crazy280

bump

My fault, I didn't realize the turbo dizzy was so different from the N/A models. I don't think I can use it, sorry. UPDATE: I'm still in need of a ZX distributor (nonturbo)

Sounds good. What kinda shape is it in, or do you have a pic?

Hey guys, I need the throttle linkage that goes from the balance tube down to the carbs. It must be from a 1970, 1971, or 1972 240z only. I live in San Francisco, so it would need to be shipped if you're not local. Send me your price. Thanks

Hey guys, I need an electronic distributor. This can be any year 280zx part, preferably in excellent condition. I'm in San Francisco, so it will need to be shipped if you're not local. Send me your price. Thanks

LOL thats what I was thinking

Thanks guys. I hadn't suspected the solenoid at first, becuase I had tested it previously and it was fine, but when I tested it again it wasn't working. So I got a new starter w/ lifetime waranty for ~$25. Fuhgetaboutit!

Hi guys, I have a '73 240z with a bad starter relay. I priced it at the dealer for ~$35. That seemed a bit high for just a small electrical component, and it would also take at least a week to order it. Then I had an idea to find a generic relay (I assume "parts is parts" right?), so I called Radioshack, and they carry "automotive relays". Now, I don't know much about electrical components, but as an example, the guy said they have a "12v 30amp automotive relay" for $6.50. My question is, would something like this work to replace the starter relay in my Z (or if not, what "specs" does it need to have)?

I never said "anything more is better", please don't misquote me. What I'm saying is, in this instance the SFC's will still add stiffness to the car, even if he puts some holes in them. Chamfered holes in chassis reinforcements is common for race-prepped cars, even without a full cage. If he was going to drill out existing, stock chassis components, then there might be a safety issue, but in this case its fine. Just don't go drill crazy and turn them completely into swiss cheese!

I'm not taking sides here, just voicing some oppinions both ways. I love the Z32. I don't own one, but have test driven a few as I plan to buy one in the future. My father has a fairly stock 1988 C4 corvette. I've ridden with him many times in his vette (and he's no slouch, he has some scca experience), and driven the car myself a few times. I will say the vette is pretty fast in a straight line (definitely has a fatter low end than the Z32) and handles extremely well on a tight, winding road (better than my 240z, even with 1000 extra pounds). However, the build quality is crap, and the car shares most of its parts with my old 85 Camaro; engine, trans, door handles, switches, knobs, etc, etc. (that's how Chevy kept the price down). Whereas the Z32 seems more like an "upmarket" car in terms of build quality (and its original price lol). When the C4 first came out, all the magazines praised it as being the "futuristic supercar that will change the industry", and all that crap. Then they said the same thing when the new Z32 came out 5 years later, so you have to take it all with a grain of salt. Now, when you compare the Z32 to the C4, stock for stock, you have to consider the years. Since TPI C4's were almost identicle from 87-91, we'll call that "early" and since LT1 C4's were almost identicle from 92-95 (barring ZR1's and GrandSport's), we'll call that "late". Z32's were pretty much identicle their entire production run here in America, so you can use pretty much any year to compare them to the vette. Autocrossing trophies aside, generally comparing the "early" era C4 to the Z32, its fairly even in terms of performance (stock). The accelleration is pretty much even (both cars regularly record mid to low 14's in the quarter mile stock), and when new, both cars were praised by the magazines for their handling (with at least one account crowning the Z champ). The "late" C4's actually are a bit faster than the "early" ones (makes sense when the LT1 is rated at ~300hp vs. ~245hp for the TPI, even though we all know Chevy underrated them). I've driven a 94 vette and can say it was faster off the line than my dad's 88 (also had a nicer interior). Overall, I would say that just becuase the magazines say one car is faster, doesn't make it so, and just becuase one car is more dominant in autox, that doesn't make it better either. I don't know much about the rules in Solo II, regarding what you are allowed to modify on the car, but maybe something in the rules has influenced the C4 dominance? I personally think the Z32 is slightly better than an early C4 overall, but slightly inferior to the late C4 overall. Now here's the thing: the Z had much narrower tires stock than the C4 (f/r: 225/245 vs 275/275), and anyone with racing experience knows that tires are the single most important factor in a car's performance, especially when it comes to handling. Of course I'm only speculating at this point, but I believe a Z32 will outperform any stock C4 as long as you run similarly wide tires and maybe install the "HICAS eliminator kit" and/or stiff bushings (to fix the "handling feel" issues BRAAP mentioned). That's what I plan to do when I scrape up enough cash to buy one anyhow! lol Sorry for the long post, I just thought this was an interesting thread! And good write ups from the owners of these cars too.

I don't think it would hurt to put some holes in them. You guys are acting like he was gonna drill holes into the stock subframes or something. Remember, the car never came with SFC's, so no matter what he does to them they will still be an improvement over stock. That's just my oppinion of course

Yeah, leakdown test. I did the same thing to my L28 when it was on the stand. Just hook up an air compressor line to one of those pressure gauges that threads into the spark plug hole.

Are any of these still for sale? Please let me know. Thanks!

A built 3.0 L-series should be making more than 165rwhp, probably more like 200+rwhp, but I get your point.

Sounds like a great deal. Too bad I'm broke right now. Did you notice the zeros are replaced with uppercase o's? Weird... 0 --> O

How much does the average machinist charge for something like that anyhow?

Thanks Johnc, I think this part explains it for me the best: It makes sense because once the flywheel is at rpm, its just kind of getting a free ride, whereas the fan is using the same energy all the time. So taking weight off the flywheel is just reducing the mass that the engine is accellerating, similar to taking weight off the vehicle (which explains the accellerative benefit), but no actual hp increase. Thanks for the wisdom guys

Thanks Thumper. Good to know!

Yes, thank you! Is there any way a list of years/casting numbers can be added to an existing sticky or something? I'd hate for someone else to have to search for this post.

I was reading the HybridzFAQ web site ("http://jeromio.com/240z/faqdraft/index.html") and something didn't make sense to me: "1: How much increase in power is there by installing an electric fan(s) in place of the stock motor driven fan? No hard numbers but the stock fan performs work by moving air so you can gain some horsepower (probably a small amount) by moving that work to an electric motor. One thing to be aware of: the stock fan pulls a lot of air. If your cooling system is marginal at idle or low speeds on a hot day, then stick with the stock fan until you fix your cooling system issues. 2: How much more horsepower can I get from a lightened flywheel? None. Chassis dynos can erroneously report reciprocating mass decreases as horsepower increases. A lightened flywheel does not increase the amount of fuel or air an engine uses so it can't possibly increase the horsepower of an engine at any specific rpm. What a lightened flywheel does is allow the engine to rev faster, which means you can get to the horserpower you have sooner and thus accelerate quicker. Remeber, acceleration is a factor of horsepower and weight." What I don't get is "part 2". I could be wrong here, but my take is this: yes, a lighter flywheel doesn't increase fuel or air, so it doesn't produce any *gross* horsepower, but that doesn't mean it won't increase *net* horsepower. After all, an electric fan won't increase fuel or air either, but according to the site: "the stock fan performs work by moving air so you can gain some horsepower (probably a small amount) by moving that work to an electric motor". In other words, some of the gross horsepower was being wasted pushing air with the fan, and now that horsepower is being transmitted to the wheels. So is the engine performing work by moving the weight of the flywheel? If so, shouldn't removing that weight also free up some lost horses (at the wheels)? The chassis dyno readings verify this (and I don't believe they are "erroneous increases"). Are there any physics people on here that can explain this to me?

Hey guys, I've been searching for an hour and a half, and I still can't find a list of the head/block casting numbers *with* their respective years. There are many lists of heads and blocks with the numbers, but no corresponding years. I know something like this was floating around somewhere on this site at one point, I'm just having trouble finding it. Shouldn't there be a sticky with this info? Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

Okay cool, thanks!

Thanks Tommyz. That's a sick looking z by the way! So I know it will fit, but does anyone know if it will mess up the balance of the engine, since the stroke is longer, etc? That's really what I'm worried about.

Hey guys, I have a 1973 240z with the stock L24, but I have an early L28 long block that I'm building to swap in. I'm on a tight budget, so I'm using alot of parts from the stock L24 to complete the build. My question is, can I use the crank pulley/damper from my L24 on my L28? Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!