Dan Juday

This is a common issue. I don't remember where I relocated them on the LT1 but on my tpi motor I moved it to a boss that had the same size threads near the oil filter. Just move it to any convienient place on the block, the bellhousing, or on the motor side of the motor mounts. I would buy a drill and tap before I bought a relocator kit. JMHO

It would be interresting to see the weight difference between the two. An ounce here and and ounce there and pretty soon... Some of this is unsprung as well. This continues to confirm my suspitions that every area of the S30 was beefed up as the years went by.

There used to be a vidio tape produced by Ztherapy that showed how to modify a TR7 top to fit on a S30 droptop. I would be interested to see how it fits on a S130. Rory Bateman, who makes the Tomahawk Z, used a S130 T-top roof for the prototype of his four piece top for his S30 design. He commented that the S130 roof is dementionally almost identical to the S30 and it fit with very little modifications. Though, for a man that completely transforms Z car bodies, very little for him may be very much for you and me. Keep us up to date on the install. Being a Z31 Straman owner I'm always interested convertable jobs. Oh yea, cool car.

Hey Karl, To move the differential back to the later ('72 on) position you will need a later R180 mustache bar and a curved rear suspension crossmember. If the 280 bar you have is for an R200 you will need to re-drill it (a big pain, it's spring steel) to mount your R180 or just get an R200 diff. You will want to anyways after you swap in a stronger motor. The rear crossmember you have now is straight and it will interfere with the relocated diff. For the front diff mount you just spin it around 180* and bolt it up. That help? Edit: Yes, you will need a longer drive shaft from a later car. Hit the local Pic-n-Pull. You should be able to gather all the parts for less than the cost of your ticket. Slow down buddy, save money!

Good to see you're back at work on the project Alex. I was afraid it was going to die an unfinished car. Don't take any crap from Mark. He can spout off when he posts pics of his Zs' progress.

I've used the JTR mount in my 240 with a T5 tranny and in a 280 with a T56. On both I made backer plates for the inside and used the recommended stock GM motor and tranny rubber mounts. I had no problems getting the u-joint angles right and have had no vibrations with either car. I had to slot the tranny mount hole with the T56 and add washers to raise the tailshaft for proper alignment. That car has side pipes so exhaust clearance is NA. I run duel 2 1/4" pipes on my 240 and where they pass under the mount is not the lowest point in the exhaust system. The JTR piece has the advantage of being simple, easy to work with, and already made. My experiance after two swaps is positive. Zero tranny mount problems.

I'm sorry but it's hard to have sympathy for you. That scam artist fraud has been exposed here over and over and over again. Sending money to low life scumballs like him only encourages them. And don't be fooled. Just because he has lots of pictures of parts doesn't mean he actually has them or the molds to make them. He ripped off pictures of my car and he still has pics of John Washington's parts on his site which he claims to sell. He is a liar who sells crap and preys on the uninformed. Anyone who reads this site should not be uninformed any longer. The best you can hope for is that you recieve a pile of crappy fiberglass parts that will cost you more than you paid for them to have them fixed.

I would agree that an oil thermostat is overkill. I would add that it also presents several new opportunities for leaks at all those fittings.

Quit whining! I'm going to be on one roof after another today FIXING air conditioners.

That's NOT the way to do it. You'll need to weld the fenders back on and weld them to the newly enlarged wheelhouse. The stock fenders are a structural member of unibody. Bonding fiberglass fenders to an open quarter like that will make a very weak car and the fenders will crack in short order from the stress put on them.

I did the same as Rick with the exception that I used thin aluminum sheet rather than fiberglass for the wheelhouse. No problems. Note: Rick's sig needs updating.

Or even in front of the motor. There must be tons of room left there where the three forward cylinders used to be.

But wait! Just how British can it be if it's LHD?

Yes, the blue one is a stock hatch modified with a fiberglass "Pantera style" insert. I saw that car and talked to the owner at Z-fest in Fremont CA a few years ago. (It looks like the pics where taken there too). A full fiberglass hatch would be a better deal. He had issues with cracking that you can't see in the pics. You really have to love the look though to give up so much interior storage space in the rear. When my wife and I drove the Z to MSA we needed all that space for our luggage and what-nots. Never would have made it with that hatch.

Thanks Alan for the reference to the Tool Shed thread. An extremely informative thread. Too bad many people may miss it now that it's been moved. I too was under the false notion that the original G-nose was steel. I had seen an imported RHD Fairlady Z with G-nose that was the victim of extensive rust. The top center panel/hood extension was as badly rusted as the rest of the car. I believed the car to be original and that formed my misinformation. I'm now one bit less Z ignorant than before. Sorry for this off topic jaunt, but being such a conasuir of rare and original Z's how do you feel about us bodgers that fit 'Merican V8's in them?

Well dang! If I had known someone was filming and it would have ended up here I would have ripped a big smokey one for you. Just ask the guys that were at Blackhawk two years ago. Actually I figured the cops would have been all over that show exit. You know, kind of like shooting fish in a bucket. That's why I was creeping out all steath like.

Alex owns a Z?

Yes, although I've never checked that out for myself, it makes sense. But just because the voltage is stable doesn't mean the engine is running at the optimum AFR for conditions or even the AFR that the ECM wants it at. In open loop the ECM doesn't know what the real AFR is. It's using it's other sensors and its maps to extrapolate a particular fuel flow rate. While this still may be pretty accurate, much better than a carb I'm sure, it's still not as accurate as direct feedback from the O2 sensor (Well, kind of direct. Scott explained it. You know what I mean, right?).

There was a Bond movie that had an open version in it.

Yup, I missed it. I had my brain turned the other direction.