inline6

Great! Thanks.

Anyone have a 44 mm Manley L series valve laying around? Also, SI brand part number is 8001SG or Nissan Comp 99996-N1100. I need to know what this stainless steel valve weighs. G

The assembled short block is back home and I started final engine assembly yesterday. This was something I wasn't expecting: This head gasket is a nissan comp multi layered steel (MLS) one. The oil supply hole to the head (the one mid way front to back on the block) is what we are looking at. Interestingly, the hole, which is now almost twice the diameter of what it was when the engine was run last, is not lined up with the opening in the gasket. This is the case on the block, but not on the head, meaning there is misalignment of this opening between the 280z block and the 240z head (E88 casting). Now, the "restrictor" in the block is recessed maybe a half to one millimeter below the deck surface, so the partial "blocking" of the hole is not the same as if the restrictor was flush with the top surface of the block. Not ideal however. So, I took the gasket off and carefully opened up the hole in the gasket a bit. The goal at this point is to get it fired up again this weekend.

Sounds like the latest version of these seals is better, I guess then. When I restored my Z in 1994, I bought my door weatherstrips from MSA. They were Precision... I fought with them for more than two years... even went so far as to bend the spot welded lip around the door circumference inward to make more room between the door and the seal. That helped, but I still had to slam my doors crazy hard. Also, the seals put a crazy amount of stress against the stainless window/door frame part... so much so that the lower most bolt that attaches that frame to the rear side of the door developed stress cracks... I cut a cross section of the Precision seal and a factory one to show the difference on my z website that I was going to create someday to show others all the things I found out the hard way... The Precision seal is (was?) both much thicker and also much denser than the factory seal. Sure, it compresses a bit after you put it on, but it never compresses nearly enough. While we are on the subject, I found out something else during one of the many times I revisited the poor door shutting behavior of my z. The latches and strikers have to be working properly. Both the latches and the strikers do wear. The rounded groove the latch interlocks with widens over time... causing a bit of looseness. I solved my issues by scrounging some OEM seals off of ebay. Here is a short video (not very entertaining, I must say) of how well my doors shut. I have also sprayed sound deader on the inside surface of the outer door skin, and I have applied dynamat to the metal inner door panel... thus the sound difference you might perceive from other z doors. http://youtu.be/QYgN1KnnAQw

Didn't know your expertise level with the carbs... Looks like what I said may help someone else which is good. You said earlier that you have no definite evidence for taking the head off... And swapping carbs, you fouled number 2 cylinder instead of 4. And you fixed that issue. Have you driven it on the road at all after fixing that issue? Fouled plugs can sometimes be hard to "un-foul". Just idling in the driveway may very well not do it. Do you have a glass bead cabinet to clean the plugs with, or some known good plugs laying around to swap with?

You found that your linkage is messed up - potentially worn ball sockets... That can definitely cause driveability issues. Do you have throttle plate return springs on each carb? If not, then the issue might be exasperated because you may think that the throttle plates across carbs are in sync when they are not. Out of sync carbs will definitely cause poor running. If there is slop in the ball joints and especially if you don't have return springs on each carb, then at "off" throttle, each carb's throttle plates may be at different positions. If twisted shafts, then even the plates within each carb body can be out of sync and at different positions. If that is the case, setting pilots is going to futile. And, what you have done with them so far could be contributing to poor running problem. I think I'd start by removing the throttle linkage rods from each carb and checking them out closely. Perhaps you need new ball joints... You need to verify that all the throttle plates on the carbs are closing completely, especially those within each carb body. Back off all idle/throttle screws that open the throttle plates for idle. With the throttle linkage arms (those with the ball joints) removed... close the throttle shafts and listen for the plates to snap shut in the bores. If carbs are off the car, you can shine a light on the back of the throttle plates and verify the plates are closing completely. Address twisted shaft problem if it exists. After verifying that the shafts are not twisted (or correcting), put the carbs back on the manifold - carefully so that they are level as possible and as close to the same horizontal plane as possible. The bolts/studs probably have a bit of play in them, and the slight misalignment on the manifold causes minor syncing issues with the linkage - not a big deal, but while you are there... take a minute or two. Install throttle return springs for each carb. Set initial setting of idle/throttle screws. I cut a strip of paper... and put it between the screw and where the screw hits the arm of the throttle shaft. I turn the throttle screw in until when I pull on the paper I can just feel the paper drag. I do this for each carb. This way I know that the idle screws the same distance from contacting. When all three are set that way, turn each of the 3 screws the number of initial turns called for in the manual - to set initial idle setting. For my Mikunis, I think it is one turn or maybe one and a half. Adjust/set all three throttle arms (ones with the ball joints) to the same length. I used calipers to set mine to within a few thousandths. Having them the same length is important. Loosen linkage for pivot balls on the main throttle linkage rod. Install adjustable throttle rods. Be sure that the throttle plates for all three carbs are shut and re-tighten the linkage for the pivot balls being sure to keep carb throttle linkages undisturbed. This will ensure that each linkage works in unison as the main throttle linkage rod operated. Set all of your pilot screws at the manual spec. as well. For my Mikunis - it is 1.5. At this point, the car should start without issue. You should then put the sync tool on at idle and adjust the throttle screws (hopefully the same amount) until desired idle speed is achieved. You can deviate in throttle screw setting across carbs if necessary to get the flow through the carb bores from one body to the next to be the same - however they shouldn't require substantially different settings. After the flow is the same across the three and the idle speed is where you want it, check to see how the flow across the three is with rpm's held at like 2500 or so. It should be equal across all three. Now you can take a look at AFR between the two banks to see where you are... There really should be no need to run the pilot screws at different amounts out... at least not substantially different. Hopefully getting everything synced up like this will solve your problem.

Me three. I did that before I ever used it. Evidently, that is a requirement when you use this Nissan competition washer. With .015" interference fit, installer and puller are absolute requirements. This thing is TIGHT!

What RPM's are you running?

Ok, noted. I realize that some space there is necessary to keep the washer from bottoming - so proper torque can be achieved on damper installation. My engine builder and I discussed the washer I am using a bit. I am using the Nissan Comp bolt and washer. That washer has a step in it which puts some of the washer inside the hole in the damper hub. I was under the impression that the part of the washer that goes inside the front of the hub ID performed the same function as sliding the damper onto the crank a touch (.060"?) more, but he says absolutely not - that the part of the washer that goes inside the hole of the damper hub is 100% useless - and it doesn't index the front of the hub at all. By the way, this is why we are considering the mod - this was done to the front of the crank with about 700 light "tuning" miles where I only crossed over 7k a few times. You can also see the "step" on the washer here and the amount of "extra" on the oil drive gear: The damper only had about .0005" interference fit. The rebuilt BHJ unit now has ".0015" which is the right spec. per BHJ.

My engine builder has made an observation about the grip length of the hub of my engine damper. I don't have exact measurements on me, but when the damper is installed on the front of an L6 crank, the hub portion over hangs the front of the crank snout by a good bit... like more than an 1/8 of an inch, I think. I have removed (and chucked) the stamped steel oil slinger, by the way. And the amount of "grip length" is not all that much in comparison to other engines with which he is also familiar. Because vibration can become an issue on these L series engines at engine RPM's I plan to be going through, I'm wondering if anyone has done some investigating to see if the damper could be installed onto the crank snout a bit "more" with "modifications". My engine builder is going to be taking a look into this. The oil pump drive gear has a lot of "wasted" area on the front side of it. However, he is going to look to see about where the oil seal is in relation to the damper. Assuming that the damper won't bottom out on the front of the seal, and there is room on the OD of the damper hub/shaft for the oil seal to still ride on the portion that is not radiused, he will look at what would need to be done to the alternator/pulley, and water pump/pully also. As with anything on these engines, I don't want to go off into uncharted waters... If this is ground that has already been covered, I'd appreciate hearing about it. Thanks in advance, Garrett

Is the value of a "base model" Fairlady in the US... ummm... significant? I mean, what might they be worth in average running condition? I only ask (somewhat hesitantly) because I took possession of one briefly back in 93 or 94... long enough for a Z parts collector guy I knew and I to split the cost of buying it and then stripping it for parts. I let him bring a pick up truck with a hoist and spend the entire day taking everything he could get off of it in exchange for paying most of the price of the car ($500 I think). I kept the the diff and the gas tank, (and wanted the transmission because I assumed it was a 5 speed, but it wasn't) as those were the only parts of interest for me at the time - I was in full restoration and full debt load with my 240z at the time. The next day, I carted it's pretty well stripped body off on a trailer to the salvage yard. I felt bad because I knew it was somewhat rare, and it was "too nice" to throw away (no visible accident damage and not much rust either) but didn't have the time, nor the money to take it on. It had an L20A engine and 4 speed transmission with a 3.7 diff. I believe it was a 73, but interestingly, it had the later style tail lights like the US model 260z, except for amber/red vs. all red. Also, it had these weird floor mats... they were like really thick rubber in front and behind the seats. .

Thought it was about time for a small update on this saga. I pulled the head off of the engine a while back so I could drill out the oil supply restrictor in the block to .125". With the head off, I found some odd wear on the bores. So, I sent the short block back to my engine builder to be disassembled, checked, and specifically for some touch up honing. We suspect the wear possibly came from running too rich during attempts to tune the carbs... and possibly bits of the metal from the cam problems causing some havoc. According to my engine builder, all crank journals, rod journals, respective bearings etc. were fine. The cylinder walls weren't perfect. So, we went ahead and honed it as planned. Short block is being reassembled now and will be on the way to me soon. I'll be pulling the oil galley plugs on the head and checking to be sure there is no debris or obstruction. Plan for restart includes: Red Line full synthetic oil - high zinc content Red line assembly lube on cam lobes Block heater to heat oil north of 100 degrees for startup Pressure oiling kit to blast oil through all oil galleys just before startup Rebello camshaft spray bar - replacing the factory oil spray bar Same induction set up - everything adjusted as prior, when engine last ran - assures quick initial start up With the oil restrictor now .125" instead of ~ .078" and no chance of any restriction (everything will be tripple checked), along with the list above, I think I will not have another repeat of this problem.

I like the Jags that Run option. There is a nice write up showing what makes the radiator special here: http://www.jagsthatrun.com/V8-chapters/V8-DatsunZ-Cooling-System.pdf I think you would need the Rad ($185), the mounting kit ($80), and the DAT-128 kit which is for running hoses from the new rad to the L series engine instead of a V8. They would be able to confirm. http://www.jagsthatrun.com/Datsun_Order.html#anchor When I bought it years ago, the mounting brackets were galvanized steel. Now, it looks like they are aluminum, and come with electric fan straps too. I just happen to be looking at electric fans now, so maybe I'll upgrade to the aluminum kit. Also, just saw the Koyo radiator at the Koyo site: http://www.koyoradracing.com/news.asp?id=61 Looks nice and I like that it mounts to the stock location, but that thing is thick - and in the example car shown, there is no engine fan installed, stock or electric. Doesn't look like there is much room for a fan there to me. G

BHJ is making me a new hub that is sized for my crank, which is a tad undersize. $300 and we'll be back in action.

Yep. Learned that the hard way when I used the bolt and washer with a Euro damper many, many years ago. Never want to hear that death rattle coming from an L series again. G

With my recent engine build, I used a Rebello BHJ crankshaft damper (a used one). The engine has about 600 miles on it and is apart for other reasons. At the time of build, the damper had some visible wear/markings on the ID of the hub, but we decided it was good enough still to use. Given the photos of the "damage" that happened within only about 600 miles of engine tuning, and what my engine builder said after removing it from the crankshaft: "Your harmonic damper now has only .0002 interference fit to the crank snout. .0005 is the accepted minimum on non "problematic", internally balanced engines. .0007-.0012 is preferred for most engines and .0015 is the maximum which requires careful chamfering of components and the use of E.P. grease for installation. I weighed your damper and it was about seven pounds total weight (bathroom scale). It might be of benefit to obtain a damper with an inertia ring with a higher weight (moment of inertia)." I am faced with making a decision. Either pursue getting a new hub for this damper, which I do not know is even possible at the moment. Or, buy a new one of the same part number from Rebello (It is the BHJ street version) Or, go with another brand, such as ATI. My engine is basically the same as a Rebello 3.0 L engine (but with an 88mm bore instead of 89mm which puts it at about 2.9 L instead) with a lightened and balanced crankshaft (only about 3-5 lbs lighter than a stock L28 crankshaft), and a 7800 max RPM Kinetic Sunbelt cam. I've read various posts in the forums regarding "tuning" of dampers. I'd like to understand this tuning better so I can make as informed of a purchase decision as possible for my specific application. I would appreciate any guidance. G

I thought about that when I was posting. My car is also predominantly a track car, but I still drive it on the street every now and then. As with my other cars, I enjoy pulling to redline in first, shifting to second, then letting off. It's annoying when I can't enjoy that because of gear crunch. It won't be an issue at the track. Yeah, I am so like that.

Man, that is a bummer. I've been hoping that this would take care of it once and for all. I hate the 1st to 2nd crunch. Any chance that you don't have the timing spot on? If that is right, then what is left to look at? Could the dog teeth be worn a bit too much on second gear?

Oh! Totally makes sense that the seal will be pushed away from the shaft as any pressure pushes on it. Wow. Learned something today.

Working on transmission a bit while my engine is back at the engine builder. It appears I have another transmission leakage issue. What I thought was oil leaking out the of the back of the engine (I thought past the rear main side seals) is almost certainly transmission fluid. This means I have leaks coming from both the back and now, the front transmission seals. The thought occurred to me... I am currently running Redline MT90 transmission fluid. This stuff certainly seems "thinner" than what I've typically run in the past. Is it too thin? One other issue is I may have the front transmission seal installed backwards. I tried looking at the 280ZX workshop manual to determine, but I wasn't able to tell conclusively. I see 2 shiny rings around the mainshaft where the seal rides... so this is confirming to me that the part of the seal that touches the mainshaft is in a different spot than some time prior. Here is a pic showing the front seal installed with a new front seal just sitting off to the side - reversed from the one installed. Not sure why it would be leaking though as it looks to me like the seal is still riding on a spot on the mainshaft that looks like it would work. That said, I still think I need to pull it out and flip it around. Can anyone confirm? [edit] - yeah... it is in backwards. Clearly, the spring side of the seal isn't supposed to be facing the outside of the transmission where dirt and stuff can get to it. I am still not convinced that flipping it around will stop the leak though as the lip of the seal appears to be riding squarely on the mainshaft surface that it should be - it is just offset to near the edge of that surface. So, I wonder if the MT-90 is too "thin"?

Tiny bit of good news for me in such a long time with this car - the pump I got yesterday is the real LD pump. Same ground off markings and stick on Aisin label. The impeller was about 1/16th" smaller than 3".

During the full rebuild, the press fit plugs were all removed and the oil galleries cleaned METICULOUSLY. Engine has to come out to have the freeze plug spikes (I forget what they are called) installed anyway. I guess I have no choice but to remove the head. Incidently, oil temp has a major impact on flow as seen by some vids another HybridZer sent me. My videos were with 10W30 redline at like 65 degrees.

I took the oil pressure sender out and used that hole in the mail gallery for the tank supply location. I did not measure psi while operating it. I have a regulated air supply from my compressor that I set at 120 psi when I filled the tank. I also have a 60 psi air gauge. Just before doing the second video, I measured the pressure in the tank, and judged it to be about 80 psi by the amount the needle was past 60 psi. During the 20 minute run with fresh cam and freshly re-ground rockers I saw 70 psi coming from the oil pressure gauge - this being read from the oil pressure sender which was in the stock (and same) location in the block. I have no idea what oil pressure the head is seeing. I might be able to remove the npt fitting at the back of the cam (I had one installed there instead of a press fit plug) and rig some kind of pressure gauge there to see what I've got for oil pressure inside the cam. Would that be helpful? Does anyone have a good number for me to compare to? I can regulate the tank pressure to 70 psi or whatever and then get a number for pressure at the cam...

Finally got moved and had a chance to hook up a pressure kit. I put a quart or so into the small tank and pressurized the tank to 120 psi. Didn't take the best video footage on the first one. Second one was much better. With the second video, I had an estimated 80 psi left in the tank. The spray bar is clearly useless. Take a look: Video 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXAo8S7Wetc Video 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFZM4P1Dfqo So... Is that enough flow?

Some got the right one from them it seems from the activity in the last few weeks. We'll see if the one I get is right or wrong. That they wouldn't or couldn't measure means that can't confirm the statement that they don't have the right pump for you. I mean, how do they know for sure if they didn't look at or measure them?