BRAAP

Could be a bad connection somewhere whether it be a positive lead or ground. Don’t rule out a malfunctioning alternator. Brake lights and radio, (depending on the radio and amplifier/s) might not be enough of a current draw to noticeably dim the instrument lights if the alternator isn’t functioning. With the engine running, voltage at the battery should be 13.7-14.2 or there-abouts. Engine off, of course voltage will be around 12-13 volts depending on if the battery just came off charging etc. A quick test, (no volt meter to verify actual voltages), would be with the engine running, turn on the parking lights, make note of the gauge brightness, then turn on the head lights with the high beams and note how much the gauges dim, (for the 240-Z with the stock alternator and wiring, it is best to do this test with the engine revved above 1500 RPM.) In short, first make sure the alternator is indeed functioning as it should, 13.7-14.2 volts at the battery with the engine running. Hope that helps…

Zehto, First off, welcome to HybridZ. That frame rail is quite bad. As mentioned above, definitely look over the rest of car first as this picture could be an indication of much more extensive corrosion thereby making the car essentially worthless other than as parts car, i.e. worth only $200, not $2000. You know, that is the area/frame rail directly under the battery which could’ve caused that corrosion and rest of the car “could” be ok. Again, you will want to look over the entire car paying close attention to the common problematic Z car corrosion areas. Those areas have been spelled out here on HybridZ in the past and can be found with some searching. Secondly; Please click and read through the "Click me..." link below as it contains some valuable information regarding how to make your posts here on HybridZ more effective. In particular, #3. Click me... Thank you and good luck finding a worthy Z. Paul Ruschman HybridZ Staff

There are other threads on this forum regarding the exhaust liners and Turbo charged engines. I’ve seen a few liners “burn out" on N/A engines, yet there are others on this forum that are running Turbochargers on their round exhaust ports, liners still in-tact. In short, I prefer not to use the liners on Turbocharged L-6, on the flip side, it has been done and done successfully by members here. Keep searching. Search for Turbocharged N-47, exhaust liners, turbo, etc, and you'll find those threads.

How about a femur? Sorry I don't have that post or recall it, but I'll throw in my $.02 if it helps... I’m assuming you are installing an L28ET in your 240-Z. In that case, I “think” you just wire it as it was originally wired in the 240-Z, triggered off the positive side of the coil. Some guys have gutted their 240 tachs and installed ’75-'77 280Z tach guts in their 240 housing. These 280 Tachs trigger off the negative side of the coil. Is that the info you are looking for?

Battery???! Just to live in a place where you can purchase an RB26DETT powered AWD world renowned super car that runs and drives and in decent overall condition for a mere $4500?!?!?! Way cool…

2 words that throw a big monkey wrench into this... Track width! Flares are one option. Narrowing the cross-member and rack to keep the wheels under the stock fenders is also an option, though the A-arm pickup points would end up at least partially, if not fully through the fenders into the engine bay and might encroach on engine ancillaries, intake/exhaust, etc. If the narrowed cross member option is used, the geometry should be plotted to get an idea of what ill-effects will be gained by narrowing the track of that suspension to that degree, (roll center and instant centers changes, etc). Double A-arms on the front of the S-30 Z with performance being the primary design goal has been looked into. One of the big hurdles on the S-30 is its quite narrow track, space available for the engine, its ancillaries and intake/exhaust, (depending on which power plant is to be utilized), then to get control arms with any sort of realistic length in the leftover space and a steering rack with its inner tie rods narrow enough for proper geometry, i.e. keep bump steer in check. This thread touches on A-arms in an S-30.. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=126992

Update… I robbed the two front marker light bulb sockets out my ’96 Infiniti Q-45 parts car and with some minor adjustments to the new JDM marker lenses, and using my Z-32 factory service manual for the electrical connector pin-out guide, I carefully removed the pins from the Q-45 plug and arranged them as needed for the Z-32 harness, (wire colors even match the OE Z-32 after altering the connector pin-out), now everything works fine. WOO HOO!!!!

***edit*** Deleted extraneous non-pertinent info.

I need to post a correction to my rant regarding the Paint Jail, more to the point, eat some of my words as I eluded to the Paint Jail employees hastily wiring the lights. In diagnosing the electrical lighting issues, the paint jail actually tried to get it to work right, and as body/paint guys, their intentions and efforts were for the greater good and it is quite apparent they were not trying to cut corners. As for the crease? If it starts to crack out, I’ll have them fix it. Of course it will be on my dime as the crease is not the fault of the paint jail. I’ll talk to the vendor of the fascia first as the “shave” job I think is performed at Nissan Motorsports, maybe the vendor I bought it from, not sure which. Also, in direct sunlight, the color mismatch is not as pronounced. At this point, it seems to be most noticeable in gray/blue overcast conditions, which the previous pictures show as quite drastic. Now the long versions of the electrical issue. The US Z-32 has in its front marker light housing, a dual element bulb. One element is the marker/clearance lamp, the other element is the turn signal. This new fascia is an OE JDM Z-32 front fascia, as such, in Japan the Z-32 did not incorporate both turn signal and clearance lamp in the same housing, i.e. there was another lamp on the fender just behind the front wheel. Any how, this JDM fascia came with the JDM clearance lights and the vendor supplied a bulb socket that physically fits the lens, but electrically does not work on the Z-32. The bulb socket supplied by the vendor appears to be a domestic dual element bulb, (identical to the bulbs in my wife’s ’01 Chevrolet Suburban). Paint jail spliced this socket into the factory harness and they had it wired up as correct as it could be wired, and by rights it “should” work as the vendor supplied this socket, but it doesn’t. The Nissan Z-32 harness has three wires, one HOT turn signal, one HOT marker and a shared ground. The GM socket with its funky spade/blade type bulb won’t allow a shared ground in the same way the Z-32 requires so when wired up as a shared ground, (not really a shared ground due the design of the socket which does not allow a shared ground), you can have either marker lights “or” turn signal, not both at the same time and apparently there is some back feed into the other circuit when either is on. If the marker lights are “on” and you hit the turn indicator, the turn signal will not flash, but with lights off, the turn signal will function fine. So I grabbed an OE US Z-32 socket I had laying around, plugged it in to the cars connector and it functioned perfectly normal just as it should and always has. Now I have to modify either the new marker light housing or my original sockets so they will physically fit the new housing. Whew…

A worthy Honda for sure...

Hugh, Yeah, the font plate thing crossed my mind when I placed the order for that fascia, though when I bought this car it had no plate and really like the clean look without the front plate. There is a bracket for a front plate in the grille area of this new fascia. Next time you come out, remind me to tell you about the time I was pulled over for speeding and the officer claimed he didn’t get me because his laser didn’t “see” my front plate. (though I would think those huge sugar scope headlight buckets would give the S-30 a big laser return signature). I can not confirm nor deny that my front license plate was attached to a piano hinge in so it would swing up out of sight at speed in an effort to reduce my laser signature, uhhm, I mean allow more airflow to the radiator for better cooling…

Finally got the car back from paint jail last night. I did get the ’99 JDM Z-32 fascia and really like the style, though this install has some issues. Paint jail obviously struggled in getting the color to match as can been seen in the pics. Also, when I picked up the car, they were working on the wiring for the markerg lights in the fascia. This fascia uses a different marker light and they were struggling with the lights. They told me that the high beams don’t work now, I told them just leave it and that I’ll take care of wiring the lights myself, (I am a bit hesitant to trust body/paint guys with automotive electrical for this exact reason ). In their wiring haste wanting to have the car ready for me to pick up, I actually only have high beams when the lights are on. No low beams no matter what position the high beam selector is in, no fog lights, and no marker lights or dash lights. Probably crossed the marker light wires and popped the marker light fuse, no idea how that could’ve affected the high/low beams though? Really no reason off the top of my head how or why the high/low beams should’ve been affected at all during the front fascia swap. At any rate, I’ll be looking into the wiring issue today. One more issue is this is the “shaved” version, (normally comes with the license plate mount molded in/on or you can order the “shaved” version with that mount shaved off and holes filled). There is a very distinct crease where the “shave and fill” was performed, green arrow. It will be going back to paint jail at some point…

I could be wrong here, but I think that Bonneville car is a Datsun B-210, not a 280-ZX The quarter-light and tail are a perfect match to theses pics of the B-210…

Incredible! VERY impressive Brian. Regards, Paul

Capt, Ok, I’ll move it for you. Did I hear that right? Did you say something about “great service” and “Les Schwab” in the same sentence? Ok, please don’t answer that… Glad to hear that you “enjoyed” your visit to Lesters.

Papasmurf, PLEASE oh please read the links below before you commit to this combination you proposed. Your combination of a flat top piston L-28 and N-42/N-47 head for a street pump gas L-28 is a very poor combination. Read on… 1) For a reman L-28, you will see absolutely NO difference in performance between a stock N-42 and stock N-47 head. Depending on what your exhaust manifold/header is, (in this instance anyhow), would be the deciding factor as to which head to choose, i.e. square or round exhaust port. At that, both are a very poor choice for that short block in a stock to mild L-28 application! 2) OE flat tops in an L-28 with an N-42/N-47 head, stock application, even with premium pump gas is far from ideal. That combination is notorious for being detonation sensitive, even with the highest quality premium pump gas available, this is a bad combination. You would be MUCH better off with either a P-79 or P-90 head on that short block. With the N-42/N-47, your compression ratio will be TOO high for an "open chamber" L-series on Pump gas. To get that combination to run “safely” and produce ANY power, you will have to retard the ignition timing to the point the engine is VERY inefficient, and be VERY soft power wise. The P-79 or P-90 with those pistons, will run circles around the N-42/N-47 head on that same short block with pump gas hands down! Trust me on this one. In short, your shooting yourself in the foot trying to put an N-42/N-47 head on a Reman flat top piston L-28 for street duty with pump gas, PERIOD! This topic has been covered ad-nauseum here on HybridZ. Here are those links… L-series heads, the good, the bad, the ugly! A very in-depth review… http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=104420 L-series cylinder heads… http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=105653 Bonus thread.. Valve unshrouding… http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=110269 Hope that helps, Paul

***edit*** OOPS! I need to clarify my blanket statement which was to be "as interpreted by EGT’s alone". ***edit, part deux*** You know what? This topic is extremely deep. WAY too deep for blanket statements.

Aux, What the hell is wrong with you? Every time I open up “Posts - Last 24 hours” and see some ludicrous title, it always has your username attached to it and for some strange reason, I’m drawn to open those threads, (typically giggling before the page even opens knowing full well your sense of humor), and as always, your subject line defines the content very well! Whatever you do, don’t change, or alter your current daily meds. Thanks for the laughs. Keep em coming…

GORGEOUS! Nice work Yasin. Looking forward to hearing how it performs once it is broke in.. Very nice, Take care, Paul

Very nice Tim. Clean, tight, more subtle than the OE 280 bumpers for sure. Which Fiart is that from, X19?

First, you need to get your idle timing back down to 15-20 degrees BTDC, verify that timing figure with a timing light and also verify that your timing mark on the damper hasn’t slipped, (i.e. inertia ring that has slipped due to an old wore out damper, that is if your timing mark is on the inertia ring that is), and once your ignition timing at idle is where it should be, then recheck your idle vacuum. If it still 9”-10” inches, (not lbs), then read on… Something else that caught my eye was the amount of vacuum you lost at idle. I don’t recall off the top of my head what the LSA of OE L-28ET is supposed to be, (112 rings a bell, but I’m not 100% sure. LSA is Lobe Seperation Angle, which is the angle between the intake and exhaust centerlines, as ground into the cam). Being as your new cam is a more radical profile in duration and lift, yes a drop in idle vacuum should happen, but the amount of vacuum you lost at idle seems a bit much, though it does coincide with the exaggerated lag you are experiencing, i.e lots of valve overlap equates to over scavenging/reversion, (depending on exhaust back pressure etc), resulting in loss in low RPM off boost performance, which also means less exhaust flow to spool the turbo. Do you have the means to verify cams specs and Lobe separation angle, i.e. do you have a degree wheel and a dial indicator set up to measure valve movement? It would be nice to verify the 112 LSA. Your idle vacuum figure is more in line with your duration and lift specs for a cam ground on 109 LSA. Again, get your ignition timing at idle in check and make “absolutely” sure that your timing mark hasn’t slipped, if the mark is on the inertia ring of the damper. Then report back…

I saw that to. Being as you are running Mega squirt, are you also allowing MS to control your ignition timing or are you still using the mechanical flyweights and vacuum advance canister? Maximum of 20 degrees advance at idle, 15 is a good compromise.

Hmm. Good question. Though I have no actual experience to back up my opinion, my guess would be the thicker spacer would offer the least compromise for the following reasons. 1) Less heat transfer to the carbs via conduction from the intake manifolds. As mentioned above, this does not help in heat “radiation” from the exhaust manifold though. 2) That much more distance for the air fuel to be atomized, though carbs by nature have extremely good fuel atomization characterizes, this benefit would possibly more for consistent distribution of the fuel to the cylinders, i.e. less separation during WOT conditions. 3) One possible down side would be the larger “plenum” area that the thicker spacers present. This would result in the fuel falling out of suspension during light load condition such as cruising down the freeway because of the slow velocities in that “wet” plenum space. If I am barking up the wrong tree here, please don’t hesitate to correct my theories. Paul

OMG… now that there is funny, I don’t care who you are..

Rick, Very cool. Looking forward to reading your detailed write-up in the MS forum. Nice work. Paul