Boy from Oz

I have purchased a special LHD fibreglass dash which I now wish to make into a RHD. I wonder if anyone has their LHD car stripped to the point where they could take a measurement for me. I wish to confirm the position of the steering column is a mirror image with LHD and RHD 240Z models. The first photo indicates the measurement I am after. It is 310mm on my RHD car. I would like to know if it is the same on a LHD model. I don't remember where I got the photo of the dash but apologies if it's from somebody on the forum

If I was you I would slow down a little at this point. I have a shed full of 'things' I bought on eBay which don't fit or I've decided not to use. It could be $350+ down the gurgler. I notice there is no mention of the baffle tray. I think I paid $250AUS for the whole lot from the US. If it were me I would first try to install the engine and see what actual interference issues I had. You may have to juggle between the position of the engine and sump you use. If you are in Sydney PM me. There is I guy here with a 5.0ltr Aussie V8 in a 280ZX.

??? I am toying with the idea of leveling-off the top of the door (window) frame to fit sliding windows and extending the roof line down to compensate. I thought that's what the statement above implied, but it does not appear to be the case judging by the photos. Can anyone explain what the statement meant?

It's a costly exercise to ship items down here and just to make sure this fits the local cars as well as the old GTO export model could you supply these dimensions (using the centerline of the mounting holes and with the shifter in the vertical position). Thanks

I am just about to have a fuel tank made and I would like some comment on whether foam acts as a sufficient anti-surge medium or if solid baffles are also needed. I am fitting the in-tank pump from the LS1/t56 donor into the new tank and I assume this will require some solid protection at least for the float arm. Can I just fill the rest of the space with petroleum resistant foam?

Alas... no wife here You should be able to afford a real GTO then! So do you think I'm pretty close on the backspacing? I might have this completely wrong but I think your backspacing is a bit off. For a start, is it possible to have 5.5" backspacing on a 6" rim? The front GTO panels, as I understand it, are wider than the OEM Datsun panels so you need less backspacing to compensate, otherwise what is the point of the spacers. I'm not really sure what backspacing you need but again suggest you work through the Dayton template - it's applicable to all wheels not just Daytons. The springs will be changed for the proper ride height. Make sure you address the bumpsteer issue if you alter the ride height. Also, have you checked eBay or other places for used Daytons or cheap Chinese made wire wheels. Wire wheels are just so in character with that car.

I know what you mean about the cost and I had to pay exorbitant freight cost on top of that - funny how freight cost go up when oil goes up but doesn't come down when the oil price comes down. You should see what this exercise is doing to my wife's bank account! I know larger external offset are not popular these days with cast wheels but have you considered composite wheels where the rim is attached with multiple bolts and setting them up with reversing the rim. http://www.simmonswheel.com.au/ I'm sure there would be something like this in the States. Also, way way back in my youth we often removed the wheel hub/centre from the rim and reversed the rim. It was easy to do with steel wheels but with alloy welding so good now is that an option for you?

ZZZeee - I'm not sure what outcome you are after which makes it very difficult to advise. If you are after an original look, the 1962 GTOs had 5.5" front and 6.5" rears but the '63-'64 models went up an inch to 6.5" and 7.5" respectively. They were probably the first to run external offset to clear the brakes or to keep the brakes cooler - compare the offset to other wire wheel cars of the era. Many of the the GTOs racing today are clearly going to much wider rims for races. http://www.supercars.net/cars/518.html (see gallery). I have just ordered a pair of 7" reverse-laced triple-cross wheels from Dayton Wire Wheels. I am hoping I can get away with a 6"-7" combination but I may have to go with a 7"-8". Either way I need the 7" so I have started there. I am widening the rear track to suit the narrow rear wheels so my dilemma is with how the narrow rims will look on the front. I should know in a few weeks. On their site http://www.daytonwirewheels.com/ they have a template which allows you to input caliper, spring and guard lip positions, etc, to get a cross-section perspective of your wheel/tyre and backspace options. http://www.daytonwirewheels.com/pdf/dwwmeasurementguide.pdf Here are a further couple of good sites to help you. http://www.rims-n-tires.com/rt_specs.jsp http://www.carbibles.com/tyre_bible.html Spacers are illegal down here so they are not an option for me.

It's explained already but to help here are a couple of images of my DBW pedal - yet to be installed. You can see the additional bracket which locates the pedal relative to the brake. If I follow Mike's instruction and simply unbolt the pedal assembly itself from that bracket (two bolts and slide upwards) I will then have the component I need. The 'stop' is contained in that component.

I think you are onto something there. On closer inspection there does not appear to be any way the fuel can get from the rails except via the injectors. Sorry for the content of my earlier post - I saw the two lines connected to the engine and clearly marked 'in' and 'out' lines at the fuel tank and jumped to a conclusion. I will post a question on this site http://www.ls1.com.au/ and let you know what responses I get. Update: Here is the question I posed; Hope someone can help me out here. I am fitting all the running gear from a VZ Ute to a sports car (240Z) and I initially thought the two fuel lines connected to the engine were 'fuel in' and 'fuel out', but now that doesn't seem right. What is the purpose of the line connected behind the throttle body and were does it connect to? Where does the 'fuel return' line fitted to the in-tank fuel pump come from? How does the emission canister come into all this? Thanks I took a bunch of photos when I was stripping the ZV but it just doesn't seem to make sense now. Here is a response I got; The line behind the TB heads to the Charcoal canister. The system is a returnless or dead head system. The pump heads to the filter and then to the rails but there is a T on the way that heads back to the return line on the swirl pot (which has the regulator inside the swirl pot attached to it) So basically the pressure in the line from the pump to the rails builds up and the return line (coming from the T piece) bleeds off the pressure back to the inside of the swirl pot when it exceeds 58psi. Keeping the lines at a regulated pressure. Think of the reg as not a regulator of what goes through it but more of a bleed valve set at a set pressure, maintaining the pressure on the other side of it Hope that makes sense. I hope this is of assistance to you because it has been a great help to me. I would have run into this problem when I reached that stage of my project.

Here are photos of my GTO donor - Aussie Ute, built Sept/04. You can see the in out lines in all photos.

There is some good GTO/t56 information here. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=133831&highlight=shifter

There is good information on the thread below for an S30 but I don't know how that relates to the 300ZX (Z31 or Z32?). I imported an LS2 sump (pan) but they are now in Oz on the LS2 engines. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=118395&highlight=ls1+pan Here are some photos which highlight the differences. My donor was a 2005 VZ Ute.

I have done very little on the car over our winter (yes, we do have one) and what I have been doing is mostly chassis and drivetrain work. However, I also did do some ‘bling’ activity on the speedo and tacho and thought others might be interested. I am keen to have it looking like a genuine 250GTO as far as that is possible and practical. Some time ago I picked up the Veglia gauges with Italian script - benzina, oilo, etc - but could not find a tacho (the GTOs have no speedo). I thought through a few options. While there are many alternative tachos available the speedo was more of a problem. I have an electronic speedo output from my t56 gearbox and in most cases it is difficult to find an electronic signal speedo that has an analogue odometer. To keep the GTO look I basically resigned myself to fitting an expensive mechanical output to the t56. To cut a very long story short I think I have come up with a viable solution. The Jaguar XJ6-12 models have a great 1960s style instrument setup. Independent 100mm (4â€) speedo and tacho and four 50mm (2â€) gauges for fuel, oil pressure, etc (check eBay for images). What makes the speedo and tacho so suitable is the ease with which you can change the face to any style you like, e.g. Veglia. Even better from my perspective is that the later XJ12s have a electronic speedo with the analogue odometer. The bezels are secured by a few tabs and are not rolled over the full diameter so they are easy to remove. The faces are secured with a couple of screws and are easily detachable. I simply scanned the original faces and then used MS Word to create alternative faces. I plan to have the new faces printed on photographic paper and attach them to new sheet metal dials which I will make by using the originals as templates. The originals have some curves which would make it difficult to attach the printed faces evenly. Nothing is fitted as yet as I am in discussions with John Washington about a RHD Simpson dash. Con Biro - great work. Your 2.5 years for a rebuild makes my 6 year schedule for a complete built look about right. Oh, nearly forgot. I found that the rear reflectors for Series I XJ6 Jag are a near perfect match for the GTO - that's where I picked up the link to the Jag instruments.

Some time ago I was talking about this to a couple of male friends and we decided to approach our wives about it. The results were interesting. Terry bragged that he had told his wife she needed to do all the dishes and housework. He said that it took a couple days but on the third day he came home to a clean house and the dishes were all washed and put away. Jimmie bragged he had given his wife orders that she was to do all the cleaning, dishes and the cooking. He told me that the first day he didn't see any results, but the next day it was better. By the third day, his house was clean, the dishes were done, and he had a huge dinner on the table. After hearing this I told my wife that her duties were to keep the house cleaned, dishes washed, laundry and ironing twice a week, lawns mowed, windows cleaned and hot meals on the table for every meal. The first day I didn't see anything, the second day I still didn't see anything, but by the third day most of the swelling had gone down and I could see a little out of my left eye, just enough to fix myself a bite to eat, load the dishwasher, and hang out a load of washing!

To 'do it right' I have to ensure there is adequate push-rod travel. Apart from the new booster being later design technology and in plentiful supply (spares in 20 years time) I'm also keen to show the approving engineer that the rest of the vehicle matches the LS1 - I'm after as little hassle as possible come certification time. I've had another little play around and it looks as though there is enough space to lower the booster 35mm and not foul on anything. Hopefully this will sort the problem out. Next year's Nationals - tell him he's dreamin'. Project's scheduled for a realistic completion date of 2012 - I simply don't get that many opportunities to work on it.

I’m trying to use as many components from my 2005 LS1/t56 donor car as I can and that includes the brake booster (master vac) and master cylinder. I gave away the idea of using the pedals as they were far too long. In sizing up the standard 240Z brake pedal (approx 350 mm long and 50mm from the pivot to the push rod clevis pin) it appears to operate on a 7:1 ratio, i.e. 70mm foot pad travel will move the push rod 10mm. The donor car pedal is 420mm long and 100mm to the push rod clevis pin, giving a ratio of 4.2:1, i.e. 70 mm pedal travel would move the push rod 17mm. This suggests I will require more push rod travel with the donor car booster and master cylinder fitted. To compensate for this I am thinking of moving the push rod clevis about 35mm further down the 240Z pedal shaft towards the foot pad, giving me approximately the same movement ratio at the donor car. This would mean the push rod would be angled at around 15 degrees to the booster. Questions Would the angled push rod create significant functionality and/or wear problems, and would fitting a 15 degree wedge between the firewall and the booster, to align the mechanism by tilting the booster/MC, create functionality issues? Photo shows the abandoned donor pedal lying on top of the 240Z assembly. Any comments appreciated. P.S. I will have the 4 spot Wilwoods all-round.

Michael - You need to bear in mind your exhaust configuration and any ground clearance issues that will arise if you lower the vehicle. Remember Zerrari has a different fuel tank with the exhaust tucked up on either side. Unless you are going that route I would suggest you finish the car and see how it looks settled with all the weight in it, then calculate how much clearance you have and how much you can lower it. I agree with Zerrari that 15" rims and high aspect ratio tyres can be part of the final equation. Check the 'Exhaust' forum for a litany of exhaust clearance problems.

mrp69 - I'm in the process of fitting a Holden 3.07 final drive. You might be interested. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=138675 There is a lot of information on this site so take your time to research. Look under 'Driveline' where this thread may have been better located.

D-Star[280zx] - Just remember this site is a predominantly North American site and we in Oz have some colloquial terms for specific items (bonnet/hood, sills/rockers, etc.) which may not be understood by most members here. When you say 'bar' I am assuming you are meaning 'bumper' and not sway bar or anti-roll bar and that's why it's on this forum. I will just add that you have come to the right place, this is the best Zee (not Zed) site, bar none!

I'd be surprised if it isn't. I've had a bit of a surf around and the only issue of any certainty is that the latest diffs for Commodores, G8s and the yet to be released are made by ZF in a new $30m plant in our 'rust belt'. http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/archive/index.php/t-34318.html The extra good news is they are stated as being aluminium casing. There are confusing comments about earlier diffs being made by Borg Warner and Dana. However, my diff is tagged ZFC, whether that means ZF casing I do not know. It might be a situation where GM own the design and just have different suppliers from time to time. I'm guessing mind you, but if they are not all beam axles then you might find the diff in any larger IRS GM vehicle sold in the last 10 years. As stated, I'm just guessing.

That's disappointing. I thought these might have been made by Borg Warner or Dana/Spicer for a global market. sweetride2go - I believe the rubber universals were introduced around 2005 to help smooth out the power transfer. The donor Ute has 250 kW (335 hp) and weight of about 1600 kg (3520 lbs) so there should be no trouble with an 1100 kg S30. Oh, nearly forgot, the latest G8 aluminium casing diffs have an 8.3" crownwheel - I assume the earlier ones are the same. http://www.users.on.net/~nweber/commodore/ve/ve-specs.html