate is gone, but the valence-panel still sports a parking sticker, from when the car was a daily driver... back in the 20th century. The only obvious give-away from this vantage point, regarding the car's transformation, is the exhaust system... cheap Summit Racing 3"-in/3"-out mufflers (unpleasantly loud, unfortunately) exiting in the center. The lower control-arms are stock, but powdercoated, courtesy of Mike Kelly... Mike mentioned that those were the LCAs that he used for the adjustable custom-welded kit, that his former company made. The more seasoned members here may recall that Mike had quite the venture with his custom parts, before the proliferation of more mass-market vendors. You may also remember how a bunch of us scrambled to find symmetric, high-tolerance factory suspension parts. The late John Coffey noted that control arms, McPherson struts and the like, were often mismatched or otherwise askew... poor quality control from the factory. So it was no trivial matter to source a matching pair.

Search for country of origin has for me also thus far been unsuccessful. I'm not utterly thrilled with the styling, but the wheels are remarkably light-weight. They have the correct bolt-pattern and offset. The closest competitor is Rota, but the comparable Rotas are 3-4 pounds heavier. The reason for my sudden ebullience is that I'd like to get my perma-project out of hibernation. The current tires on there are about 30 years old. Yes, 30! The current wheels are the 14x7 "Western Turbine"... heavy, and offering limited tire choice. 15x8 offers several tire options in 245/40-15: https://www.tirerack.com/tires/TireSearchResults.jsp?width=245%2F&ratio=40&diameter=15&startIndex=0&search=true&pagelen=20&pagenum=1&pagemark=1&RunFlat=All . Selection for 225/45 is even larger. Tire height is admittedly small, resulting in bad highway gear ratios (my transmission has no overdrive). But these are light and fairly inexpensive tires. And on 15x8 one can put some seriously meaty drag radials: https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Hoosier&tireModel=D.O.T.+Drag+Radial+2&sidewall=Painted White Letters&partnum=36R5DDR2&tab=Sizes . Note also that multiple people have been using 15x9 wheels, but these worry me for two reasons. First, fitment with a stock McPherson strut (no coilovers) is dicey. And second, the 225 and even 245 tires tend to get "stretched" on 9" wheels... not a setup that endears itself to me. Why 15" and not larger? Because I prefer lighter weight, and using stock brakes, I don't need anything larger. In sum: the 15" wheel-world isn't large for Zs. Options are limited, with the right bolt pattern and offset. That being so, these Vors wheels look at least superficially like a plausible solution. And yet, nobody seems to be using them. Something just doesn't jive.

Surprisingly, there don't appear to be any threads on these wheels. Manufacturer link: https://www.vorswheels.com/collections/tr3/products/tr3 . These are 15x8, 0 offset, and appear (by my reckoning) to fit a stock-suspension 280Z. Weight is evidently 13.5 lb (see https://www.vorswheels.com/pages/vors-wheel-weight), which looks to be decently light. Any opinions? I am surprised that I've never seen mention of these either on our Forum, or really in any Z-type of venue. Am I missing something obvious (failed design, improper fit, bad reputation....)?

I'd like to see more dedicated tube-chassis and other radical mods. Whatever happened to jos260z's project? Promising start, but then...? One approach is to build a proper round-tube chassis on a jig, with the desired front/rear subframes (or even better, mount the suspension directly to the chassis, eliding subframes and their associated weight). Hollow-out (technical term?) the Datsun body, and then wrap it onto the chassis. This has been done before, but recent examples are hard to come by. In the 90s there were some drag racers... the name Ron Jones comes to mind. Ron used to post heavily here, then drifted away. That car, if memory serves, used the stock 240Z front suspension pick-up points (including K-member) and a fiberglass front clip (hood, valence panel, fenders and "bumper"). In back was the obligatory tubbing, 4-link and Ford 9". The salient question is of course why one would do this, apart from the tackling of a challenge and the desire for originality. One answer is weight reduction and stiffness-increase for drag racing. Dedicated drag-cars tend to converge towards one common solution. The "bones" are all one triangulated tube frame, and the body amounts to the aforementioned wrapping, be it a Datsun or a Chevelle or a Fiat Topolino. I'd also like to see more cars with firewall setback. Put the largest and heaviest component of the car further aft... that is, the engine. Zs are famous for their enormous passenger-cabin. With the seatback securely pressed against the rear tire-well (stock or tubbed), there is plenty of room for setting the firewall aft. Why go to all the trouble of a tube chassis, if retaining the stock location of the principal components? Get creative!

Cute dog, and attractive young lady. That out of the way, the 2nd-generation Camaro front hubs/rotors also fit the 280Z spindles. I confirmed this in a "pick-a-part" junkyard in Ontario, California, some 20 years ago. But, whether with the Mustang or the Camaro, we have the issues noted in the video: rotor diameter is too large (needs to be machined-down), and brake caliper has to be replaced with a larger and beefier unit --> more weight. So... what if instead one prefers the comparatively svelte weight of the stock hub/rotor and stock brake calipers... but wishes to avail oneself of the much more common 5x114.3mm bolt pattern? Maybe redrill the front (and rear) hubs? This was tried a decade ago, here: . But I have not seen an update. The topic was casually revisited here: ... evidently with consensus to redrill nothing, but instead to spend $500 (then) on some aftermarket parts (link to parts is in above-linked thread). In the spirit of this thread - machining, instead of buying new stuff - it would be nice to see an update.... or am I being petulantly cheap?

Inspired by an ad for 15x9 wheels in our classified sections (sincere best-wishes to the seller, but those particular wheels are a bit too heavy for my tastes), a search on tirerack.com for 15" tires isn't as bleak as I'd worried. For example, these: https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=BFGoodrich&tireModel=g-Force+Rival+S+1.5&partnum=44VR5GFRS&vehicleSearch=false&fromCompare1=yes look like a good candidate. Not to dissuade Spdrcr or anyone else, but perhaps our misgivings about 15" tire selection are a bit excessive. That said, a bigger problem, I think, is finding reasonably light-and-wide wheels in the Datsun 114.3 mm bolt circle. The aftermarket offers fantastic support for the Miata and its 100mm bolt circle, but selection for 114.3 mm is poor. We had somewhere (maybe moved to the FAQ?) a handy recitation of proven diameter/width/offset combinations. Unfortunately the more dedicated enthusiasts seem to have all moved to coilovers, and with the resulting narrower spring-perches, that allows for more positive offset. Then there's the lament, that modern wheel choices skew towards FWD offsets anyway, especially for 4-lug bolt patterns. Perhaps I should reconsider the aforementioned gentleman's ad for those 15x9s? Sorry to have merely stirred the pot, instead of offering anything actionable. Oh, and Spdrcr - what was the weight on those wheels?

The coolant/oil mix suggests a blown head gasket (best case), cracked heads (can be repaired) or cracked block (a serious problem). it may make sense to pull the engine, and to completely disassemble it. The machine shop will then perform tests to ascertain if the blocks is cracked. Even if the block is fine, there may be merit to installing new bearings (crank and rod) and new rod bolts. The stroke of the crank can be easily confirmed by measuring the vertical displacement of a piston across one half-revolution. If it's a 383, that displacement (which is the stroke!) will be". If it's a "normal" 350 (nominally) engine, the stroke will be 3.48". The difference is sufficiently large, that it can shouldn't require precision gauges (like a dial indicator) to measure it.

Good points, Miles, but with all due respect, this is not a "newbie" question. I've owned and worked-on this car for 22 years. Wick's book (among others) has probably been sitting on my shelf for nearly 30 years. It's just that the car (not unlike the book) has sat more or less ignored for the majority of those years. Recently I moved, together with the car, to a locale where I have no garage, no parking space, no tools, no place to work on the car, and no time to work on it either. But the car was too precious, too storied and too unique to sell. And paradoxically, even Quixotically, I have no what that of which I had nearly zero, for so long: motivation. The point now is to start and maintain a discussion on modest, incremental steps to take a car from being a piece of furniture, to a piece of transportation.

To summarize, the approach appears to be: 1. Disconnect lines to the calipers (front) and slave cylinders (rear). Pass fluid through the whole system. Hopefully the master cylinder and vacuum booster are OK. If not, do something... 2. Replace the slave cylinders (rear) while being mindful of the parking-brake pawl. Check drum diameter, and if out of spec, replace. Replace shoes. 3. Replace the calipers (front), rotors and pads. Presumably also do the bearings... or split the hubs/rotors and just replace the rotors? 4. New fluid, and bleeding. 5. Careful adjustments in the rear, while the front is self-adjusting. I found one source for parts, here: https://zcardepot.com/collections/280z?constraint=rear-brakes . Any other recommendations?

Despite surfeit of information on upgrade options (in this sub-forum, or the FAQ), and some wise advice on leaving things alone for the more modest applications, there seems to be little information regarding refreshing of stock brakes. Here’s the problem: car has been in hibernation for years, maybe decades. Fluids are old. Pads are probably from the early 1990s. Brake lines were custom bent and installed around the year 2000 (long story), but the brake hardware (calipers, rotors, drums, cylinders,…) were left alone. Car was driven sporadically over the years, but hasn’t been a daily driver since 1999. Thus, the question: what ought to be refreshed, repacked, replumbed? Having sat for a while, the rear drums seized. A winch eventually un-froze them. The brake pedal is somewhat (not entirely) mushy, and hitting the brakes “hard” results in a jerking to the left followed by a four-wheel slide (tires are probably 30 years old). Do we have a step by step checklist, for what ought to be done? And to reiterate, this isn’t a plea for advice on upgrades. I just want this car to brake and handle like it would have done, 25+ years ago.

The ideal solution would be to find a local mentor... somebody who knows what to see/smell/touch/hear, whose intuition would quickly diagnose things. To be learning on one's own, could be intensely rewarding - but just as intensely frustrating. The learning-curve is easier to ascend, if there's a fellow-traveler. Unfortunately this is all the harder in the present 'rona cataclysm. I'm going to make a potentially specious, but not entirely phone speculation: the engine is just worn. Nothing is seriously damaged, but it is "out of tune". It likely needs some carb and distributor adjustments. Maybe some gaskets. Maybe there are carbon deposits, or worst case, bad valve seals. Can the car be driven as-is? Does it run sufficiently well, to brave California's highways? That may be the best (if risky) way to test it. Good luck, and as goes without saying, congratulations on your recovery!

A “big block” was a mid-1960s development of the Chevy engine family, with larger bore-spacing than the then already-venerable small block. The small blocks are, for those who remember, the stars of the original “Jags that run” Datsun V8 swap manual, that was popular in the 1990s. Big blocks were installed in passenger cars through at least the mid 1970s, but subsequently were limited to trucks. Mine originally came out of a 1978 Suburban. It had the hapless “peanut port” cylinder heads, meant for low-rpm yeoman duty. Big blocks continued to serve in GM trucks through the 1990s, but were eventually replaced by a new generation of engine – completely different from the LS-x series, and limited to trucks. The classical big block beloved by hot-rodders is the so-called Mark-IV, and the largest mainstream displacement is 454 cubic inches: 4.25” bore and 4.00” stroke. A 0.030” overbore, which is what I have, takes us to 461 cubic inches. Also common is 0.060” overbore, resulting in a 468. Beyond that, stroker cranks are available, but they get expensive, especially if the intent is to retain good rod-stroke ratio. 15-20 years ago, the aftermarket had a bevy of aluminum cylinder head designs. Mine are from Brodix… the so-called “Race Rite” oval-port heads. There were two port designs… rectangular and oval… the former for higher-rpm, higher displacement applications, and the latter for more street-oriented uses. As for the history of big blocks on HybridZ, well, as we transitioned from zcar.com, or whatever it was, there were two outstanding examples. One, a gentleman named Brad Barkley, campaigned a big block dragster. Another, Ron Jones, had an alternative design. Both kept the firewall in the stock location, but back-halved the rear, installing a solid axle. As the application was drag-racing, these design choices were eminently sensible. In at least one of those, the front-end was also redone, maybe with a lift-off hood/fender/bumper clip. But the basic McPherson strut front suspension geometry was retained. Ron had a stunningly powerful engine – something like a 540 cubic inch, maybe with nitrous. Brad ran, if memory serves, a 496 – a popular combination, which is a 454 with 0.060” overbore plus a 0.25” stroker crank. This is popular because such a crank fits in the stock block, with maybe just a tad of clearancing for the rod big-ends. With suitable pistons, the rod-stroke ratio remains OK. My idea was an all-around car, with low polar moment of inertia and nearly 50-50 weight distribution. I retained the stock Datsun rear-end, except for welding the differential spider gears (“Lincoln Locker”). Yup, stock half-shafts and everything else. In the front however there were some changes. I worked with a gifted under-the-radar custom builder named Nick Tierno, based out of Las Vegas. Nick raced motorcycles, and built some pretty impressive custom cars. In my case he did all of the frame-work and welding. Details are still online, hosted on Pete Paraska’s web site (I need to find the link). But in brief, the front clip was cut off, then the firewall and floorboards removed, and a cage built on a jig. The cage was welded into the car, then the floorboards cut, and the floorboards and firewall welded back in, 6.25” further aft than stock. Sheet metal was constructed to reconnect the front clip, and the whole thing was secured with diagonal members from the roll-cage to the front strut towers. This was all fantastic, but the aforementioned wiped cam rudely stopped the project. It languished for 4-5 years, in a dejected questioning of what went wrong. Rescue was in the form of another member here; active, then, but now long-gone. He went by “Denny411”… a semi-professional mechanic, a pillar of his local community in a smallish town hidden in Ohio’s countryside. AAA graciously towed the Datsun to his garage, and then for some months, we’d chisel-away at the mound of granite, hoping to reveal a sculpture. After a while the engine deigned to be restarted… but only for a while. What then? Well, I used a “Cloyes adjustable timing chain”. The classical small and big block Chevys had a basic timing chain between the cam gear and the crank gear. Timing was literally cast into the gears, with Woodruff keys and corresponding slots. In some cases there were alternative keyways for advancing or retarding the cam, typically by 4 degrees. Indeed, a common trick to render tamer an aggressive cam was to install it 4 degrees advanced. Cloyes came up with an improvement: the cam-gear was two pieces. One had sprockets, engaging the timing chain. The other bolted to the cam. Between them was a rosette of six 1/4-20 bolts, riding in slots. To advance or retard timing, loosen the six bolts, and rotate the crank, while the cam stays fixed. Then retighten. Well, in my case, the six bolts somehow worked loose, sending the cam into its most retarded position. Fortunately there was no piston to valve contact, but the heads of the bolts, having gotten threaded-out, worked themselves into the aluminum timing-cover, sending aluminum shavings all over the engine’s oil galley. The result was a pile of aluminum crud in the oil filter, and elsewhere. Thus, yet another rebuild. That was around 2009… for a car that was originally built in 2000. The story continues in the next segment….

And here it is! HybridZ is now 21, fully and properly having attained the age of consent! Does this not call for a round of drinks? In all seriousness, folks... thanks to everyone, frequent or irregular, veteran or neophyte, or anything in between. The journey/saga/whatever continues!

We hear incessantly about “the one that got away”. That’s either the crotchety old neighbor’s garage-queen, which we’ve been hankering to buy, but the neighbor would never acquiesce… until one day the old coot dies, and his widow donates the car to some obscure charity, or outright junks it. Or it’s our teenage love, that vehicle in which we blew our first head-gasket, in which we learned the joys of long-distance pushing (uphill, both ways, in the snow,…)… until college, a new job or a new spouse render iron demands: me, or it… and decades later, we regret… As of this writing, it’s mere days until this site turns 21. And it’s been even longer since the selfsame project has been… maturing. Remember the 20th century, folks? Remember the fervor over prep for the Y2K bug, how automotive ECUs were going to reverse the rotational direction of the crankshaft, and anti-lock brakes would switch to anti-release? Our attention was rapt, and the more irreverent or quirky types were praising carburetors, as the fix for a modernity gone bonkers with surfeit of tech. Well then…. my project began in 1998-1999. It never left. It never “got away”. It was hardly all my doing, but instead lurched ahead when I found a fellow who could help. It was his idea to do a firewall setback, noticing how S30 Zs have ample room, and ample distance between the firewall and the windshield lower lip. Then, after good progress, the engine wiped its camshaft. Back then we mostly used flat tappet cams. Remember those? Motor oils reputedly went weak. The car-magazines wrote copiously about the resulting wiped cam-lobes. Dejection followed, lassitude, a loss of interest and vim. Years! Subsequent efforts, some good, some purely a perfunctory self-salve, a show of sorts, too brief. Now I am moving back from Ohio to Los Angeles, reprising youth’s initial sally. The Datsun follows, on a tow-trailer. House, career, a former marriage… they all “got away”, but the car somehow endured. It’s only meet to mention its return. With luck, elaborations follow. Until then, a question: is anyone still left, who’s still running a big block?

5 months later, the latest buzz is "patent filings" (how does one patent a car design???) confirming the images from September 2020; see for example https://www.autoblog.com/2021/01/14/nissan-z-proto-400z-patent-renderings/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAAgQm6F5psC-cVjBNOmi7kDKu_U4c7lx-EWczI4ZidrrHD0CClr7rko-img5XUobX72U_EUpAw-XurkQsSFSNLgSubNYlAp10RBqGFfuhqwV0yRCMDZpn4UwlIH6TkS0cSjdW8Z6ymS-7PObyRS70Ol_Jt8eg1gJAkKwsHU7dxNF . The current situation with the 400Z reminds me of our mutterings from back around 2009, when the 350Z was coming out... lots of criticisms of the aesthetics, of bumpers and spoilers and headlights and grills, but what of the most crucial item of all: the weight? My dream would be a car with the size and weight of a BRZ, but the power of a current-generation V8 Camaro. How likely is that? Remember when the Z32 300ZX came out, and we were aghast at how heavy it was? Today that would be a comparative featherweight. It seems that only Mazda has made a serious achievement in keeping down the weight of its sports cars (ND Miata is only 100 pounds heavier than the early-90s NA). Could Nissan do something similar? One can dream...