Search the Community
Showing results for tags 's30'.
-
Hello everyone, I picked up a 1971 240z in Oregon for $650. I'm sure I should of looked closer but I was surprised to find that it already has headers, a 5 speed swap, and a K&N air filter. I had my eye on it for about half a year and was lucky enough to finally purchase it. I was told that it was running when it was parked and it was last registered in 08. I brought it home thanks to some help from friends and family and now sits comfortably in my garage. I started out by changing fluids, bleeding the brake lines (the brakes were nonexistent), drained the gas tank and put some fresh gas in, and cleaned the spark plugs. After picking up a new battery and getting the starter and alternator tested I was able to fire her up. There was quite a bit of backfiring through the carbs and exhaust but each time I started her up it got a lil better and after changing the plugs I rarely get any backfire. I've got a huge list of things to buy/fix and am looking forward to all the fun and bloody knuckles that await me. I'm getting it running good for the time being and hope to dig in this fall/winter to fix some of the rust and interior.
-
From the album: 71 240z
I'm not sure how I missed this but my Z came with headers! -
From the album: 71 240z
I discovered that my Z came with a K&N air filter. -
From the album: 71 240z
-
From the album: 71 240z
-
From the album: 71 240z
-
From the album: 71 240z
-
From the album: 71 240z
-
From the album: 71 240z
-
From the album: 71 240z
-
From the album: 71 240z
I picked up my new 1971 Datsun 240z this weekend 06/17/2017 and getting ready to bring her to her new home. -
Version V1
48 downloads
Simple roll center calculator for the Z car based on measuring the angle of the control arm. I tried to list all the definitions and assumptions. Please drop me a comment if you see any errors or improvements. I checked it against my professional software and got the same values when using the same inputs so I think the math is correct.-
- Roll Center Calculator
- S30
- (and 5 more)
-
I am rebuilding a 1978 280Z and was planning all along to pretty much buy all of the suspension items available from T3, minus perhaps the coilovers since I wanted to go with BG Racing. I want to do a 2JZ swap with maybe a Z32 transmission and want it to be a fun street car. I will not be doing any drag racing or drifting as I do not want to beat the crap out of the car after all the work I will be doing restoring it. Recently I met a gentleman who had the S13 subframe installed and who claimed I couldn't go wrong with either set up but that the S13 subframe would give me way more options for upgrades as well as flexibility and adjustability. He also claimed it would be cheaper, unless I had to pay a shop to do the labor, which I would since I do not know how to weld. I contacted 2 companies that sell suspension items for the S30 and asked them their opinion on the pros/cons of the S13 subframe vs T3 stuff. This was their response: 1st company: "As far as I know, there is no mount kit for putting a complete S13 subframe under the car.....for good reason. The S13 subframe is fairly complex, yet poor handling design. The multi-link rear suspension is an inherently loose system. This is why they are such good drift cars, but rarely ever seen in road race. The Z car's original suspension geometry is a far better road race setup and linear handling design. It is proper sports car handling. The S13 subframe is a huge bulky setup as well. I think with a LOT of fab work you could put it under the Z car, but you'd be sitting at truck height because it would hang so low. In the end with all the fab work, I doubt you'd save much money, and you'd end up with a poor handling, ugly monstrosity of a mess under the car." And the 2nd company: "the s13 is a much better new technology it has similar to a double wish bone suspension which is far superior to the 240z rear suspension and differential. it will handle better. But it looks like a really long project with much welding cutting grinding fabricating. I would not do it unless i had all the tools already, and the skill to pull of such a project, and the amount of time for it. So do you have those resources is the questions? If you decide to keep s30 parts everything will kinda bolt on. any upgrade you buy will bolt on. All the parts are the same price. brake kits, suspension parts. so i'm not sure which one would be cheaper to do. It's a hard questions." Their opinions seems to vary, one saying it would handle well while the other saying it would handle better. Now I have not had the opportunity to drive a car that has either set up, but would like to know the opinion of the people who have done these upgrades. From the people with the T3 setup, how do you like it and would you go this route again? From the S13 setup, how difficult was the swap and do you wish you had gone with something easier and bolt on? Any and all information, advice and suggestions will be greatly appreciated. I did some searching around and found a few threads talking about the swap but not comparing the two in regards to handling and also cost.
-
So a friend of mine recently told me about a 1975 280z for sale... The car, for my area, was one of the best I've seen. Sure, it wasn't totally together or running, but the body was straight, didn't need much body work, and barely had any rust anywhere (the worst of the rust is on the inside of the hatch by the corners; worst of the body work is the pass. rear quarter). It was kept in storage and hadn't seen the weather for 30+ years, and at some point had a 350 SBC and 4 speed auto swapped in. The suspension has been refurbished a little; new bushings and shocks as far as I know. Original glass with no cracks or chips that I can see. The dash is cracked (pretty bad in some spots). The car came with pretty much all the stock parts that weren't installed on the car (trim pieces, carpets, lights, door handles, etc.). Needless to say, I bought it. I haven't done too much to it yet, just trying to get it situated for now and come up with a plan for where to start. I have some ideas but nothing set in stone yet. I'll try to keep this thread updated as often as possible with what's going on. For now, here are some pictures and a video from the day I picked the car up. If the pictures show up small, let me know. I can try re-uploading larger ones. Video Link: This is the worst of the body damage. It was explained to me that this was to fill in where the bumper wrapped around, as well as some trim holes
-
Hey all, I took my 240Z to the track last weekend, and because it was a bit wallowy at high speeds and had a lot of body roll, I'm now looking into changing up my spring rates. Current setup: 200 lb/in front springs 22mm front sway bar 250 lb/in rear springs no rear sway bar pretty thin RCAs on the front (18.5mm) lowered somewhat but not a ton 205/55R16 bridgestone RE-11s Koni yellow single-adjustable (rebound only) race shocks -2.0º camber front and rear 2.5º caster (can't run more until I modify bodywork or relocate strut mounts rearward) 0 toe front 1/16" total toe in rear Next steps I was initially thinking of: put thicker (30mm) RCAs back on increase spring rate to 300 front, 350 rear (or even 350F, 400R) add a rear strut brace (front has a triangulated strut brace already) However, I was reading about tender + main spring setups and they seem really interesting (To be clear, I'm using the same terms Eibach is here: helper springs: soft, just keep main springs seated at full droop. tender springs: have sufficient spring rate to impact driving under other conditions; I've noticed that some people use these terms the other way around). It sounds like it could provide a good compromise between a car that corners fairly flat and doesn't move around to much on load transitions, but still has higher ability to absorb bumps well. One setup I was thinking of was: 350# main springs in the front, with #300 tenders, yielding an ~160# effective rate until the tenders reach coil bind. And something similar in the back. But, I also see lots of downsides: it seems like with the simple shocks I'm using, you'll only be valved decently for either the soft or the firm part of the range. it seems like this setup would actually be worse than my current setup for high speed stability by reducing the effective rate in those conditions. the bump absorbing ability would only be improved when the suspension isn't already compressed, so it does nothing to help when cornering near the limit and hitting some uneven pavement, i.e. conditions where you actually want this. the sudden transition from 160# to 350# spring rate after an inch or so of compression sounds like a great way to unsettle the chassis. Anyone here have any experience experimenting with a setup like this? It sounded good on the face of it, but I'm not convinced it can work. But if it can't, then why does these setups exist? Is it just another compromise between comfort and handling, or are there actual rear-world handling benefits from a setup like this? My goals for the car are: 1: fun to drive on back roads, and okay to drive on regular streets and highways. and that performs well enough on the track that it's fun to push it to its traction limit (which it wasn't really with the high amount of roll and floatyness I got last weekend) doesn't have be super comfortable on our pothole ridden California highways, but I do want to be able to drive it fast-ish on less than perfect surfaces, so it should be compliant enough for tires to remain in contact with the road most of the time. Some pics to show the amount of roll:
- 25 replies
-
- suspension
- spring_rates
-
(and 4 more)
Tagged with:
-
Hey, i was planning on getting Work Equip's 03 replicas for my Z -Cosmo Racing Coilovers (already installed) -15x8 et0 FRONT (wheels that i'm planning to buy, equip's 03) -15x9 et0 REAR (wheels that i'm planning to buy, equip's 03) I'm planning to buy them and go with the 205/50/15 or the 225/50/15 to have some stretch and fit under my stock fenders, i'm currently on Cosmo Racing Coilover's for s30 that they can be dropped on 3'' Let me know your answers and if you have pics it would be better.
-
Hey guys, I have my 240z stripped all the way down and working on fixing some body issues before rebuild. I have replaced the roof skin as I had an aftermarket sunroof and wanted a slicktop. I'm wondering if I need to replace the entire section of the rear bumper/valance that goes all the way up to the hatch or just cut and patch the damaged portion. I don't have any experience with body work so not sure what the best approach would be. There is a very small ripple in the floor of the hatch and the very end of the frame rail has a little wow in it. Also looks like the right taillight frame is slightly bent. See pics. Thanks in advance! Cheers!
-
I recently bought my first Z, a 1972 240z with a pre-done L28 swap that, according to the PO, is stroked to 3.0 liters with forged internals and an upgraded cam. It's been a great car, however it runs on the original L24 carbs which have trouble supplying the necessary fuel throughout the rev range, and completely maxes out at 5,000 rpm. It is frustrating having an engine with so much potential for decent power that is held back by the carbs, so I'm curious as to what direction I should go with this project. I read on some long-winded article that I can either modify the carbs with larger needles and other components, have rebello bore them out, or go with an EFI system. I like the idea of EFI because I live in, and will most likely be going to college in a cold climate and starting the car is a difficult task. As I understand it, the engine was built with low compression by the PO for the eventual addition of a turbo later on (which I plan to do too, just a few years from now) and I'm told that adding a turbo to EFI is easier and more reliable to run than turbo+carbs. The PO also has a "manifold and actual rail and body for injection" that he is willing to give me a discount on should I go that route. So, I'm curious as to how difficult and costly it would be for me to make the switch from carbs to EFI, and whether or not the current carbs would be able to be modified to work with the current engine demands without a liberal amount of work. Also which would be the best in the long run for the eventual addition of a turbo? Thanks, Jack