Gollum

That page doesn't contain much specs beyond the motherboard. Things that matter that it doesn't mention: Hard drive CPU Specs RAM Quantity & Speed DVD-Burner? Graphics card? (it shows onboard specs only) Without that information it just looks like an overpriceds barebones kit...

Not a bad card for the money. Like others have said, go for the AM2 processor base (you'll need a motherboard with that socket), and DDR2. The old DDR and 939 socket are only still around for those last few waves of purchases before the standards are dead. AGP is also well on it's way out. I recently built a new system for my mom's work and spent under $200. That includes Case, Motherboard, CPU, RAM, and PSU. Only thing reused was the hard drive, and CD-ROM. Specs? AM2 AMD 4600+ Dual Core 2.4x GHtz 2GB of DDR2 800 CAS Latency 5 Onboard Video Onboard Audio Onboard Lan etc. Hard drive is a 80GB IDE. But here's the catch. Because it's DDR2 she'll be able to upgrade the ram for another 4 years or so until DDR3 starts to completely overshadow DDR2. The AM2 socket should be around for at least 3 years. And the motherboard has PCI-E so if she ever needs a graphics card there will be plenty of options. The motherboard also has SATA 3.0gB/s of course, so hard drive and CD-ROM options will exist probably for 6+ years. I could build that same system needing to recylce zero parts WITH a decent graphics card for under $350, and it'll blow up most of the store bought $500 and under group. With how much part prices have come down, there's almost no point in buying the generic garbage they sell at stores IMO. And if you're gaming by the way.... the system I just built would be plenty for most games, but of course it'd need a decent graphics card. Right now, most RAM speeds and CPU speeds are MORE that up to the task of taking on the most intense games. Most framerate drops will be comming from the graphics card. Realistically, a "budget" gaming system will blow half of it's budget on a graphics card(s). Keep this in mind when buying a graphics card. If you play a lot of games and need something that can really chug out the frames then saving up for a better card might be wise. Tomshardware.com has an extensive graphics card benchmark database that can be very useful for finding the best card in your price range. They even do an article on finding the best card in a price range every month. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/graphics-cards,1942.html And I'll give my blessing to newegg. I've been buying all my parts there for probably about 4-5 years now and they've never let me down. Maybe not the lowest prices around, but competetive enough and their service makes it worth it.

Really??? What year? The two 80's, one 81' and one 83'T I've owned have all had relays for the headlights.

If you plan on keeping your engine, and keeping it NA, then exhaust isn't completely redundant. If you plan on swapping in a skyline, V8, silvia, or some other motor then it's kinda pointless isn't it? Just keep in mind as you dump money into that motor, that the highest HP NA engines on these forums are just over the 300hp range at the crank. If you wanted to stay within a reasonable budget, and spent a good 2k getting a good head built, you could expect around the low to mid 200hp range, which will make a car scoot pretty good. At the stock weight of a 83' that should be a high 14 second car in the 1/4 mile. Don't be expecting to end up with a car that'll make it well into the 13's and compete against the local muscle cars. If you're gonna be happy with those HP numbers, 150-250, then the stock motor is fine and mod away. If you're gonna be looking for more power down the road, skip almost every possible mod for that motor and just plan on swapping something else into the car.

There's very little you can do to squeeze much more power out of the stock NA engine. Best thing you could do for yourself I think would be to install a EDIS ignition system and install megasquirt EFI. This system could be transfered to almost any engine you decide to go with, so it's not a redundant modification. Right now your engine will probably put around 100-110hp to the wheels, being optimistic... The most you could really do on a budget would be exhaust, throttle body, cam, maybe some mild port matching of the head/intake/exhaust. These modifications wouldn't get you over 150 wheel HP, if even 130hp if you're lucky. The real power increases come from porting the head, installing a wild cam, and having an intake that can breathe at the RPM that cam lives at, and if you've got EFI then good control of the fuel will be required as well. Of course if you're going through all that work most bump the compression a little. On the other hand, if you just do as I suggest, install modern EFI like megasquirt and a good ignition system like EDIS you'd see a noticable power gain in ALL RPM and any future mods could be fully taken advantage of.

I'd do quite the favor to ever get a deal like $300 on a R200 Long nose LSD (the posi in question in this thread, basically the only LSD unit we're all hunting for). Lately they've been on the rise, and even in the recent economy they still havn't really "come down" in price. Simply too many of us are looking for a limited item. It's almost more cost effective to rebuilt a non LSD with a power brute center. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/R200-LSD-Differential-510-240z-260z-280z-300zx-Turbo_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ33731QQihZ002QQitemZ120275083460QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW As to if the cars are a good deal. If you trust the nephew AND his knowledge that'd be required for his statements to be true (such as "rust free") then yes, it's a good deal.

The 200SX turbo from 84-86 had the CA18ET here in the united states. It's not the DOHC, but it's still a CA turbo engine. The CA was used in FWD application in several other cars in the USA, so finding some parts shouldn't be TOO hard. But I'm gonna have to side with the many others here and say the KA would be the way to go. It's got quite a lot of displacement to play with, and there's lots of parts availble for these engines. They have quite the selection of turbo manifolds to choose from "over the counter" so to speak, more than you can say about any L series... And as 1 fast Z has shown, their DOHC head flows pretty darn well. Just get the air in and out, tune it and it should make decent power for the cam profile and displacement. As far as where to get one? I see the DOHC engines nearly every visit I make to the junkyard around here. Don't forget they came in the Xterra and Frontier too. It really shouldn't be too hard to find one for a good price. Tranny wise, I think the older SOHC engine used the same tranny as the L28E. Not sure if it's the same bellhousing though. I've seen people mate the Z31 tranny to them though, and those are stout enough for the torque the motors make.

If it's really just that one area, odds are it was caused from a leak. See if you can figure out the most likely areas water could have gotten in from and see if there's still a leak issue. No point in spending a ton of time repairing the metal if it's just going to rust again... As JohnC said. If that's all there is, then it's not that big of a deal. As far as repair advice, I think you know what most here will say. Get one of those guys to know that knows how to weld and get him to weld in a new piece. If you want to do it as clean as possible and keep it OEM looking, it might be easier to go cut a piece out of another 300ZX than it would be to make a peice of the same shape.

And all those reason are why I DO find the project interesting and cool, no doubt. But even with your high performance batteries you're range would still barely get me to and from my mild commute. I drive 26.6 miles one way + driving to lunch. That's a fairly average commute here in the bay area, and lucky me, it's completely counter commute. With the other driving I do in the evenings before heading home, I'm driving at least 65 miles per day, which is a bit of a stretch for most EVs I've seen online. Plus there's tons, I mean TONS of hills in the bay area. But isn't this the beauty of the Z car? With enough clever engineering it can become nearly anything. My personal "holy grail" would be an all tube chassis, aluminium paneled single seater with a fiberglass body resembling an ultima, or same idea. Powered by a power bike engine with around 130HP. With it only being big enough for a single person, weight should be down around 1200-1500 pounds max, if not around those weights WITH the driver. With that weight and that engine it should get around 60mpg easily. It would also be insanely fast, run on small cheap tires, and handle like... well a go kart. I must admit though, if the range of your EV was more like 120 miles, or costed about 1/2 the price overall, then I'm not sure I'd be able to restrain myself. Electric is just so much cheaper than gasoline in reality. The idea of a EV truck also sounds cool. Get an old toyota or datsun pickup, add batteries and you can still leave room in the bed to haul some things around town.

75mpg would cost $832 for 12,480 miles. 55mpg would cost $1134 @ 12,480 miles. You can see it's not a huge cost difference for cars once you get over 45mpg or so. What really hurts is cars nowdays that are seeing 25-30mpg at the pump. And I'm not saying you're not doing this for a good reason. I just have an issu when other members come and try to act like the EV is this holy grail that it isnt. You're still limited to a short range, so you can only use it around town, and as long as fuel prices go up (which is historically accurate) then it's a wise choice. I was simply asking that if we're going to compare the EV to normal cars, lets be fair you know? I respect your choice to make your Z a EV, and I'm still watching for updates with high anticipation. But let's please compare apples to apples. We can't compare average vehicle costs of a sedan to a EV. Would we compare a geo metro to a hummer? No... Another thing for us californians to think about too, is that electricity prices and rates fluxuate as much as fuel prices, and your price per kwh is directly related to how much energy you use. Charging your car every night might increase the rate significantly. I'm not saying it'll be enough to really make the "fuel" cost insane, but it'll make using any electricity in your house more expensive. If you live in a large house with AC/Electric heat, and have a family with electronics on constantly, just a small hit per kwh might make a big difference in the monthly electricity bill. The reality comes down to the fact that even the generators power companies use are far more effient than our engines in our cars, as they run at optimum ranges constantly, thus giving the power grid a lot more power per gallon of fuel than we ever could in our cars. So electricity, in theory, should always be cheaper than gas.

Poor car. I feel worse for you guys though. Locking seatbelts are a good thing.

Good catch. Probably not a ZXR.

From what I've seen the turbo cars will get the same, if not actually better MPG when driven right. Only reason I could understand it getting better MPG would be the better ignition system, but at any rate I've talked to turbo owners with verified occurences of getting 28+mpg on stock EFI. With megasquirt 30mpg shuoldn't be a problem, and I plan on going to megasquirt on my L28ET soon just because it'll pay for itself in a year with how much I drive. As far as comfort... The S130 is lightyears ahead of the S30. Completely stock they're almost silent as long as the weather stripping is in good condition, mostly around the windows. If the rubber is all good then they're just as quiet as a new car imo. The AC on these cars are almost ALWAYS not working as good as they should, so expect to need to recharge the system. Of the 2 S130 cars I daily drove, never once did I get less than 300 miles on a tank, driving like a maniac. When on road trips 450 miles on a tank was normal. These cars had BIG tanks. If having a spare tire is a concern, make sure to check the spare the car has. Those collapsable tires aren't easy to find, and you'll need to make sure you're can(s) of air are full. If the brakes are mushy just bleed them. Usually these cars respond with very agressive braking, and though not normally "mushy" when working right, you might want to upgrade to some steel braided lines just to add some feel to the brakes if you're picky. The steering is amazing on the rack and pinion models, though the recirculating ball cars still drive plenty fine. Overall I really love the S130 still, and I'm waiting for the day that smog laws are lifted on them in CA... They're not much heavier than a S30 when you're comparing chassis to chassis, and I personally think they're a bit more versatile in what you can do with them. They make much better daily drivers, and can easily make wonderful road trip vehicles. All the electronics have relays from the factory and never once have I had electrical issues in all 3 that I've driven for reasonable periods of time. Stock headlights are a bit dim IMO. Get some new clear lens types with a H4 bulb. I just put 50/65 watt bulbs in my 280Z and they're plenty bright. I think the bulbs I had in there were the same wattage, but the older style lens just robs a lot of direction to the lighting I think. Wipers aren't bad as long as the blades are good. Though the top speed of them still isn't that much better than a S30 wiper when they're working in perfect condition. The difference is that the S130 wiper system is much more reliable and I never had issues with it going slow or not working. T-tops are known to leak. Make sure they're not leaking, and if you take them off make sure you get them back on good and tight. I persoally think that most leaking t-tops are due to user error and either not getting them on tight or crushing the rubber when putting them back on. Hope that's a good enough walk through a S130 for ya. Oh yea, replace the shifter on the T-5. The nissan shifter is a joke.

50' might be enough to get most people to work though. Sure beats the traffic around here...

oOo, there's also the subie front diffs, but those are R160 on all of them aren't they? Not sure if that's up to the torque unless you're gonna keep skinny tires on it. And that's why I bring it up. Depreshiation, maintenance, and running costs still exist on a EV. Sure average year cost of the average car on the road (which is a SUV around here) is $8k. But lets just assume that $3000 of that is fuel (which is a TON to spend on gas unless you're in a gas gusler or drive 25+miles one way to work), then an EV is probably going to cost, say, $500 a year by comparison. It's going to take a long time for the EV to really pay for itself. To say that average costs of a vehicle are $8k, and suggest that a EV will save you that much every year is completely false. A EV still has a motor (more reliable, I admit). A EV still has suspension. A EV still has electrical systems. A EV still has windshield wipers, door locks, and fenders to get bent. You're main "maintenence" costs won't differ much, ESPECIALLY when you consider the life of most of the batteries being used, and budget changing them every 5-8 years. I guess my point, is that if you had a econo box with similar practicality as most EV's, then the yearly costs won't be much different at all. But let's not compare the average vehicle on the road to a EV, that's just plain not fair to either side. One person might save $4k a year by owning a EV, but that same person would probably save $3k a year by buying a car that gets 50mpg and driving it in a manner that'll actually get 50+mpg. EDIT: Found the AAA article mentioned. At their fuel costs the average fuel numbers were $1,335 for a 15,000 mile a year car, which average yearly costs were $7,823. If we jump to 20,000 a year fuel costs were $1780, while average overall costs are $9,498. So you can see that a very small portion of the AAA figures are actually FUEL related, which is what making a EV is about, and where it's going to saving you money. Now, the AAA figures are based off of a $2.256 per gallon... Can any of you guys find gas that cheap still? No. But take those average numbers and double them and you've got today's prices. $3560 for 20,000 miles. Oh, and I ran the numbers. Their average fuel consumption figures are all based on 25.5mpg. Thier small sedan figures are 30.5 mpg, while thier large sedan figures are 22.5mpg. The middle sedan is 24.0mpg. The average comes out to, like I said, 25.5. So again, gettign 50mpg, which IS possible with some cars, you could bring those fuel costs back down in half, back to the origonal figures: $1780 a year at 20,000 miles. Here's the link to the article: http://www.aaaexchange.com/Assets/Files/20073261133460.YourDrivingCosts2007.pdf

Hmmm, wonder how hard it would be to make a new diff mount to mount it facing backwards. If you did that you could mount a motor where the tank used to be. Then you're left with the entire bay and tunnel for batteries.

well there's a couple answers why I can't meet such prowess. 1 - There's only so much you can do with hand tools 2 - There's only so much one can fit in the back of a tundra But seriously, if there's anything left on that car someone wants PM me and I'll see if he can set it aside.

You're hurting me! I want to start calling up some car buddies now and get a road trip planned. Grrrrr. Beatiful collection of cars there though.

I'm considering the same thing, though more likely a CRX HF or something honda with a lean burn engine. Right now I daily drive a 75' 280Z that's getting around 17-20mpg and is a complete blast! Unfortunately if I DO get a different daily driver then I'll be on the hunt for a 240Z, and who knows what that'll mean for the 280Z. Either gonna become a parts donor, or sold to fund the 240Z. It looks better now, I promise.

Well, sorry I didn't get more pictures, but you get the idea. Owner was a brother of a friend of mine and he'd bought it more than 5 years ago for $50 not running, found the battery ternimals reversed and fixed it and drove it. It only drove for about 5 months and then it died on him and it just sat. And sat. And sat. So he found out I own a Z and said I could come by whenever I want to take anything I want before he cuts it up for recycle. He lives a good 2.5 hours away from me, so it took a couple months before a Saturday showed up that was free so I could make the trip up there. Here's what it looked like while I was packing up my tools. I took the complete doors, fenders, headlight buckets, hood, tail lights, and lots of other little bits. Some of it I plan to sell, some I plan to keep. When he cuts it up he's going to pull the diff and axles for me to keep. I spent about $90 filling up the truck on gas (ouch!) and gave him $40 out of good favor for his time and letting me pick at the car. When we wrapped up we went for a dip at a local river swimming spot to relax a bit and spend some time with the previously neglected females with us. Good finish to a long day. Hope everyone else had as good of weekend as I did. Oh yea, friday night I installed some new headlights with built in turn signals. I'll get pictures of those tonight.

He'd asked me before, but let me check google maps right now to see how far it is (city center to city center). 126 miles. That's at least 12 gallons of gas, wich costs at least $54 right now. So realistically it's a $60 trip for me + 4.5 hours of drive time round trip. I'd love to do it, but it's just much more feasible for someone closer to help him out. There's gotta be someone in the san jose area with some free time.

Those almost sound like 1/4 prices compared to bay area pull yards.

A break down of how much of that cost is actually fuel, and maintanence on the drivetrain would be nice... At my yearly commute miles of 16.5k, even if gas went up to $7 I'd only be spending $3,300 at 35mpg wich is easily attainable in many MANY cars. Get 50mpg like in a CRX HF and that goes down to $2100 A YEAR for $7 a gallon! Scary thing is that my Z right now is costing me around $4,500 a year in gas. I've been driving it almost half a year now with maybe $100 put into it for maintanence/required work. And I've run the estimates for adding a CRX to my insurance, moving my Z to a recreational vehicle, and getting a CRX HF as a commuter my insurance would only go up around $10 a month. If prices come down and you could build an eletric car for under $5k it might seem reasonable. But personally, I'm just going to buy something that gets 45-50mpg that's worth less than $2k total. Sure I might still be spending more money in the long run, but I can do a whole heck of a lot more with a CRX HF that has a 500 mile range and then just needs a 10 gallon fill up at that point, than I can with a EV that can get a 100 mile range if I don't hit too many hills... I'm not knocking the project, as I still think it's awesome. I'd just like some context if we're going to start talking about the average costs of a vehicle. AAA standards mentioned are based on what the average person is willing to spend, not what could be attained by most if they just simply tried. There's no reason for a car to cost you $8k a year to run and operate.

For us americans who are used to wheel numbers: 275 wheel hp at 12 psi 226 wheel hp at 8 psi Still impressive numbers, if even more impressive than the numbers given by their "correction" factor. At a 15% power loss you'd be at 316hp. Most of us yankees don't trust dyno machine's ability to read drive train loss, and just go by wheel hp which is easier to compare from car to car. Those numbers are just about right in line with what I'd assume a NA block with a P90 should make though. That said, I'd be happy with 225 wheel hp at 8psi.

I know I know, I'm getting to this a bit late. But are EGT's really telling the whole story about what we're talking about? Some have suggested that unburnt fuel is heating up the turbo causing the failure. Would this really be seen by a EGT sensor? I guess it mostly comes down to where the sensor is placed. My point is that a turbo adds another dynamic to the equasion. In a NA engine, sure going richer past stoich will cool the EGT down, but adding a turbo means those unburnt fuel vapor molecules WILL get burned in the turbo, bringing EGTs back up as the turbo burns more and more fuel as the mixture goes more and more rich. Anyways, as I said in the video comments, don't sell the car phil. A 240SX is no replacement for the Z. If anything dump the headache of the L28 and get a different motor. You can always do the RB25 in the Z, or be back up to your current HP easily with a large variety of V8 options.