bjhines

I tried the stock brakes and various combinations until I ended up with vented toyota fronts and the MM 240SX kit in the rear. One of the things I found was that the rear drums do not have much bite under hard braking unless you are using a race friction material on the shoes. Custom lined rear shoes and the cost of the drums makes the rear drum brakes INCREDIBLY expensive to maintain, and they will always have lackluster performance. The fronts can be improved.. but they will always be overworked until you actually get some bite in the rear shoes. I was cracking rotors with dual ducted and vented Toyota disks in front until the day I actually got a decent set of rear brakes.

Pop-N-Wood, I think you interpreted that differently than I had intended in writing it. Your assumptions about my understanding of engineering practices are unfounded. I laid out numerous reasons WHY the S-30s rust in post #8. There I explained several shortcommings of the early unibody design that makes it prone to rust. I also gave several examples of how technology and engineering practice have progressed over time to provide much better rust protection in modern cars. My peeve is with those who try to lay the rust blame on poor materials. It is ridiculous to assume that poor quality materials are to blame. Anyone who assumes this... needs to pull their head out of the sand. It is sad that people still fall for this NASCAR redneck propoganda. The Japanese car industry put the rest of the WORLD to shame in this early period.

He could have just been looking to see if it was a front engine rear drive layout... Without actually seeing where the person was looking you can't really make a judgement on what he was looking for.

I have an observation. Not with this forum as much as others I visit. A lot of people can post hundreds of words explaining good reasons why Z cars rust. This kind of post is intended to give people a good clue on why they rust and where to look... maybe this is of no real use... But a part of the conversation will always come down to "low quality materials"... China?.. I do not have any opinion to give on political issues. Everyone makes good and bad commodities in ever country in every era. It is like saying the S-30 cars are made of ♥♥♥♥ and there is nothing you can do to understand or fix them. The fact is that Nissan put together an industrial engineering masterpiece from it's conception to delivery and for History. It would be unwise to assume they used poor quality materials at all. Everything was engineered to do exactly what it is supposed to do and nothing more.

I just watched the Boneyard show on the history channel. One interesting fact that came up is that 75% of the metal used in cars manufactured in the USA... 75% is SCRAP METAL!!!!!!! 3/4 of hte steel is scrap right here in the good old USA. It is facts like these that make me feel like the argument that poor quality steel is NOT the problem with rusty old Japanese cars.

No offence SHO-Z. This is just a pet peeve of mine. The poor quality materials theory is a no go. There are obvious engineering faults with the rust-prone early unibodies. The poor quality steel idea was an ignorant attempt aimed at ignorant people to slander the import car makers in general. There may very well have been some aspects of the Japanese steel supply that was not up to spec with the steel that American manufacturers used. Those faults have a lot more to do with the performance of the metal during the industrial processes involved with stamping and forming the metal. In fact the "low quality steel" the Japaneese used was more than enough to make American cars look like rolling shitpiles by the middle of the 1970s... and everthereafter.

I have the all metal one I made for the Windtunnel project. I would be willing to sell that one.

Thanks Pete! I still have to get through painting this project. I am fitting up nearly every piece of the car(inside and out) to make absolutely sure that it will bolt together without further modification when it comes back from paint. Ohh god.. the dreaded paint jail is about to begin. It is almost more agonizing becasue I will have assembled the car to a nearly driveable state by the end of this weekend... Only to disassemble it again and wait weeks or months even for it to come back painted and ready to permanently reassemble.

I think MOST of the rust problem comes from the fact that the entire car is stamped out of 26g sheet metal. There are some design aspects that also contribut to the problem. The primer they used was designed to "weld through". The individual sheet stampings were primed BEFORE the chassis was spot welded together. They literally welded right through the surface primer. The original protective primer is very thin and only does a minimal job of sealing the metal. There are a lot of stampings that overlap one another and trap moisture. The overlapping areas also make it impossible to PAINT in between the overlapping surfaces. To make matters even worse they used seam sealer applied with a brush(or fingers). The seam sealer rarely sealed the seams properly. Excess sealer also trapped water in places it needed to drain. The floorboards rust very badly because the tar noise insulation pads were applied BEFORE PAINTING. The only thing under the tar pads is pre-assembly primer-sealer. The tar pads were never applied in such a way that water could not get under the insulation. The factory never used seam sealer around the edges of the tar pads to ensure that they were water tight. The combination of the poorly applied tar pads and the fact that water could ealisy get under them meant that MANY of the S-30 Z cars rusted within the first YEAR they were on the road. Modern design and manufacturing has eliminated most of these problems. Many cars are dipped in paint and sealer to ensure that every nook and cranny is filled with PAINT. The cars were designed in an era before they had completely figured out how to make a thin guage unibody car that would resist moisture and rust.

WHOAAAAA on the dishwasher detergent!!!!!!!!!!!! Almost all of the dishwasher detergents have CHLORINE BLEACH. The Chlorine will instantly rust everything in you engine. You need a surfectant degreaser. Not a caustic nightmare. USE SOAP.

Maybe it's just not broken in yet?

cheap water pump??? Try the factory pump and see what happens.

Hmm... Rust and cracks aside!!!!!! Springs and struts: The sport packages can sit a little low. You might want to try the "Euro springs" that Motosport Auto sells. Those springs combined with Tokico blues(non adjustable struts). Repairs: Steering mounts, steering coupler, engine mounts, tranny mount, differential mount, mustache bar bushings, suspension bushings, ball joints, tie rods, wheel bearings, etc... should ALL be replaced with stock or urethane, whatever, just replace all the worn out parts. Do it all at once and then address any alignment issues. Alignment: Alignment issues can be fixed by adding a few washers, ovalizing the holes in the front crossmember or the tower tops, or relatively inexpensive aftermarket parts. Parts not suited to rough use: 1. I would stay away from offset aluminum/delrin "camber bushings". 2. do not install the aluminum/nylon Ball and socket Tension-compression-rod cups. 3. Make sure you use the urethane TC bushings in front of the TC buckets with factory rubber bushings behind the TC buckets. You can crack your TC rods if you bind it up too tight and expect full suspension travel on a regular basis. Weight: You should be good to go with a snappy ride that can handle the rough conditions like a rally car. Make sure you keep it LIGHT WEIGHT. Dump the spare tire, get a lighter battery, loose the bumpers and mounts, get a new aluminum radiator that holds less water with better cooling. You can also find a huge number of other parts that can take away a few pounds at a time to add up to a really lightweight car that still ahs all of it's functionality and interior. Wheels: Use lightweight 14"x6" wheels with generous sidewall 205/60/14 tires. Steel wheels bend easily unless they were intended for heavy duty use. You don't want to put heavy duty wheels on your Z-car. The unsprung weight of these cars is important and it usually grows considerably as people add bigger brakes, longer lugs, and wheel spacers. I would also stay away from the universal/dual lug pattern wheels. The extra, unfilled holes considerably weaken the wheel hub.

The differential crossmember is done and fitted. I had to clearance the top surface to clear the lowered differential nose. Actually the only thing that hits it are the nuts that attach the urethane mount. I can just barely fit a rubber pad in between the diff and the mount to keep it from clanging. I also modified the bottom of the crossmember to allow dual exhausts.

STROTTER was the member here who posted the Camaro boot idea on the first page of this thread. The stock 1988 Camaro SHIFTER binds the 1973 240Z BOOT enough in first and second gear that it would need to be moved over slightly. Keep in mind that this is with the 1988 factory shifter with a very wide 1" tube forming most of the lower half of the stick. A smaller diameter rod might clear the factory boot. The PRO 5.0 shifter has it's stick attached at an angle and it is a smaller dia. rod. The pro5.0 shifter would probably fit the factory boot with no modifications. We would have to see it mounted to confirm this. I don't particularly like the Camaro boot because it interferes with the factory center console. It is nice to see that it will work in a pinch though. Pic of the Camaro boot with the tranny in 1st gear. Here is the shifter in 5th gear. It is being pulled back out of gear by tension on the inner boot. The boot is caught under the inner lip of the console. The boot bellows need to slide as well as flex. There is just no room in there for that kind of movement.

LOL... Now I am thinking I might like having the shifter right next to the steering wheel for that NASCAR feel. It seems that the PRO 5.0 shifter might get the stick too far away. Could you post some pics and angles for that PRO 5.0 stick?? There are several other similarly priced options out there... It would be interesting to find out if the PRO 5.0 could be easily modified to get the length and angles right.

The Camaro boot is molded rubber with a steel reinforcing strip molded into it's perimeter. It is very ductile and can be easily formed to fit the tunnel. I have not put any screws into it yet. It is just bent to fit and laying on top of the tunnel in that pic.

I slapped on the adaptor flange so I could get the driveshaft length measured and take my shaft off for shortening. My required driveshaft length comes to 19.5" center-to-center between the hinge points at the yokes. I am taking it to the driveshaft shop this afternoon. Ohh BTW. I have measuerd the length with a .75" spacer holding it from being completely inserted into the tranny.

I spun them both to make sure the spot was right on. Of course one of my pointers is a little less than accurately aligned. But it is only scribing a circle a half an inch in dia., so it is pretty easy to find the middle. Here is a pic of the differential mounted. I still need to do a few little things... like clip the flat washers attaching the mount. They are not sitting flat. I am changing the engine mounts to a harder urethane style mount. I also need to measure Yoke to Yoke for the driveshaft.

ok... I got the damn differential mounted. The R200 is MUCH!!! heavier than the R180s I am used to. I had to slot 2 holes to get everything bolted up properly but all in all it fits VERY well with the Ron Tyler mount. I will have to clearance the bottom crossmember a little bit to bolt it back in. I still have to modify it to allow dual exhausts as well. I slapped the laser tools on the tranny and diff just the way they bolted up. I was dumbfounded that everything lines up evenly without any adjustments. A. The laser on the tranny points backwards and hits the diff flange an inch low and to the right. B. The laser on the differential points forward and hits the tranny an inch high and to the left. Correct me if I am wrong.. but that is dead on the spot. It is horizontally and vertically EVEN on both ends. Probably 2 degrees of driveshaft yoke angle.

2 pointers complete! now to mount the differential and see what happens with my new Ron Tyler mount. ...

I formed the 1988 Camaro boot to fit the tunnel. What a great idea! I bet this boot would work great for guys doing other tranny swaps with less than ideal shifter locations. ...

Thanks for sorting that one out P-N-W... As far as toolshedding the thread.. That is a little harsh considering it isn't really about the alignment tools specifically. I managed to find a $40 boresight laser that is accurately aligned in it's case. That would really be the shiznits to make an adjustable length apparataus.

The credit for the laser pointer goes to another HybridZ member. JT1 pointed out that PParaska was one who has written this up before. I have run across this technique on several occasions. the lasers seemed like a good way to do this rather than worrying with even more expensive magnetic angle finders. The laser pointers allow for vertical AND horizontal adjustments simultaneously without hassle. I am still working out in my head some of the finer points to this. I am thinking that a piece of elastic string put through the lens housings(as close to center as possible without blocking the beams), will give me a center point to shoot around. The idea is to put a paper or cellophane target midway on the elastic string. Then as you move things around the centerline(target on string) moves with every adjustment. This will make things even easier to deal with than constantly re-marking centerline for every adjustment. The idea(I think) is to keep the 2 laser spots equidistant from the centerline AND diametrically opposed. I also wonder if the laser lens should be placed at exactly the hinge point for each universal joint. The actual solid length of the driveshaft would be exactly what is being referenced. I could have cut the tubes at specific lengths but the misaligned lenses would have made using the original pointer bodies at a longer length pointless. Even as short as they are I still had to offset the base to keep the actual lens on centerline.

I got 2 laser pens from Radio Shack. They were on sale for $10 each. They are quite bright for a cheap laser pointer. The laser lenses are not particularly well aligned in the bodies. I considered using gunsmith boresighting laser pointers but they are 10 times as expensive. I cut most of the battery holding portion of the bodies off on the lathe to get a nice perpendicular mounting surface. I soldered wires to connect a battery pack and I kept the push button switches intact. I notched the bottom of the housings to allow the wires to pass through. Then I glued them on a magnet(mounted in the chuck). I used the tailstock center to align the laser spot while the epoxy hardened. I also packed the end of the pointer's body with epoxy to keep the circuit board and inner parts still when the push-button switch is depressed. This is where the laser spot hits the rearmost crossmember before I have even begun to align the angles. I still have to mount the diff and build the second pointer. ...