IdahoZ

I used Adobe Illustrator. It is part of Adobe Creative Suite. If you plan on doing something similar, you will need to talk with your sign company to see what type of files they can use. If I remember right, they asked for an Encapsulated Postscript or pdf file. I can send you the files if you are interested or maybe set it up so HybridZ members can download them?

Kash; Sorry about the late reply, I have not been working on the Z for a while or keeping up to date with this site. The guages are stock. I just painted the housings white and had a local sign shop print new faces on some sign vinyl that had the sticky back. I designed the faces to match the AutoMeter faces and took them the file on a thumb drive. They printed a bunch of faces on 1 sheet of paper and charged me $20 bucks. http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc75/IdahoZ/GuageFaces.jpg

I really like how your Autometer guage swap turned out. I was thinking about doing this very same thing, as both my Speedo and Tach are Autometer Phantom guages. I opted to go a different route and make custom guage faces to match the AutoMeter guages. I also swaped the ammeter for a voltmeter. I may swap to AutoMeter guages in the future but this was a less expensive alternative and I could keep all 7 guages in my dash.

Well, I decided not to chance it and took the extra time to modify the backing board on the 240Z fuel gauge so it would clear the lamp in the 280Z housing (lamp is in the center of the can on the 208 models vs. off to the side on the 240). This way I can use my original 240Z fuel gauge and the 280Z volt meter in the same housing. I will need to use both the fuel and volt meter face places from the 280Z but I am making my own custom white face plates anyway so they will all look the same and will match my Auto Meter tach and speedo. I'll have to post some photos when I get them all installed. Thanks for your input.

I am wanting to replace my amp/fuel guage in my 1972 240Z with a volt/fuel guage from a 280Z. Will the 280Z fuel guage work in my 240Z? i.e. is the fuel tank the same size, sending unit the same, guage the same, etc. Thanks.

BlackBeaut; Your design is almost exactly what I am trying to do, but I would add a small 1.15" outside dia X 0.25" long extention piece on the top so that the seat can center itself inside the bearing. I also like the idea of using aluminum. Do you mind if I pattern mine after your design? Now I just need to find someone that is willing to make a couple of these for me. Thanks

My seat design would use the original insulator and bearing (not shown in the photos) and would be the same height as the origianl but it would have a seat designed to fit the smaller diameter coil over spring. The upper tapered portion of the seat is the same shape as the original so that it would fit up inside the insulator without having to modify it like you would need to do with a flate aluminum seat. The thickness of the seat between the bumpstop and the bearing is what I am trying to keep to a minimum along with a seat that will center the spring on the strut tube using the bearing as a guide. On the stock seat and with my seat design, this thickness is only 0.10" vs 0.60" if I use the aluminum seat and washer that came with my kit. The drawing actually shows the seat upside down, but you probably noticed that.

I am playing with the idea of having a custom upper spring seat fabricated out of mild steel for my 240Z. I am running coil overs and want to maintain the maximum amount of suspension travel that I can. I tried modifying my stock seat with the 2-1/2" muffler tubing, but was not able to get the tubing exactly centered and I am afraid the spring will rub on the threaded sleeve. I think this seat or something similar would work great and it would look good also. It is a hybrid of the stock seat and the custom aluminum seat from my coil over kit. I would use the aluminum seat from the kit, but I will loose another 1/2" of travel. Are there any machinists that would be interested in making something like this and if so how much it would cost to make two of them? Thanks.

I am only assuming that the "Normal Load" called out under the front spring specifications in the service manual is the "Sprung Weight"? All things being the same with the exception of the springs, the unsprung weight would not be enough to make a differance in ride height as long as I use the same weight as the service manual when calculating my ride height with the after market springs? I'm trying to figure out what the spring rate is and approximatley how the car will sit with said springs, as this is the information any potential buyer would probably ask me. I want to sell these aftermarket springs and do not want to mislead anyone, i.e. tell them that they will lower the car 1" when they probably will raise it back up to stock height if their existing springs are old and sprung. I have heard of people buying performance springs that promise a ride height drop, when in fact they do not drop the car at all, and in some cases they raise the car back to stock height. I guess the easiest thing to do is just provide as much information about the spring as I can and inform the buyer they need to make sure they will work for their application. Thanks.

I purchased a 1972 240Z from asomeone who had started a restoration with some performance upgrades and never finished the project. The car has new aftermarket performance springs on it that never saw the street. I have decided to go with new coil overs and was wondering if I could figure out what type of springs are on the car. I am just looking at the front springs at this time, and after a little measuring and testing, I think they are 140 lb/in springs (in the front) and would keep or return a 240Z to stock height. The car was in pieces when I bought it, so I could not really tell how the car would sit with all of the parts on it? I would like to have someone check my math so when I sell these springs, I can describe them accurately. The PO bought most of the parts for this car from VB and MS auto. The springs are blue if that helps. 240z (1972) Stock Spring Information (out of the service manual) Front Normal Load: 562 lbs Number of Coils: 10 Active Coils: 8.5 Wire Diameter: 0.417 inches Coil Diameter: 4.35 inches Free Length: 14.7 inches Comp Length: 8.0 inches Compression: 6.7 inches Spring Rate: 83 lb/in Performance Spring Information Front Normal Load: 562 lbs Number of Coils: 8.75 Active Coils: 6.8 Wire Diameter: 0.450 inches Coil Diameter: 4.325 inches Free Length: 12.0 inches Comp Length: 8.0 inches* Compression: 4.0 inches Spring Rate: 145 lb/in** *compressed length was calcualted @ http://www.engineersedge.com/calculators/comp_spring_pop.htm **spring rate based on the spring rate calculator at http://www.proshocks.com/calcs/coilsprate.htm and double checked with a spring compression test on bathroom scale (took 140 lbs to compress spring 1”) Summary: The stock spring on the LH side is 2.7 inches longer than the aftermarket spring (14.7" vs 12"). The stock spring will compress 2.7" more than the aftermarket spring (6.7" vs 4"). So the car should sit real close to stock height with the aftermarket 145 lb/in springs, right?

Thanks for all of your input and information on this. I agree that if I have to adjust the eccentric bushing such that the hole is at the bottom of its arc, I have just waisted my time relocating the pivet hole in the cross member and have introduced the bumpsteer I was trying to eliminate. I have decided to take pop n wood's and jmortensen's advise and use urethane or OEM rubber bushings in the front and ditch the eccentrics. I think this may be the best for the street and for what I will be using the car for. I haven't decided on the TC setup yet, but will probably go OEM here also. The only problem is finding the steel rod that goes between the bushings as I have not found anyone who sells these and my is gone, i.e. not used with the ball and socket kit. I really appriciate all of your input, this site has really been a big help in building my Hybrid. I wouldn't even try it without you guys. Side note - I just ordered a set of 16" x 7" Centerline Ventura's. On sell for $150 each. I want to machine a custom center cap for them, as the Centerline caps are pretty ugly, IMO. Will let you know how it turns out. Going to order my bushing now.

The eccentric bushings were on the front of my car when I purchased it. I understand that these bushings will affect camber when adjusted and the bolt tighted, but my question is how are they designed to rotate. The bushings on my car have been modified somewhat and I do not have any installation instructions so i do not know if they are installed correctly. I was wondering if these bushing were designed such that the aluminum eccentric core rotates inside of the poly bushings or if the poly bushings were suppose to rotate inside the control arm? In my mind when I visualize the aluminum eccentric core rotating inside the bushing, I can see the control arm moving in and out as the suspension moves up and down during normal driving. It would make more sense to me to have the bushigs rotate inside the control arm where the pivet point would be centered like a stock or urethane bushing setup. Does anyone using these bushings still have their instructions? If so, can you scan them and send them to me? As for the TC rod setup, I think I wll try it for now and see if I like it. I was just concerned about stressing my raod to the point of failure. Again this setup was on the car when I purchased it, and I have since rmoved everything from the front end to detail it. Does anyone have instructions on how to set up the TC rod ball and socket kit? It looks like the kit came with a gauge of some kind and installation instructions. Thanks.

I have the front end off the car and was trying to decide what to do with the front suspension. I went ahead and relocated the lower control arm pivet holes up 3/4" to help with the bumpsteer per the JTR manual. The previous owner of the car installed eccentric bushings on all forner corners. I will not be racing this car but would like a nice agressive street machine. A little info on my car before I ask my questions. 1972 240z 400 sbc / 400 hp / 400 lb ft torque T-56 transmission 2600 lbs Hypercoil coil overs 175 f / 225 r from MM Lowered 1" Tokico Illum struts 7" x 16" zero offset wheels with 225/50/16 tires Will be installing sub frame connectors and strut tower bracing Questions 1. Can I run the eccentric bushings after relocating the pivet holes in the crossmember? Looks like I will plenty of clearance as long as the eccentric hole is on the bottom and does not pivet up past say 90 dgrees, otherwise the CA will hit the crossmember. 2. The eccentric bushings look like they have been shaved a bit, as they are different sizes. Previous owner must have shaved them to fit the crossmember. How are these suppose to pivet? Does the aluminum eccentric core rotate inside the plastic bushings, or are the bushings suppose to rotate inside the control arm? 3. My eccentic cores are longer than the bushings when installed in the CA, which would mean the aluminum core would rotate inside the bushings which are press fit in the CA. Would this not change the camber as the CA moves up and down since the pivet point in the eccentric bushing is not centered but offset. 4. I have also heard about TC rods breaking when urethane bushings are used. The PO installed one of those ball and cup units that use the stock rubber bushing in the back. Has anyone experienced TC failures with this type of set up? Thanks.

I think that's a good idea. The guy I bought the car from started to restore it and ran out of time and/or money and let the car sit for about 15 years before I bought it. The gas struts I am used to are hard to compress and return rather quickly.

I finally got around to tearing the front suspension apart to see what I have. The springs (not a 2.5 ID coil over) look brand new, are 12" free length and are blue in color? The struts also look new and are silver with no other markings. Could they be KYB gas struts? I can push them down pretty easy and then they come back up really slow. Is this normal or are they bad? The bottom of the strut also had a little oil on it like it was leaking but I can not find a hole? I would like to re-use the struts with my coil overs if they will work. Thanks.

Well I think I am to the point that I am ready to start work on the suspension and was trying to figure out what length and rate of spring I need. The car will be used mostly as a street rod. I would like to have it handle good, have decent tranction but be steetable without a bone jarring ride. I like the looks of the larger wheel so I am thinking of going with something like a 16 x 8 wheel with a 5" offset and 225/50/16 tires on all fours. Here are my specs and what I was thinking. Any feed back would be appriciated. 1972 240Z (2355 lbs) minus engine and 4 speed tranny (525 lbs) which gives me a starting weight of approximately 1830 lbs. add 547 for a 400 sbc (575 lbs minus 30 lbs for aluminum intake/waterpump/gear reduction starter). Engine will be mounted in the JTR setback position with crossmember spacer. add 140 lbs for a T56 tranny add 16 lbs for an R200 diff to replace the R180 add ~50 lbs for misc stuff like frame rail connectors, strut bars, bigger wheels, LSD, etc. That gives me a car that will weigh approximately 2580 lbs when done. That is about 645 lbs per corner. I do not know what my front to back weight distribution will be? I plan on using a 1" front sway bar and 7/8" rear (as these came with the car). I will running around 375 hp and 400 lb/ft of torque. With the wheel and tire combo I plan on using I thought I would run the following for my coil overs: Front 10" coil overs (probably from MM or GC) 180 lbs with stock hat. Section strut tubes 1.5" High quality strut like Carrera Rear 10" 220 lbs with stock hat Section strut tubes 1.5" High quality strut like Carrera Opinions / feed back? Thanks.

Could you use the crossed drilled and slotted rotors that are offered for the stock 240Z setup with the 79-84 Toyota 4X4 S12 front caliper mod or do you have to use the non vented rotors with these calipers> Thanks.

Great post with a great deal of useful information. I have one question that I did not see answered here, maybe I just missed it. It's about the 4X4 S12 upgrade for the front brakes. Jmortensen's original post says this about the upgrade. FRONT BRAKES The 4 piston caliper: The Toyota 4 wheel drive pickup trucks from about 79-85 will bolt directly onto the Z strut and will work just fine with the stock non vented rotor. This upgrade will require the minor step of trimming the backing plate to make room for the new larger caliper. It is also recommended that the larger 79-81 280ZX master cylinder be used, since the 4 piston calipers displace quite a bit more fluid. Although the master cylinder isn't absolutely necessary, the pedal throw is a bit long without it. Fits most 14" rims. Question - can I use the cross drilled and slotted rotors that are offered for the stock 240Z setup with the 4X4 calipers or do I need to keep the non vented rotors? I have a 1972 240Z and would like to upgrade the brakes. Thanks again for this site, I never would have tried to do a Hybrid without it.

Anyone try these headers on a SBC with a JTR setback? http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/CHEVY-CERAMIC-COATED-BLOCK-HUGGER-HEADERS_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ33631QQihZ019QQitemZ8073572743

That Corvette pan is just what I was envisioning. Will that pan fit on my 1977 400 sbc?

I have read a good deal of threads discussing the need/desire of a lower profile oil pan (around 6-1/2") to gain some more ground clearance. I have not yet installed my 400 sbc in the car yet, but reading posts and looking at photos of other installs, it appears that most are routing their exhaust next to the oil pan and under the starter/oil filter making an exhaust install while using an RR or oval track pan with side kick outs a real challenge. I am planning on running a T-56 and a Weir bell housing which is about 1" higher (more ground clearance) than a stock 7-1/2" deep oil pan. I figure if I had a 6-1/2" deep pan and tucked the exhaust up tight, I could gain the maximum ground clearance possible with my setup. I also plan on not using the JTR spacers between the frame rails and cross member so I can gain an additional 1/2". So the question is where can I find a 5 quart wet sump pan that has a 6-1/2" deep sump that will not interfere with the exhaust? I was thinking - why not modify a stock pan, reducing the sump depth to 6-1/2" and expanding the sump like the RR pans, but instead of out the sides expand the sump to the front? With the engine in the setback position, there is plenty of room to expand the sump before the cross member would be an issue. Has anyone tried this? I am not an engineer but I think this could work. I have seen racing pans that are one continuous sump sloping form 6" to 8". I think this could also be done without having to modify the existing baffles too much and would probably be able to use the stock dip stick. I don't know if the stock oil pump pickup would work, but there are plenty of pick up choices out there that would probably work. What do you guys think? Would this be something that is worth pursuing or is an additional 1" of ground clearance not worth the trouble?

I just finished rebuilding a T-56 for my 240Z and was looking for information about the reverse lockout solenoid and what others are doing. My engine will not be fuel injected and will not have a computer. I decided to disasseble the solenoid to see if I could modify it in some way to lighten up the spring tension so I would not have the solenoid activating everytime I push on the brakes, etc. I found a simple solution which seems to work rather well. Just remove the drive pin that is part of the solenoid to allow the larger spring to bottom out in it's housing. I tried cutting the pin off but it is very tough, so I just ripped the guts out of the solenoid and pulled the pin out through the solenoid housing. Next I put the spring in the vise and compressed it enough to remove the snap ring that keeps it compressed. Then I just put the spring back in the housing and installed the housing sap ring to keep it there. The spring tension feels good, but if I feel like I need it stiffer later on, I can simply remove the spring and insert spacers in the bottom of the housing, thus compressing the spring allowing me to fine tune the tension. I decided to fill the empty solenoid housing with fiberglass resin to make it look a bit better.

A little more searching on the net and I found an article about Rockland Standard Gear out of New York that rebuilds T-56 transmissions and also sells those performance "No Walk" tailhousing bushings that almost twice as long as the OEM bushing. They tell me that no after installation machining is required. I got me one and will let you all know how it fits.

OK, I tried freezing the bushing with dry ice and heating the housing up with a propane torch. The bushing did not slip in like I thought it would, but it did press in much easier, but it still did not stay round and the slip yoke would still not slide in. Today I called and talked with a technician at Tremec and he told me that Tremec does not sell this bushing seperate but they do sell the tailhousing with the bushing installed. They press the bushing in and then machine the bushing so the ID is perfectly round and 38.23-38.28mm and thus providing a perfect fit every time for the slip yoke. So I guess I need to purchase a new tailhousing or take mine to a machine shop and have the installed bushing machined to fit the slip yoke. I think I will try the machine shop route first to see if it works. Anyone know where I can get one of those silicone bronze "no walk" performance bushings that are a little longer and provide more support for the yoke?

I am in the process of rebuilding a T-56 out of 1995 Camaro for my '72 240Z Hybrid. The rebuild seems pretty straight forward so far but I have run into a problem I can not seem to solve and the local transmission shop was also unable to assist me. I purchased a complete rebuild kit from the Gear Box which came with all new syncros, blockers, bearings, races, seals, bushings, etc. Since I had a new tailhousing bushing as part of the kit, I decided to replace it. What a mistake that was. The new bushing does not fit! When I pressed it into the housing it deformed into the grooves that are machined into the sides of the tailhousing and the slip yoke will not fit into the bushing. I removed it and purchased a second bushing and had the tranmission shop install it, same results. I emailed numerous transmission vendors asking for help and was told to use the correct tool. But nobody can give me a part number for this "correct tool". They all say to call Kent-Moore Tools and ask them. I emailed Kent-Moore and they told me they need a part number to look it up as their books do not tell them what tool it is. OK, I'm getting frustrated by now. I go and look through a service manual at the local Chevy dealership and find a listing of all special tools in the tranmission section. Guess what, no tool listed for the tailhousing bushing install. I go back to the transmission dealer and ask if they have any other bushings I could try. They give me two different bushings with slightly smaller outside diameters that are made by a different manufacturer. Hey, things are looking up. I go home and install one of the new bushing using a socket on the inside of the bushing so it will not deform. It deformed and the yoke would not even begin to fit. I pressed the bushing out and tried the second one using the slip yoke to actually press the bushing in so that the bushing can not deform. Well, once the bushing was pressed into the housing, the slip yoke would not turn at all. I had the use my press to get it out again. Has anyone rebuild a T-56 or know of anyone that has that has faced this problem?? Thanks.