blueovalz

I'm using your typical parts house caps on my Griffin radiator AND on the Griffin in-line neck filler.

Sounds like you've got a good start on a properly done project.

Looks great Tim. Get it painted and send pics. You might even beat out Dan if you hurry

10 and even 20 under bearings are common, but I don't know about 30 under. How this affects the strength is a bigger question. My thoughts on this are for a low to medium build motor this amount of reduction is insignificant. I do not know enough about the dynamics of cranks to give an informed opinion on the smaller journals. Smaller journals help reduce friction in high rpm applications, but also reduce the rigidity of that journal, so how should this be looked at? Grumpy is the first person that comes to mind on providing valuable insight into this issue.

.010" or "ten under" means the journal(s) have been reground to be .010" smaller than the factory journal diameter to clean up the surface of the journal. This term is used separately for the rod journals and the main journals. Thus 10/10 meaning both the rod and main journals are cut .010". This then means that the bearings you use for this crank must now be .010 thicker to make up for the smaller journal's size. This is not uncommon for any used crank, but .030 under is quite a bit (IMHO).

All right, I bite here. What's the "machine gun" part of this.

74_5.0L_Z is right on here. IF, and that's a big if, I need to have some work done that I cannot do (e.g. aluminum tig welding for may radiator tubing, exhaust work, etc), the first thing I do is insure that I can watch and interact with the person doing the work, real time, and with a positive attitude toward my "suggestions". I've never been dissatisfied when I do this. Yes, sometimes it's a PITA for the guy doing the work, but when the job is done, and I see that he has spent more than a normal amount of time for a job well done, then I'll throw in a appropriately sized tip for him. It is hard to find people who stand behind their work, and take pride in customer satisfaction, but when I do find such a person, I personally make sure they are rewarded for their "unique" attitude.

I don't have a perfect comparison here in photos, but I wanted to show some of you guys contemplating designing your own custom parts (or modifying existing aftermarket body parts) what a difference subtle changes make to a simple part, such as a rear spoiler. The first photo was the spoiler's original design. After I built it, and looked at it a while, I felt the upper side corners were too abrupt for the "look" of the rest of the Z's rounded corners so I rounded only the corners, which is shown in the second photo. BUT, again, after seeing it for a while, it became obvious that the upper edge of the spoiler was fairly straight while the roof line and rear window line has a curve to them that do not match the spoiler's upper edge. So I modified the spoiler a 2nd time to round the upper edge to match the roof and window. Even though these changes were subtle, it changed the whole character of the part. It goes to show that first ideas are not the best ones and that carrying shapes and contours throughout the car brings "synergy" to the overall product. Think long and hard and sit on it a while to let your ideas congeal before you start. The savings in time of a re-do is worth it. Not shown in these photos is the way the sides of the spoiler now flow into the sides of the rear of the quarterpanel as one single curve rather than two disjointed curves or angles (when seen from a front or rear quarter view)

I found this string fascinating in comparing it to a bad car wreck. I didn't want to read what was posted, but at the same time found it too intriguing to look away as one that feels he has had experienced some level of each end of the continuum discussed. This includes keeping the basic Z and "enhancing" it, to the all out physical transformation the blueovalZ has morphed into. Often I see examples of what Pete describes, and for me they are quite pleasing to the eyes, and provide excellent examples of what the traditional proportions and characteristics of a classic sports car are. Often I wonder if I wouldn't be happier with my old 280 I had that had the subtle, clean, classic look that a Z can easily exhibit. I also look at what I've done to my 240 and wonder (often) if I went well beyond tasteful. My only regret with the blueovalz is the vast departure of some of the more recognizable features of the Z and that I have to pause slightly when someone asks me if it is a Z. I prefer the original look with some cleaning up, and subtle competition exterior pieces. Now, if I could redo the past 15 years I've spent on my Z, it would instead look more like a physically fit 180 lb example of an Olympic gymnast, rather than the 320 lb steroid bloated power lifter that it now has become.

When I raced in E-mod for the little bit that I did, my car ('71 240) came in at 2160 lbs with a cage which was about 100 lbs. I built the fiberglass with the thought in mind that I wanted the panels to be lightweight, but durable in case I wanted to use these panels for the street later on (which has become the case as I write this). On average, the glass is about between .130" and .200" thick. I could have made them lighter, but not enough to break the 2000lb barrier that I wanted to so badly. Engine wise; it was lighter than the L6 I pulled out. With no cage, narrower and smaller wheels and tires, and minimal thickness on the fiberglass (everything but the roof and "C" pillar, and unibody are glass) and lighter rotors and calipers, may have gotten me down to 1950 lbs at best. I was always the "pig" in my class racing against spitfires with japanese turbo 4's and even V8's that were a lot lighter.

I've heard from two independent (race oriented) sources that the way "they" set their moly rings is by not oiling the pistons/rings when they assemble the motor. One source used a little WD40, but no engine oil. They both report the rings seat almost instantaneously and NO damage results from this practice. I chose the traditional route of oiling everything, and I'm only just now (about 500 miles) seeing a slight improvement in exhaust oil and ring seal.

I agree, it sounds as though sectioning is unwarranted in your case. Those front springs should compress no more than 2-1/2" at static ride height, and the backs even less. With some descent dampening you should be fine. I lowered mine almost 2" which left little compliance before bumpstops were hit, which was the primary purpose for the sectioning.

You want to be careful handling this magnets. I had two dogbone magnets from a hard drive and they got together around my fingertip and snapped together causing a major blood blister. Very strong magnets here.

I built a jig with 2x4s for the frame rails, then I set the engine block between them and went at it. The steering rod was the big problem because these tubes were going to be very close to the rod. I spent a lot of time insuring that it was correctly positioned while I built the tubes around it.

The ratio was refering to 3 J-tubes to one U-tube when I ordered them. Diameter of the tubing? Grumpy or someone else can best answer that question, which depends on what parameters your engine is built around.

Hmm, this gives me some ideas about new headlights for my Z

Yeh, round tail lights are a pretty safe choice when it comes to something different. Round kind of works anywhere.

I guess it mostly depends on how long you want the tubes to be. Shorty headers generally have a higher turns/straight ratio than the long tube headers. Constraints in space for the headers usually dictate more complex tubes (hence, more bends). If you'll not rag me too hard, here is a photo of my headers (welded with a crackerbox prior to my purchase of the MIG welder). These are what I would call a medium length header. I believe that when I purchase my tubing, I used a 1:3 ratio of U-tubes:J-tubes. The U-tubes had shorter arms than the J-tubes did. The collectors were the most expensive part.

I used "J" tubes and some of their accessories from Hooker. They have some neat rings that fit between sections of tubing that allow these sections to be brought together in perfect alignment, and welded in place without removing the rings. These tubes are mandrel bent and are of excellent quality, but unfortunately, I spent close to $300 for a set of tubes to make my headers, and that was in '88.

I can't see any obvious problems here. The "Boss" heads will be a bit difficult in exhaust manifold options. Do you know for sure they are Boss heads, or just Cleveland heads. Even though they look wider than the Windsor heads, the exhaust exits parallel to the deck plane (downward) instead of straight out to the side. This swap in a ZX is rare, but becoming increasingly more popular as several recent posts have eluded to.

In my humble opinion, the location of the brake bleed is of primary importantance. And even then, you need to insure that the hole or port leaving the brake cylinder is at the 12 o'clock position even though the brake bleed fitting may not be. Removing the piston is the only sure way of seeing where this hole enters the cylinder. It can be estimated visually from outside, but the wall thickness can be misleading. Without doing this makes it a harder job at bleeding the brakes.

All the 240SX diffs had a "finned cover", but very very few had the VLSD. If it has the HICAS (rear steering) option, it should have the VLSD on it as well.

More pics Dan! That blue looks a mile deep, and I like the rear end treatment. In response to ON3GO, no LEDs here, I simply used the same tail lights I had chosen before, only this time I split them and then added another layer of red acrylic in over the tail light lenses. This layer is not a true prismatic acrylic, but instead came off an old Buick tail light cover that I cut, shaped, and polished for a smoother, more homogenous external appearance. Below is a photo of all the parts prior to assembly.

Well, after Nic-Rebel450CA posted the modified photo of my car, I figured I had nothing to lose but to go ahead and post what I had built, but it just was not primed until today. His idea was basically the same as what I had constructed, in that a divider is used to split the single tail light into what would appear to be two lights, one on top the other, similar to his photo.

I believe the factory(s) set these up with the middle carb being the only one for idle adjustment, and the two outside carbs are staged.