toki

I have put unnecessary amount of torque on this: Soaked it in penetrating oil. I am on it with a 10" adjustable wrench...I have decent leverage but it's just not budging. Here is the new piece from courtesy. Shown is the drivers side, the other picture of the one of the car is the passenger side. The weld on this one are dirty, but they are both the same in the fact they have 2 tacs securing the slotted nut. Unless someone has a better idea I am going to just pull the rack out and jig it up somewhere and get enough leverage to either rip the shaft out the side of the housing or break that nut loose.

Is this a joke?

I will get pictures tonight when I go home. I have been slacking and haven't been back out to the car since I made this thread. It makes since the nut with the 4 flat spots is the lock nut to me, I think it just need to lock the rack to either side to retract the gear/shaft/whatever when I go to break it so it doesn't flex like it was starting to last time.

The new tie rod from courtesy has the same little thin nut with the same slits welded on as well.

You see that the inner nut with the slits is in fact welded on? I out a flat head in there and gave it some blows with a 4lb sledge, the steering gear shaft (I don't know if that is the right term) was just flexing and likely absorbing the force.

If this helps refresh your memory?

No one else has ever removed in the inner tie and can tell me what actually needs to be done?

Alright, I searched my little heart out and couldn't find a good explanation for my simple mind. I am working with a 72, bought new complete tie rod assemblies from Courtesy Nissan...but I don't understand how you are supposed to remove the inner tie rod assembly from the steering rack. I see the large thin nut with 4 flat faces on it between the inner assembly and the steering rack, I gave that a solid pull and nothing...I didn't want to press my luck and go at if I was wrong. Also I see the inner tie rod has that piece welded on with 4 pits, I put a flat head in there and gave it a few good pounds with a 4lb sledge and about nothing. So was I at least close? P.S. carfiche sucks, been checking it as often as I can since 5pm and I still haven't seen the 280z manual available once.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/730720/harry_potter_and_the_stolen_book/ I guess this kid got his book straight up ganked at the release last night. Kind of funny if you ask me, haha.

I saw the title of this thread and came to say exactly what the study shows: AFX sucks, waste of money.

Thanks for all the input and stories guys. Rather than go through having the old stub axles prepped and redrilled, I'm just going to go with the MM axles.

I keep reading old threads with people talking about stub axle failure being fairly common under road racing scenarios. My question is, is the problem really that serious, something you should count on happening eventually if you run a big tire with a solid suspension setup? I couldn't see the car ever being raced with anything LESS than a sticky 275 street tire (rt615 or something of the sort) out back and will see time with slicks on it. Just trying to figure out if a safety issue is really at hand, and I should just suck it up and get the billet ones from MM.

From what I understand the early 260z were the same as all 240z, and the laters the same as all 280z. But, that being said. These cars are 30+ years old, who knows what they have been through and who has needed to replace what suspension pieces.

Thanks for the prompt response.

I need their phone number so I can A) Call them, and Ship them their cores (UPS wont ship internationally without a phone number.) Would be even more sweet if they could respond to any of my emails or follow up on the note left with my $750 payment to them to get in contact with me.

What does a CARB legal turbo kit have to do with anything? You realize a JDM sr20 is just as illegal, right? But California sucks for emissions, period. CARB legality is literally the last thing that should be comming in to this conversation. It's an arguement because people like you keep trying to pull negative points against the KA like "it wasn't a factory turbo motor so there are inherantly less turbo parts available" when that is not true in any way. Tell me one thing turbo related available for an SR not available for a KA. Just one.

Less turbo parts available? Sorry, but no. More money for a manifold? That just makes no sense at all. A top dollar equal length mani for a KA costs the same as an SR. A cheap log manifold will cost the same, a cheap ebay special china chrome plated manifold will cost the same. There is absolutely no shortage of any 'turbo parts' for the KA, and to say so is ignorant of the truth. P.S. you don't have to get anything from Japan when something on your SR breaks since the NA version came in about eleventymillion sentras.

well the situation is mildly complicated, but the long and short of it is I have 3 of the thicker 280z rear strut housing assemblies, and one 240z....and the GC coilover kit for the 240z size. So , I am going to chop off the thicker 280z housings, see what the ID is at the bottom of the housing (it should be between 1.9 and 2.0", bore that bitch out until the 2"OD 240z sized tube will slide in to place and reweld it just like it came from the factory...so I'll have a one piece strut housing shortened to match the struts. Should be an interesting learning experience if nothing else....

So instead of sectioning the struts housings, is there a reason not to replace the entire strut housing portion of the assembly? On my 240z suspension front and rear it measures out to 2.00" OD, wall thickness, atleast on the front, was measured at .100", which explained why both the BZ3015 and BZ3099 measured to have OD of 1.70" and have some (.100") of wiggle room. Why not replace the entire length with 2.00" OD .120" wall (1.76" ID) tube? I have access to a lathe so getting the threads for the gland nut turned it not an issue. Also I can't image taking away some of the play the stuts currently have in the housings is a bad idea. Any reason NOT to do that?

thanks for the response. I actually had a buddy who has some experience with 1js look at the cross member, also confirmed I would definitely need a midsump.

Sorry guys, I have searched but keep comming up with old threads with dead links and no helpful pics or info I can find. I am wondering if a front sump 1jz will have interference issues with the cross member and I need to get one of the mid sump motors, or if the front sump will be fine? Thanks, Ryan

hehe yeah, unfortunately all of my tig instruction so far has been on an industrial tig machine at my school's machine shop...when I have access to that to learn on I wouldn't see much point in buying that thing if I won't actually be able to use it to make stuff, less emergency repairs.

roger that....back to the original plan of picking up a decent mig

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=91811 link says it all. no foot pedal, low power, and cheap. I don't think I would be using it for anything over a .120" wall thickness, all steel. I am wondering, from those of you who are educated on what makes a welder worth a damn, if it will be sufficiant for things like welding joints on suspension components. Again it's not like I need to get through some 3/8" plate, just need a weld that will hold. I am thinking things like welding fitted threaded tube ends in when making control arms, etc. Also intercooler and exhaust piping, but I can't see that being a problem.

bi turbo systems (2 turbos, one small, on larger, used exclusively at different rpms) have been implimented by uhhh audi? or vw? I forget for a few years now.... compounds turbocharging works under the same theory as twin charger, just with two turbochargers....tractors have been using it for years with great success, again, matching a little and a big turbo together.