NewZed

Get one of these from a 280ZX. Or just put a 280Z throttle body back on. Most people say if you haven't done any cylinder head work the 240SX TB is too big anyway.

Send a message to borini63 or dangerdan88. They sell a lot of parts.

Good luck. Probably need another rebuild kit.

There are springs but they're not "on the piston". Probably fastest to just go to your local auto parts store. http://www.oreillyauto.com/site/c/search/Drum+Brake+Hardware+Kit/01271/C0064.oap?model=260Z&vi=5142642&year=1974&make=Nissan

Coil bind implies that there might be enough spring there (length) it's just getting compressed completely by the weight. Seems like he has two weak springs, and two okay springs. So "coil over" wouldn't fix this specific problem.

To anyone who's followed the new Stagg/Vogtland spring/shock option, the Brandcarparts site is in much better shape than it was, with parts and packages listed by car. Pretty easy and looks promising. I'm mainly here because I'll probably buy the suspension package someday and like to keep up.

Actually, what johnc is saying, combined with the other thread, I believe, is that they're all the same company/person. Something weird going on, beyond LS engine. To summarize what you're saying - one spring (the VA) is way too low both front or back, the other spring (HA) is way too high both front or back. So both springs don't work. One question that might clear some things up is - where did you start? With a stock 240Z spring and strut combo and LS engine? Where did it sit? Or are you piecing the whole thing together? Could be that you just have a mishmash of parts that don't work together.

KYB's are about $200 for a set, or less. You could have got the springs from Brand for $180. http://brandcarparts.com/suspension-lowering-springs-nissan-240z Actually, they sell the whole set - http://brandcarparts.com/shocks-struts/select-by-car/nissan/240z-280zx/240z/1970-1973-nissan-datsun-240z-kyb-excel-g-shocks-full-set-and-vogtland-lowering-springs-kit-1-2-drop.html Doesn't help you but might help the next guy. Good luck.

You know that "coil bind" means the springs coils are touching? It means the coil can't compress any more. Doesn't really matter, but it would add a twist to the problem.

Kinda sounds like somebody cut some 280Z springs and screwed them up.

Here's what milenko said in Post 38 of the other link. I'd guess that you had 280Z springs but they should actually be longer and of higher rate. Seems like they'd raise a 240Z, not drop it. You have an odd situation. "The Vogtland's that came with the strut kit for the 280z. VA front HA rear"

Bummer. Search those part numbers and some interesting stuff comes up. I think that Stagg repurposed some Vogtland springs, and it looks like others have tried to copy their lead. You've been eBay'ed, maybe. Probably should have went through the channels shown in that link. Here's an eBay link mixing up Stagg struts with KYB part numbers, with Vogtland springs. http://www.ebay.es/itm/KYB-4-SHOCKS-SPRINGS-fits-NISSAN-DATSUN-240Z-70-to-73-early-260Z-361001-361002-/311009549336 Here's another that shows your part numbers, without the first letter prefix. http://www.ebay.es/itm/VOGTLAND-GERMAN-LOWERING-SPRINGS-fits-NISSAN-DATSUN-240Z-260Z-1970-to-1974-/400786157431 Both are jdmwerks13. Is this your guy? Maybe somebody with the parts that work will check their part numbers.

http://forums.hybridz.org/topic/117631-new-s30-shock-and-spring-option/page-2

There are (edit - three, see below) different springs you could have received. 240Z front or rear, and 280Z front or rear. Do they have numbers on them? You haven't really supplied much information. I've seen others report no problems and a suitable drop in height, for the 280Z. Edit 2 - the link below shows a common spring for the 240Z and 280Z front. Which means that the 240Z might sit higher in the front than the 280Z since the spring rates are the same. Don't know what rates are in the rear. The space for the springs is different in back between 240Z and 280Z so the springs have to be different. Maybe they only fit right for the 280Z.

Isn't there a bushing or bearing surface in the front cover? If there's not then the end of the shaft would wobble around nithe collar at the bottom of the distributor shaft. Seems like a bit of maybe unnecessary work to cut the oil pulp quill off. Went out and wiggled the distributor drive tang inside the cover on an assembled engine and it seems well-supported.

One more thing - square versus round doesn't tell the story. I have square and round flange R200's, both use the same bolts and have the same pattern. I've had them both in the car. One from a 1976 280Z, the other a 1978 280Z. Don't know why, but it is. You have to measure.

I had an estimate of about $150 by a local shop that did mostly 4x4 off-road vehicle work. Then I took it to a Porsche race shop and the machinist studied it for a while and was hesitant to even guess. He noted that it was a very important bearing and would take precise and accurate work. So I ended up swapping the bearing to the smaller one and will just replace the bearing more often if needed. If you do it that way it's just one easy drilling/reaming operation on a small hole, and some quick, rough, material removal. Some ballpark numbers and options for reference. You don't get the benefits of the bigger bearing but Nissan probably made that change to extend 150,000 mile design life to 200,000. It's not critical to performance of the transmission.

Worlds like that really exist???!! I thought they were just fictional creations for television.

Tire size matters. My gears work as expected to give an almost perect speedometer reading. 205-70-14. 25.3" diameter by calculator. Smaller would read faster. I've had a 3.54 and a 3.9 in it and the right gear gives the right speed. http://tire-size-conversion.com/tire-size-calculator/ Does the BW use the same colors and numbers as the Nissan 71B and C transmissions? Maybe that's the problem.

Don't make it complicated. The internally regulated alternators only need four wires. One to energize the windings (The "L" wire, "L" for Lamp), one to Sense the voltage level ("S" for sense), the big thick wire that carries the charging current, and ground. Ground is often through the case so there may not be an actual wire. "S" is easy, it can just go the battery positive terminal. The charge wire is easy also, it typically connects to the starter solenoid lug, (after running through the fusible links), which is connected to battery positive. L is the one that needs to be defined. It is just a wire that is only hot when the ignition switch is On (aka Run). If your alternator is good but it's not charging in the car, that's an L wire problem, or the charge wire is not connected to anything. Confirm the charge wire, then find L. Use a meter.

Disconnect the alternator and see if the same happens. Alternators have been known to short internally. 11.6 is low charge. Get a charger on the battery or you'll really get lost.

Titles get screwed up or you have an ownership problem. But at least you know what you're working with. Progress... Could be that someone wired in an extra set of lights and didn't fuse the circuit properly, then shorted it. When a short happens the whole length of wire will get hot but the part that doesn't dissipate heat the fastest will melt and/or burn. Then if it melts its way to another ground source there's a second short. The Hazard switch is in the circuit so that it can blink all of the lights when you press the button. There's no separate circuit, it's all one system. Hazard switches can cause a lot of problems.

What do the harness connections look like? That's the part that normally stays with the car. Your pictures are of the removable stuff. And the door pillar tag will tell you what year car you're working with. What's it say?

That does help. The delco alternator is internally regulated alternator so the 1971 external regulator doesn't need to be considered, although its old wiring might. The 8-9 at the dash meter, with the 10.3 at the battery shows that dash meter is wired incorrectly or you have a big voltage drop between the meter and battery. The 13.7 with the car off, assuming that the meter is accurate, would show that the alternator does charge. Unless that reading is right after removing from a charger (is the battery on a charger). The 10.3 when the engine is running is undefined since you didn't specify idle or revving. The alternator might just need more speed to charge or it might not be charging at all. Sometimes people wire their alternators in "one-wire" fashion and they have to be revved to start charging. The good news is that unless you touch wire ends to the wrong spots, all of those problems are fixable. Here's a link about the 10 that might help - http://bob_skelly.home.comcast.net/~bob_skelly/alternator_conversion/wiring_alternator1.html There's a lot more out there on the CS130 though. Have your alternator tested and if it's bad, consider that route.

It's probably a code that his machine shows related to something like throttle opening, or RPM. Try to find a smog test reference. Did a Google and found this - http://smogcheck.ca.gov/pdf/Smog_Check_Manual_ENG_2013.pdf with the page shown. Could be that his equipment actually lost power, not the car. Worth a follow-up. He should have been able to tell you what the code meant but many people today are just trained to a minimum level. Just do what the computer says.