74_5.0L_Z

Which brakeline? What are you using for new brakes? If its an aftermarket setup (Wilwood, Outlaw, etc...) then you probably need to adapt to SAE flared fittings, and need to replace the brakelines anyway. Some of the brake lines are easier than others to remove and replace with the drive train installed than others. The ones going to the wheels are generally not that difficult, with the possible exception of the passenger side front. If it were me, I would remove the broken line back to the nearest flared fitting (be careful not to distort it). Then measure the length of the brake line, and get one of the nearest length from the autoparts store. The lines from the auto parts store are straight lengths with fittings already installed. Then, using the line that you removed from the car as a template, bend the new line to match. Finally, install the new line in place of the removed one. For the bending, you can use a brake tubing bender (available from the autoparts store for about $9.95), or you can just bent it by hand (be careful not to kink it and use really generous bend radii). I have completely replaced the lines in my car twice without any problems using a combination of bending tool and my hands.

I run mine in Emod, and I have deleted the brake booster. I prefer the brakes without the booster, but I've replaced all the brakes with aftermarket pieces. Here is a list of what I am running: Stock 260Z master cylinder Front 11.5 x 0.81" vented rotors (coleman machine) Outlaw 2800 series 4 piston calipers (1.75" pistons) Rear 10.5" x 0.81" rotors (1985 maxima front discs that have been slightly modified Outlaw 2800 series 4 piston calipers (1.375" pistons) Wilwood propotioning valve in line to rear brakes adjusted to nearly full decrease Hawk HP-Plus pads on all four corners. I love my brakes. My car stops very well. When I take my car to the drag strip, I drive it hard through the traps (and then some) at Orlando Speed World and easily slow it down from 115mph to make the first turn out for the return road. The brakes have great modulation and really don't require too much effort. To delete the brake booster I made a 1/4" aluminum plate that has the bolt patterns for both the booster to master cylinder and booster to firewall concentric with each other. I also dismantled the booster to acquire the push rod that goes from the pedal to the booster, and used it (with slight modification) as the push rod for the master cylinder. As far as using a larger master cylinder, don't bother. Increasing the bore of the master cylinder increases pedal efforts, and the stock 260Z master cylinder provides plenty of capacity. I'm including pictures: one that shows the adapter plate installed less master cylinder, and the other with the MC installed. Oh, and please don't compare us to Zcar.com

Just for you Terry

I believe that he wants a 15" wheel so that he can run a tire with some sidewall. Tires with a taller sidewall are better for drag racing. The BFG DR are available as 235/60/15 and 275/50/15. I do agree that it is easier to get the clearance with a larger diameter wheel. My 16" wheels/tires have slightly more clearance than my 15".

My 1974 260Z with a full interior, 16 gallons of fuel, full interior and me (190 lbs) weighed 2800 lb in street trim. Since then I have wrecked the car, and rebuilt it with a tubular front end, subframe, and half roll cage. The new version has no undercoating or sound deadening material, no windshield wipers, no HVAC, no emergency brake, and no bumpers. The car does still have stock seats, all of the glass, the full dash and interior trim panels. The motor is a 1989 5.0L with Edelbrock aluminum heads, Cobra Intake, 24# injectors, 73mm MAF, 65mm TB and Crower cam. The transmission is a T5. I put the car on wheel scales recently and here are the results with 16 gallons of fuel and me (190LBs) in the car: LF = 648 Lb RF = 607 Lb LR = 751 Lb RR = 710 Lb. Total = 2716 Lb Here are my percentages: (LF + RF)/ Total = (648 + 607)/2716 X 100%= 46.2 percent on the front 53.8 % on the rear. (LF + RF)/ Total = (648 + 751)/2716 X 100% = 51.5 % on left and 48.5% on right. my diagonals are equal ie.. (LF + RR) = (RF + LR) -> (648 + 710) = (607 +751) = 1358. The 260 is a slightly heavier car than the 240, and I have not done all that is possible to lighten the car. The doors could be gutted (they weigh 67 lbs each in full trim. The gutted doors would weigh less than 10 lbs. each. The rear glass could be replaced with lexan, etc....

I have two sets of wheels for my car. Set 1: 15 x 8 with a 5 inch backspace have 245/50/15 Dunlop SP8000 tires. The tire clears my rear coilovers by <1/4" and is even with the fender lip. Set 2: 16 x 8 with 5 in backspace has 245/45/16 Hoosier A3S04. Again my tire clears the coilovers by 1/4" and is even with the stock fender lip. My coil-overs are Ground Control units with 250#/in 10 inch x 2.50 springs. It would be possible to run more backspace and a wider tire if you ran a shorter spring (8"). The shorter springs will let you raise the perch location above the tire and get more clearance. The additional clearance could let you squeeze a 15 x 9 with a 5.75" backspace and a 275 if you also roll the rear fender lip. That is the only way you will get the 275/50/15's under the stock fender. Unfortunately, you would have to run a stiffer spring (300#/in +) to keep from stacking the short springs, and stiff springs are not ideal for drag racing.

This is the bender that I am getting ready to buy: http://www.jd2.com/M3B_Features.htm I've heard really good things about it.

My subframe ties in right where the original sway bay attached. Fortunately, I have an after market rear mount style sway bar (which I Don't use). My experience is that these cars handle better without a rear sway bay. They get out of the corner better if you tune rear roll stiffness with springs.

Before you switch to toe-out, try running zero toe. I run 4.5 degrees caster, -2.5 degrees of camber, and zero toe up front. In the rear, I run -1.5 degrees of camber and zero toe. I also have spherical bearings in place of all the stock bushings. Zero toe will also give you the least rolling resistance. Toe-in or Toe-out cause the tires to wear because they are trying to go in different directions. My car is very stable on the highway with my street tires on the car, and turns very crisply at the autocross with my R tires.

My wife, daughter, and I have evacuated to Tallahassee. We left town with our most valuable possessions: family pictures, our pets, and my Z. We left town thursday at 1:00 PM and arrived in Tallahasee at 11:30 PM. I love to drive my Z, but 10.5 hours of gridlock is pushing it. I have the car stored in a garage up here to keep it out of the weather. After the storm, we'll drive home. Hopefully, we'll still have a home to drive home to. At least my family and the Z are safe.

For an NHRA street class, the limited slip R200 differential that came in the 87-89 300ZX Turbo should be sufficient. ScottyGNZ of this forum used to run a 240Z with a buick grand national motor in it at the drag strip alot. He started out using the R200 rear end, and it worked fine until he got the car into the low 11's. The R200 is a straight bolt-in and your 280Z may already have one (probably an open version though). If you are not going to drive it much on the street, you can weld the spider gears. Check out RossC and Modern-Motorsports LLC. He has lots of great parts for putting the stronger CV axles into the older cars. Several members here are now experimenting with putting the R230 differential into their cars. I do know that these are stronger, easier to find with factory limited slip, and more difficult to install. About the tires, with small diameter coilover rear springs, and the right offset wheels you can fit 9' tires under the stock wheel wells. But I wouldn't let that bother you. A couple of members here put their car into the low 9's with 9" slicks (a small block with nitrous helped a little too). Look for posts by ScottyGNZ and Japtin. They will probably be the most useful for drag racing questions.

The way you guys are doing it sure makes it easier to attach the fenders. But I managed. The back half of the car is Monte Carlo Blue Pearl. The rest of the car: well...... [/img]

Your front end looks good. I was faced with a similar dilemma after I wrecked mine. I considered trying to graft a new front end on the car, but I ended up taking a slightly different path.

For several years I ran coil-overs without sectioning the strut housings. The car was lowered approximately 2", and I had very little shock travel left in the front shocks. I killed two sets of front shocks by bottoming them out. I just recently sectioned my front struts and installed the Koni 8610 adjustable dampers per johnc's write-up in the sticky section of this forum heading. I deviated from johnc's instructions by removing the material from the top half of the tube (removed 2.125 " from just below threaded end). Removing the section from the top makes the weld interior more accessable for clean-up. I wouldn't be afraid to remove the section from the top half as long as the weld is done properly (TIG).

Zero, I received the tubing for BrandenZ's half-cage last week, and have bent his main hoop and made the plates for the top of the struts. This coming week I'll borrow a friend's 240Z and do the final tube fitting before I take it to the welder. I'll probably be working on this cage for another 2 or 3 weeks, then I'd be happy to build others. If all you're interested in is the main hoop, then let me know and we can work up a deal. Dan

Really like the cage. My main hoop attaches to the floor with a similar but smaller box where the seat belts mount. I assume the you car is going to be an automatic, because it looks like the tube going to the front strut tower would interfere with the clutch master cylinder. Also, I agree with johnc about the bar that goes across between the main hoop legs. You could really strengthen that by adding bars that go from the center (top of drive shaft tunnel) to the plates on the rear strut towers. As stated by others, I am not criticizing. I like the fact that every cage that I've seen posted by this group is unique. Please post more pictures as your progress continues.

I am using most of the factory datsun wiring, although I have simplified it where ever I could. I am also using the Ford engine harness and computer. I got rid of the Ford alternator and went to a Powermaster 1- wire alternator (no external regulator). There is very little overlap of the Ford and Datsun wiring. The computer really only needs power, ground, and wiring from the fuel pump relay to the fuel pump. I also added a relay in the ignition circuit to protect the Datsun switch as I believe the TFI ignition draws more current than the stock Datsun set-up. From my 260Z service manual, the Black/Blue wire BL goes from the ignition switch to the C-5 connector (green) to middle terminal of the ballast resistor for the ignition coil. This wire is hot only when the key is in the start position. The Black/White BW wire from the ignition switch is powered while the switch is in the on position, and while in the start position. This wire branches several times and powers instruments, and the interlock relay as well as other things. This wire I cut from the connector at the inter-lock relay and redirected to power the TFI ignition (pin 30 of the ford computer). The Black/Yellow (BY) wire goes from the ignition switch to the C-5 connector to the interlock relay and to the emergency switch. I assume that you will delete both the interlock relay and emergency switch. I would take the black /yellow wire or the Black/Blue wire and redirect it to the tang on the starter solenoid. All of the above is from looking at my Datsun 260 factory service manual, and from Charles Probst's Ford EFI book. I would double check my observations before connecting anything. Good Luck, Dan McGrath

I am using the factory mini starter, and yes the positive cable hooks directly to the large lug on the solenoid. I also have the main power leads for the engine and chassi nelectical systems attached to the large lug on the solenoid on the starter. The only wire that goes to the small tang on the solenoid is the start wire from the switch.

I have been running on 2.5 year old Kumho Victoracer V700 tires, and they are hard and worn out. I feel like my driving skills at the autocross have finally progressed to the point where I can use a better tire, so I just ordered a new set of these: Hoosier A3S04 245/45/16 Now maybe I can give those national level AP Z06 vettes a thrashing. Anyone else using these yet? What camber, tire pressure, etc... are you using?

I have accomplished what you desire with the exception of cutting the steering shaft. Cutting the steering shaft, however should not intimidate you. It was one of the easiest parts of the project. My engine is mounted as far back and as far down as I could mount it without without removing the stock hood latch. My harmonic balancer sits ~ 1 inch above the steering rack, the engine is centered from side to side, and is tilted back 2.5 degrees relative to the frame. The stock hood clears the intake (EFI). I use dynomax blockhugger headers and have full dual 2.5" exhaust. The headers just barely cleared the stock T/C brackets. With the 5.0L and T5 mounted as I have it, the car has 53.6 percent of the weight on the back tires (full of fuel with me in the car). I have built the car twice. The first time, the car had all the stock body and the engine was mounted using the ford rubber mounts and plates the sandwiched between the frame and front crossmember. The second build of the car (after a nearly head on collision with a '71 GMC) has the motor mounted using a front plate mid-plate arrangement. In both cases the motor was mounted in the same location. If you or anyone else is interested, I will soon be selling the exhaust system (headers to mufflers), and the modified steering shaft. My next project is going to be the construction of custom 180 degree long tube headers that dump into side pipes.

I found a picture showing the passenger side of the rear half-cage.

Zero, With my rollbar installed, the passenger seat can go all the way back, but not recline in that position. The passenger side of these cars has tons of leg room. I am 6'1" tall and with the seat all the way back on the passenger side, I cannot touch the curved portion of the floor where it meets the firewall.

2126, I believe that the cage you are referring to belongs to 260DET. He did some very nice work, and my only concern with his design is that is has too many bends (scca only allows 4 for a total of 180 +/- 10 degrees), and that his driveshaft tunnel diagonals don't allow either seat to recline. With my design, I can fully recline the driver's seat, but not the passenger seat. I am not speaking badly about his work (It's beautiful, and I like the mounting tabs), but I just chose differently. If I had mine to do again, I would make some improvements. In fact Branden's cage will see some of those improvements.

The door bars are going to be tied into the floor pan and also vertically onto the rocker panel. I plan to make the joints where the bars are removable such that buckling will tend to be outward. The joints will satisfy Figure 3 or Figure 4 on page GCR-156 or Figure 9 of page GCR-169.

Door bar will be removable. I consulted 2004 National Solo rules: For Solo II Paragraph 3.3.2 states that rollbars or cages must satisfy the criteria of Appendix C or section 18 of the GCR. Here is my interpretation without quoting the rules (copyright), For our cars, 1.5 x 0.120 or 1.625 x 0.095 DOM steel. At least 2 braces to control fore and aft motion of the roll bar. I interpreted this to mean 2 minimum. Correct me if I'm wrong. Suggested transverse brace (diagonal) For SoloI, I consulted Appendix J Said essentially the same thing but allowed provisions for Alloy Steel 1.750 x 0.120 for mild steel 1.625 x 0.095 for Alloy steel I am in the process of making this roll bar, and I want it to be as light, as tight fitting, and as functional as possible. Any critique will be graciously accepted. The intended function of this bar is to provide safety and additional chassis support for the SoloI, SoloII and track day competitor. This is a bar not a cage, and does not satisfy the requirements of SCCA club racing or NHRA cars running quicker than 10.99.