New floors

[Guest fafafooey]

What order should I weld the new floors in my 240? I have the Zedd Finding's floors/supports. Do the floors go in and then the support or the opposite?

 

BTW, I wish these had a piece for the front of the floors. Mine are all rusted out in that area as well. I'm going to have to fab up a 10in piece to weld on top of it.

[z2go]

What order should I weld the new floors in my 240? I have the Zedd Finding's floors/supports. Do the floors go in and then the support or the opposite?

 

BTW, I wish these had a piece for the front of the floors. Mine are all rusted out in that area as well. I'm going to have to fab up a 10in piece to weld on top of it.

 

 

You have to have the floors in first in order to have something to weld the supports to. It's a pain, because they won't fit perfectly, and you will have to do some hammering and have to be careful not to warp them when welding. You have the choice of cutting out the seat rails, and going in from the top, or leaving the seat rails and coming up from the bottom, too. I recommend doing a search on the subject both here and Zcar.com, there are a few threads dedicated to the subject.

[Boy from Oz]

I left the seat front mounts in place for rigidity but removed the rears. I hindsight I probably should have left them as well. You do have to remove the bracing/strengthening plate located under the inner rear seat mount. I also had to slightly modify the seat front support to match the profile of the new floors.

 

(edit) I can't recall exactly but I think the spot welds securing the rear of the floor also secure the seat rear mount, so perhaps there is no option other than to remove that mount.

Edited April 13, 2010 by Boy from Oz

[z2go]

Oz, you are right about removing the rear bracket IF you need to repair all the way back. I didn't think about that... my car only had rust from right before the rear seat mounts up to the front, so I was able to keep both in.

[jacob80]

I just had the floors in my car replaced by a body shop in Omaha, Nebraska. I will tell you right now that the Zedd Findings floor pans do have a fitment issue regarding the side that comes up to the rocker. The angle of the original floors is not as extreme as the angle of the Zedd Findings floors. It works, it just won't be where the originals were. This is something that should be addressed when they are stamped, but they are not. Another thing is that the drain holes are not identical to the original floors, not that it matters much but I assumed these were replicas. Also, I ended up buying all new seat brackets from John at Bad Dog Parts. These pieces are of much heavier gauge, but he does not include the bracket that runs between the two rears, which doesn't necessarily present a problem as far as I'm concerned. I, too needed the extra meet up front under the pedals as my area up there was damaged, but for whatever reason, he didn't extend it all the way up there.

 

 

This is the photo that shows how much higher this side comes up on the rocker panel vs. the stock location:

 

 

Patch that had to be custom made:

 

 

I have more photos if you need something specific.

[at-jefft]

Thanks for posting those photos, I will be referencing them when I do my floors.

[Guest fafafooey]

Those picture just saved me a night of yelling "MF" at the top of my lungs. I just got done screwing around with it and when I lined the rocker edge up, the pan sat below the support. Good thing I came inside and checked it out. These definitely have fitment issues. Not only is the angle off on the rocker, the transmission tunnel is curved and the pan is angled and straight. They're the only thing out there so I guess we have to live with it. Back to hammering and yelling....I now see why beer and working on cars go together.

[johnc]

Ya really want some cussing and hammering? Try installing the 49 state 280Z replacement pans in a California 280Z that has the factory catalytic converter bulge just past the trans mount. Not only is the replacement pan 3" wider at the bottom then the original pan the OEM seat mounts are also narrower and have the bulge shaped into their inner side.

 

You guys have it easy, stop the whining.

[Guest fafafooey]

There's no problem a bigger hammer can't solve.

 

I got the rocker panel side screwed down and it looks much better than before. Of course as I get motivated to get the rest of it screwed in a T storm moved in. Once this is done, the passenger's side looks much easier since it's only rusted out in the center. The drivers side was real nasty so I'll be making a bunch of extra patch panels.

 

Thanks for the help!

 

Also, any extra pictures wouldn't hurt....maybe some of the underside by the front of the brace?

[yetterben]

Yes pictures and ......more pictures. I gotta rip my drivers side out next week. Sucks freshly painted car so i am gonna need to be extra careful of everything.

[Guest fafafooey]

I got half of it welded in before my gas ran out. Going really good so far. The biggest issue I had was some of the spot welds were over the "valley" in the rocker. I filled them as normal, but also ran a bead along the entire top of it to make sure it's not going anywhere.

 

Once this is in, I'm going to have to fab up an extension for the support. I had to cut away about 2 inches more than normal due to rust. Other than that, everything looks to be pretty straight forward.

 

I'll start taking pictures tomorrow.

[rturbo 930]

Ya really want some cussing and hammering? Try installing the 49 state 280Z replacement pans in a California 280Z that has the factory catalytic converter bulge just past the trans mount. Not only is the replacement pan 3" wider at the bottom then the original pan the OEM seat mounts are also narrower and have the bulge shaped into their inner side.

 

You guys have it easy, stop the whining.

I thought all 280Zs had the bulge? Mine does.

[madkaw]

I started a thread just on this issue of Zeds Findings Floors. I even e-mailed Charlie. The floors are made to deep up front and thus don't line up with the frame rail. So your choices are tacking it higher on the rocker or leaving it alone and not having a perfect level floor. It's a shame because it would be nice to use the outer flange of the floor as your starting point, but it isn't made properly. It is doable, but a lot of work for not so cheap panels.

My solution of a not perfect floor should be masked by the carpet and is hardly noticable from the outside.

[johnc]

I thought all 280Zs had the bulge? Mine does.

 

Although I'm not positive, the '75 and '76 California cars had the bulge and Nissan transitioned to bulges in all cars sometime during the 1976 model year.

[Guest fafafooey]

Could someone answer this for me quickly? I'm building it to ITS specs and I have Bad Dog subframe connectors. My stock reinforcement is pretty crusty on the inside. Would I have put the exact stock one back in, or could I use the Bad Dog one and just not put the rear section on to make it full length? I'd leave out the Zedd Findings one so it's not "reinforced".

 

It does say "every reasonable effort" and there is the safety argument. I haven't even started yet and I'm thinking like a racer......

 

 

Rules:

 

h. All chassis/structural/electrical repair, if performed, shall be

in concurrence with factory procedures, specifications, and

dimensions. Unless specifically authorized by the manufacturer

for repair or allowed by these rules, no reinforcement, i.e.,

seam welding, material addition, etc., is permitted.

i. Body repair shall be performed using every reasonable effort to

maintain stock body contours, lips, etc. Any body repair modification

having as its purpose increased clearance is prohibited.

In those circumstances where stock trim/molding pieces are

unavailable through all normal replacement channels, proof of

such unavailability shall be provided by the competitor.

 

Since they serve the same function, I don't see how they'd be illegal. It's thicker metal, yet the replacement pans are also thicker.

Edited May 13, 2010 by fafafooey

[z2go]

Could someone answer this for me quickly? I'm building it to ITS specs and I have Bad Dog subframe connectors. My stock reinforcement is pretty crusty on the inside. Would I have put the exact stock one back in, or could I use the Bad Dog one and just not put the rear section on to make it full length? I'd leave out the Zedd Findings one so it's not "reinforced".

 

It does say "every reasonable effort" and there is the safety argument. I haven't even started yet and I'm thinking like a racer......

 

 

Rules:

 

h. All chassis/structural/electrical repair, if performed, shall be

in concurrence with factory procedures, specifications, and

dimensions. Unless specifically authorized by the manufacturer

for repair or allowed by these rules, no reinforcement, i.e.,

seam welding, material addition, etc., is permitted.

i. Body repair shall be performed using every reasonable effort to

maintain stock body contours, lips, etc. Any body repair modification

having as its purpose increased clearance is prohibited.

In those circumstances where stock trim/molding pieces are

unavailable through all normal replacement channels, proof of

such unavailability shall be provided by the competitor.

 

Since they serve the same function, I don't see how they'd be illegal. It's thicker metal, yet the replacement pans are also thicker.

 

 

If you have baddog rails, from what I see, they would be prohibited. The zedd findings are the stock replacement, baddog are further heavy-duty reinforcement and subframe connectors, adding rigidity where there never was any stock. That would fall under "material addition" and "reinforcement".

 

 

By the way, since you are somewhat new here... this is what you would call a "threadjacking"

Edited May 13, 2010 by z2go

[Guest fafafooey]

It doesn't surprise me this forum is filled with people like you who do nothing but criticize people's threads. Half the replies are use search, use the search, use the search, with out providing anything constructive. I'll leave this **** hole of a forum like I do most other ones that are filled with assholes.

[johnc]

It doesn't surprise me this forum is filled with people like you who do nothing but criticize people's threads. Half the replies are use search, use the search, use the search, with out providing anything constructive. I'll leave this **** hole of a forum like I do most other ones that are filled with assholes.

 

I'll help you on your way.

[rturbo 930]

It doesn't surprise me this forum is filled with people like you who do nothing but criticize people's threads. Half the replies are use search, use the search, use the search, with out providing anything constructive. I'll leave this **** hole of a forum like I do most other ones that are filled with assholes.

It's in the rules. Use the search function and don't hijack people's threads because that's rude. Not to mention, he answered your question, and then you go and call him an ******* because he politely tried to point you in the right direction.

[z2go]

It's in the rules. Use the search function and don't hijack people's threads because that's rude. Not to mention, he answered your question, and then you go and call him an ******* because he politely tried to point you in the right direction.

 

Well, to be fair, I am sometimes told that I can be an a-hole.

 

It seems that guys like this are a dime a dozen... thanks John, for taking care of things quickly and efficiently!

 

 

 

EDIT: Why does it seem like this guy was just another jerk who created a new account to get on here and do the same stuff he was banned for in the first place? I feel he will be back again...

Edited May 13, 2010 by z2go