JMortensen

Yes, they are spot welded all the way across the seam, then they use seam sealer in about a 1" wide bead smeared all the way across. On my 70 those seams are stitch welded, but I think after mid 71 they are all spot welded.

Whoever did it did a really good job. Unshrouded valves, welded chambers, very nice port work. Looks kinda like the Gerolamy head in the How to Modify book. NICE.

Nothing against you personally, but I do carry a big grudge against the "dorifto" mentality. Sorry if that offends you.

Wow, I can't believe the empty door weighs 26 lbs! It felt so much lighter than that. I think the ones I was carrying had NOTHING in them, no latches, door pulls, lock mechanism, chrome for the window track, etc. Thumper I haven't checked but I'm 99% that lexan in the rear isn't a legal issue. I mean convertibles can run a piece of vinyl for a window, why would they care about lexan. It isn't the best idea IMO because of the scratching issue, but I'm sure it's not illegal.

Yeah, I hear you Andy. I like them too, and I think their better designed than most of the other ones (Carrera, AZC) because they have the needle bearing at the top. I think the EMI ones are the only others that have that bearing in them IIRC, and I definitely prefer the adjustment of the GC to the EMI ones.

Are you doing this for an autox car or what? You might want to check the rules too, might not be legal...

Loaded I would guess 20-25 lbs. I would think it would be worth it for a weekend racer. Don't know how much modding it would take to put a 240 door on a 280 if that's what you have. Might be as simple as installing the appropriate latch mechanism on the door jamb. I **THINK** the doors are the same size, and it's just the internals that are different (unless you happen upon a 2+2 door which are a couple inches longer than the 240 door). It might work. I don't know. I bet if you titled another thread "What does it take to put a 240 door on a 280?" you might find out the answer.

The easiest way to tell the doors apart is by the latch mechanism. A 240 door has a round rotating dial thingy that is ~2" in diameter and sticks off of the door 5/8" or so. The 280 door has a wedge shaped slot for the latch. By your description of the track like piece I think you have 280 doors. I didn't look real close at them but I know that the 280 has a reinforcing side impact bar inside the door where the 240 is basically just a hollow skin IIRC.

Just want to point out that even if the caster adjustment worked it would only give 1º of caster, maybe enough to even out both sides, but certainly not enough to optimize the caster.

The truck is the same way but the fulcrum is longer yet. Very short throw.

I can see the world's fastest sandrail now...

Uh, take the window and regulator out. That's about it. The early Z door doesn't have much extra bracing in it. In fact after moving 71 Z doors a couple weeks ago (yes, 71 doors) I can guesstimate that the 280Z door weighs about 20 or 25 lbs more than the early Z door. Pull everything out and I'd guess the weight of the empty Z door at 15 lbs or less. I mean when you've been carrying those doors around for a couple hours, you really get to the point where you're really happy to find one that's stripped... Seriously though I think glass weighs 40% more than Lexan size for size. The problem is that the glass has a curve to it so I don't think you could easily make Lexan work in a roll up window. Not to mention Lexan scratches when you look at it wrong, so it REALLY wouldn't hold up to rolling up and down with the fuzzy weathestrip dragging on it. So basically you can't do anything if having working windows is one of your requirements AFAIK aside from maybe pulling the door panel which weighs a good lb or two. Maybe John knows a trick or two that I'm not aware of.

I know it's my own prejudice, but I wouldn't buy anything from anyone in the US who advertised kg/mm rates. That is a sure fire sign that they are full on ricers. Plus look at those spring rates. Anyone who really knows Z's knows that you need some pretty hefty chassis stiffening to run those springs. The whole thing reeks of "dorifto" stupidity in my prejudiced opinion.

I think you're doing the right thing. Somebody out there is looking for a straight shell with some custom touches. If they're dumb enough to buy that one and then flare it, well more power to 'em. In the meantime you get some money out of the deal and get another Z that you can cut up. I'm not against cutting it up because it is a work of art or some sentimental BS like that, I just think you can make a little money selling it.

Which in my opinion is definitely NOT running fine. Again, the compression doesn't just bleed off at LOW rpms. It does it at ALL rpms. And again, you'd make a lot more power with the bigger cam, even though it is "bleeding compression". Pointing out that you don't need a bigger cam seems to be a point of pride for you. But you ARE pinging, and you WOULD make more power with a bigger cam. And a lower DCR WOULD help with the high rpm pinging as well. You're guessing and I'm guessing. Kinda pointless. But since we're engaging in conjecture, I'd also like to know how much that headwork is going to matter when he still has that tiny cam in there? I think he's running the .460/260 cam that MSA sells. I know a couple racers who bought that cam and then kicked themselves for it later. It's too small. Use Spork's manifold and sell those 40s. They're too small. I still think the ultimate proof would be dyno sheets of your car with the CURRENT setup on premium unleaded at the timing you currently have set, then another with a couple gallons of race gas and the timing cranked up.

Yeah, I guess it will be interesting to see what effect the rule changes have. Good luck out there.

No hard feelings here either, I just didn't want to keep saying the same thing again and again and again while 1 fast z and Mack said their same thing again and again and again. We seem to be past that point now. Mack, about the mixture being your only problem. I think once you do your aftermarket FI you'll find that you still need high octane gas or a cam. I haven't used a MN47, so I'm basing this on my E31 experience and extrapolating from all of the other info I've read over the years with regards to the L series and compression. Maybe you WILL get away with it, I don't know what kind of gas you have in AZ. If you were in CA I'd say you don't have a snowball's chance in hell. I think you guys are the ones who bear the burden of proof though. If it works for you in AZ fine, make it work in CA crap gas then I'll be all for telling people CATEGORICALLY that the MN47 on a flat top block is the best way to go. BTW a larger cam won't just bleed off compression at low rpms. It does do that, but it affects cylinder pressures across the rev range, and this is why it affects the torque curve all the way across the rpm range. This is because it lowers the "dynamic compression ratio" and a larger cam LOWERS the DCR. If you want to learn more about that you can read Grumpy's 4000 links on this post http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=99918 With regards to my old engine's power output, I don't know what to tell you. I only did the one gtech test. The car was pretty quick but didn't have much bottom end because the compression was so low. The new engine is much snappier off the line. Both pulled hard at the top end. I was able to chase down Mustangs and Vettes on big tracks with it. Believe what you want to believe, I know what it did. That issue does really wonder what compression is actually worth. I mean Briann510 is making 278whp at something like 9.5:1 compression, and he uses a smaller cam than I have IIRC. Granted he has a 12% larger engine, but if you knock his numbers down by 12% then he makes 245, I think the calculator I found online said I made 248. So I guess the issue is exactly how much is that 1 point of compression and the larger cam worth. I think that in an L series the BIGGEST hindrance is the SU's or FI. Second thing is the puny cam, and I would couple that with some headwork. I've said this before, but when I put the triples on I got an immediate 40 hp at least. My wife went from getting a little sideways on freeway onramps in the Z to literally being scared to drive it. As BRAAP said before though, the engine should be built for a purpose, not just a collection of parts, and when those parts all work well together, the difference is AMAZING. I don't understand your seeming reluctance to get a bigger cam. If you don't have to smog, you should be WANTING aftermarket FI like 1 fast z has or triples, and a big cam. Your engine would make a TON more power.

Do some searching. I know Auxilary has posted pictures of the R180 and R200 side by side. If it is an R200 with 3.36s then it is worth a bit of money and you might want to sell it to fund your project.

Chassis rigidity isn't the only consideration in racing. Seems to me that the 240 has been much more successful in ITS than the 280 and the difference between the two that really matters is the extra 500 lbs the 280 carries around.

I really think that installing them on top (with a plate on bottom) is the way to go. They do look nice, lowers the car another ~1/2", and then the caster adjustment would work. Why the shim thing though Cary? Is it because you think it would be harder to adjust with the car on the ground? I've found that I can adjust mine MUCH easier when the car is on the ground then when it's up in the air.

My car didn't have any undercoating in the strut towers at all. The problem is that the top half of the plate is so big it didn't fit inside the strut top at all. I have a very early 70, that may have something to do with it. If you mount it on top of the strut tower you can slide it back and forth. If you install it the way it is supposed to be installed and don't grind the crap out of it, then it has no caster adjustment at all, and in fact in my case it didn't even fit all the way up inside the strut tower and I had to grind on it just to get it in there. Once I realized that it wasn't going to slide back and forth, there was not point at all in leaving room around the 4 cap screws in the middle.

Well he's only been in business for 20 something years. Maybe you should go down there and show him which one is his *** and which is the hole in the ground...

That's it exactly.

Just use regular old pipe plugs. I think I used 3/8" on the block and 1/8" on the crank. I had my machinist tap the crank and he broke 4 taps in it. Hard steel...

NO IT ISN'T!!!! As Bastaad said, the engines in his example were pretty well identical except for the compression but the lower compression engine that could have an appropriate amount of advance made more power. Another example: my old engine vs my new engine. I agree that my 11:1 engine makes more power than my 8.3:1 engine did. A lot more. BUT if I have to run 91 it won't stop pinging until the advance is set to 5º at idle. When it is running with the distributor set that way with only 22º total advance, it makes WAY LESS power than the old 8.3:1 did. The only way to get the new motor to run the right amount of advance without pinging is to run 95 octane. I think you guys are setting people up to build motors that will require 95 octane or better to run without pinging, while running total advance in the mid 30s. I say that because of my own experience, and the experience of other people on this board. It's not just my opinion. I already tried to bow out of this argument once. This time I mean it. I'm gone.