blueovalz

Very nice example of a clean looking Z.

I ran 245/45ZR16 on 8" wheels (all four) for quite a while (it was with a stock suspension). The 245 was a perfect fit on the 8", but I have found out since that not all 245 (or any size for that matter) size tires have the same section width. In my case (Comp T/A), the section width was only 1/8" wider than the outside edge of the wheel.

This is the culmination of discussion on the following string and more a reference for any future searches. http://www.hybridz.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=28947 The toe adjuster is installed and funtions very well. It takes about 15 minutes to make an adjustment (car sits too low to make it at the normal ride height).

Dang it, One other guy on this site and I had this same problem a while back, we discussed it, found a solution, and fixed both our cars, but I'll be damned if I can remember what it was. We thought at first it was loss of vacuum on an engine with already low vacuum at idle (due to my solid roller cam) anyway due to the momentary loss of vacuum when the booster calls upon it. But I think it was fuel pulling away from the jets in the front bowl under hard braking. Old age killing me here. I know you've heard this before, but try a search for this, in the text, because I can't remember the title of the string. It was last summer I believe. Good luck and complete this string so that it may help someone in a future search if you find the solution. This seems to be an ongoing problem.

I use solid mounts on my 289 SBF (it is a carry-over from my racing days). The SBF is externally balanced and not quite as smooth, in my opinion, as an internally balance motor, but with that said, I do not find the vibrations present to be objectionable. One thing I did with mine was make the tranny mount solid as well, and thus reinforce the stiffness of the unibody, but I had to use a 5-point system (front of engine, back of engine, and tranny) to make this effective. A 3-point mounting system (motor and tranny) would not be as effective in this regard but I would hazard a guess that it would be an improvement in adding regidity over the OEM rubber mountings.

I believe it's about 350* but not sure as all my research is at work. The drying out of the lexan will be the big thing in my mind. I'm planning on 1 hour at a much lower temperature to dry it so that bubbles don't form.

Good WAG Dan! Thanks all for the helpful suggestions. This gets me one more step closer.

To make matters worse on ebay stuff, there is an R200 for sale on ebay that lists it for all the Z cars and the SX. The photo is of the newer (short and wide) R200 (looks like the R230 in shape) type, and the seller says it would be a great differential for the Z car. Some hapless buyer will see that and buy it, ignorant of the work involved just to make it and the CV joints work under a Z.

They look very nice, but like I said, I've got an S13 (240SX), of which I've bought wheels for it. The wheels that fit on an S13/S14 have a lot of backspacing, which I believe will interfere with your struts (springs). You've got a few days to buy them, so I'd suggest you find a salvage 240SX wheel and see what I'm talking about. The puzzling thing about the description is the offset. It is only 12mm on front (which to me says 4.5" in and 3.5" out) and 6mm on the back (4.75" in and 4.25" out). Some one make sure I'm correct here. My SX wheels were 5.3" in and 2.7" out, and they are a good fit between fender and suspension.

My 240SX has a lot of backspacing (over 5" I believe, and tyical of a FWD set-up). The auction title indicates that the backspacing will require spacers if used on your 280ZX, and may be very close to what would be needed in using the '84 300zx wheels on your car.

Ditto the 245. I had 245/45ZR16's on my stock Z with custom offset wheels (essentially zero offset) with a pinky fingers width between the springs and the fender lips.

Lookin' good there. Any body shots as well (hint, hint)?

We promise!

How many of us have screwed around all day on one side of the car, only to do the same work, correctly, on the other side in less than an hour Welcome to my world. When I did my headlight change, it took a week to do the left side, but the right side only took 2 days.

I'm not well versed in this area, but here are my thoughts. I'd stick with something no smaller that about 20% (keep the % of underdrive at or below 20 such as 18% for example) underdrive for a daily driver. I say this because the A/C, alternator, and water pump, even though they turn slower now, will still be able to provide their services at idle or slightly above. When you slow them down even more, you will start seeing the effects. When I raced my car, I was using a 50% underdrive, and this worked fine with only a water pump on it, but now that I am street driving it (plus I have a power steering pump on it) and I needed more speed at these devices. I don't know if NAPA sells these or not. I bought mine directly from Unorthodox racing, but I think Ebay has them all the time for the GM motors. Whatever you do, do your best to find out what size belt(s) will be needed for your new pulley. I can be a PITA trying to figure this out on your own.

This string has opened up new possibilities for me. I've never been totally satisfied with my current rear mounted battery set-up. I had to raise it up to clear the mufflers (from the race set-up), and now it sits too close to the tail light pigtails. After looking at the various batteries discussed, I may go for a dual 6v system and place these smaller batteries in each of the bins behind each of the seats. These batteries are smaller than I expected and may open up some badly needed space in the back of the car.

This answer shouldn't create two more questions. Yes, an underdrive system can be as simple as a smaller crank pulley only, or more complicated by using larger pulleys on each of the ancillary devices as well. I've used one on my 240SX and love it. I not only noticed a very slight performance increase, but I have rationalized it's purchase based on less wear-and-tear on the ancillary devices due to their slower spin rates on my frequent 6k driving style.

Just speculation here; Can it be considered correct in saying that the amp draw in starting the engine will be considerably higher (several fold) than any charge current? I believe the amount of current used in a charge is based solely upon the voltage difference between the charge circuit (alternator output) and the battery voltage at the time of the charge. The discharge of the battery for a quick starting engine is less than on an engine that takes a little cranking to get it started. Hence the lighter discharge (on the quick starting motor) will allow the battery to maintain a higher voltage when the engine starts, and will "draw" a smaller amp charge to recover. In my case, the motor takes a few rounds to get it started (no choke), and thus the requirements of a large battery for these deeper cycles is necessary. Folks with a quick starting motor in mild climates could probably get away with a smaller, space effecient battery.

The soft, crumbly "wet" foam that I used when I built my fiberglass body is impervious to the resin's effects (from crafts shops). The harder, crispy, more rigid foam will desolve under the resin's influence. What I have done is use 2" masking tape to separate the resin from the "bad" foam, but if the resin does not kick in the normal amount of time, the vapors will soften the foam regardless. With a decent "kick" time, the tape works well. This foam (either type) can be sanded to the shape you want very easily.

I wished I could remember who it was, but I corresponded with a guy (from Zdriver I believe) a while back that used one of these SC (or a very similar one) on his Z very successfully. BTW, I love the seats and the ORANGE.

Well, I could be wrong. I took 25"/.375", and then hit INV tan to get my figure. I then cross-checked with .375"/25" (25" is not exact as a hypot in this instance) and then used the INV sin and got the same number. It's been over 25 years since school, and I had to remember the old opposite over hypo, adj over hypo, opp over adj thing, so I may be off here. I found that there is roughly a 3:4 ratio on the bushing offset to tire toe measurement adjustment. In other words a 3/16" sideward adjustment at the bushing will provide a 4/16" toe adjustment at the tire (based on a 25" tire) I'll get this thing on the car this next week and give it one last shot with the camera for a final post.

Have you checked the alignment?

This brings tears to a glass eye. Great to here that the rubber met the road (and lost).

Great reading with implications I'd never thought would exist. The lowly hone job takes on new importance.

Very nice (best I can do being I'm at a loss for words). Keep the updates and pictures coming.