aarc240

Something like that! I'll PM shortly

Thanks Shan (funkymonkey), Really useful info, I'll chase up a copy of that book. Yeah, sometimes wiki really is flaky but a published book would allow me to establish that the RB was a pre '86 engine. That's the first step toward an RB powered 240Z rally car.

Researching the history of the RB engine and I've got conflicting dates for when it was first introduced. Some say 1985, others just don't give a commencement date. Does anyone have this information in a form that proves the introduction occurred in 1985, when & where that happened. Factory advertising, product brochures, whatever as long as it actually gives the date. thanks folks

The info on the residual pressure valves is good but don't leave it out of the rear circuit altogether. You can't (easily) modify a drum brake residual pressure check valve to a disc brake version as they both provide residual pressure in the lines - just different amounts to suit the different brakes. Drum brake circuits vary in residual pressure according to the original design, commonly 10 psi for Australian & American, either 7 or 10 psi for Japanese and anywhere from 2 to 15 psi for the various weird Pommie stuff. As Matty described, it stops knock-back of the shoes and is dependent on what sort of return springs etc are used in the design. Disc brakes are pretty much universal at 2 psi. That is JUST enough to stop pad knock-off in normal use so that you don't get that dreaded long pedal.

Update - the blown L28 has gone to Nissan heaven. Now replaced with L28 on LPG with twin Gas Research Australia gas carbies. At least this one still has a crankshaft and rods inside a block that isn't ventilated!

Has the brake master cylinder been changed at some point? Alternatively, was this car fitted with a drum brake rear end originally which has been upgraded to disc? Does it wear the rear pads quickly as well as making lots of noise? Wear evenly across the whole pad (ie not thin on one edge etc)? What you are describing makes me suspect that you have a drum brake type pressure maintenance valve in the rear brake circuit. Could even be the wrong proportioning valve. What either can do is prevent the rear pads returning to rest position correctly after each brake application. The problem is that the failure to fully return is cumulative so all seems good to start with but the pads gradually apply more and more load on the discs. It doesn't do much good for performance either so I'd sort this out before chasing that engine gremlin much further.

Comparison of two cars tends to indicate that the same platform was used so presumably the carpet would interchange. No guarantee though - I haven't actually tried installing the C110 carpet in a C210. Expect the cheap stuff through eBay to stretch and move around pretty quickly. Why not try Exact Fit Moulded Auto Carpets on (08) 8337 6000. Not the cheapest but I have had good results when they had the right parts. Indirectly related but may save some aggro: Buy about 5m of good quality Velcro hook'n'loop around 25mm wide and a tube or small tin of real good 'gorilla snot' trim adhesive. Places like Spotlight (haberdashery or clothing material) for the Velcro. A real automotive trim or panel supply firm for the adhesive (not Supercheap etc!). Secure the edges with Velcro plus a couple of strips across under the front footwell areas.

Here you go: http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi...=ADME:B:SS:AU:1 Doesn't matter about the FI cutouts as the carb manifold with either FI or earlier gasket will seal them. A FI head will be drilled/tapped already for both FI and carb manifolds too. $200 for a head?!? Ouch! I normally get a complete L28 motor for $300 or maybe a little more!

Stay with the 'normal' head gasket unless you have some serious compression increase. Is the engine actually an L26 (ie has the larger bore)? If yes then an N42 head from either a late 260Z or an early 280ZX will be all you need. Ported?? Why?? A standard N42 will flow all your twin SU's can supply even with a lumpy cam. At most get in there with a coarse sanding roll or drum and just knock off the daggie bits. No reshaping, just smooth the rough spots down some. btw, I hope you have a factory service manual (and NOT a Haynes or Scientific Publications piece of sh*t).

Just eyeballed the two setups - an RB30 in VL and an early 280ZX L28 (power box version). One task will be changing the drive pulley on the L6 type pump to suit the polyrib or flat style belt used on the RB30. Until both are off the pumps it is impossible to say what is needed but you may be lucky enough that they are interchangeable. If not it's not difficult to solve, just hand both to a good machine shop with clear instruction that you want one pulley that has the innards of "A" and the outer belt drive of "B" and exactly what offset from either the inner or the outer. face is required. Some fabrication will then be needed to put the L6 pump in place of the RB pump with the belt lined up (at least that is the case with the samples I have) but again it doesn't appear to be a major job. You may be best off trying the pump swap first as I'm told that L6 pumps do exist that physically interchange with RB pumps. If you're lucky it will be easy to get the pump on, then you can sort out the pulley part.

Check out the Nissan factory specified line pressure for the R30 power box and the R31 power rack. Most power steer boxes of the fixed ratio type run line pressures up around 1200 psi, variable ratio boxes are frequently up around 2000 psi but power racks seem to be significantly below 1000 psi. Mix a power rack pump with a power steer box and you may find unacceptably heavy steering. Mix a power steer box type pump with a power rack and you will blow the seals out of the rack. Swappimg an R31 rack into an R30 sounds feasible but you're going to need a good engineer to avoid an evil-handling car with lots of bump steer. You might find that a 280ZX rack is a better fit.

That 109bhp was achieved with a REALLY restrictive exhaust and a puny carb. Install a big bore exhaust from the manifold back. Adapt a better carb (I think these were a single barrel in which case a 6 cyl h Holden unit would be pretty good). Remove the engine fan and go electric. Fit a GOOD ignition upgrade (the Silicon Chip HEI kit available from Jaycar, Dick Smiths etc is plenty good for this car) I would estimate as much as 30hp could be found just with these alone so 109bhp would actually be horses instead of the ponies they measured things with back then. That should fix up the Toyota!!

Get confirmation from your State's DOT (preferably in writing). I have been advised (DOT SA) only one set of belts can be installed even though the correct anchorages for the others are there. The seat isn't the issue, the rails & mounts are. So, either 1 rails from the seat manufacturer to bolt to the stock in-body mounts (they will have already certified that combination to be ADR compliant) or 2 rails from the seat manufacturer with new body mounts that then must be engineer certified and accepted/approved by your DOT. That may be as simple as decent adaptors between the rails and the original in-body mounts. The back seat must still come out and you will usually find that the average police officer will look favourably on a 'responsible' attitude. If he reckons you are genuine in trying to prevent injury to others he can be remarkably understanding. Alternatively, talk to someone in your DOT. You may find they will issue a modification approval which actually covers the two alternatives (harnesses / no rear seat OR lap sash / rear seat) or else a letter confirming that when the harnesses are installed then the rear seat must not be. That alsp implies that they realise that it is not a permanent alteration.

Issues: 1 the seat must be ADR certified 2 the seat mountings must be engineer certified if a direct replacement to anchor to the in-body factory attachment points are not available from the seat manufacturer Issues: 1 the seat belts must be ADR certified 2 the anchorages must be in accordance with the National Code of Practice for Light Vehicle Construction and Modification (NCOP) see: http://www.dotars.gov.au/transport/safety/...n/vsb_ncop.aspx If the seatbelt enters the safety areas specified in NCOP then that seat position must be removed. More importantly, removing the seat isn't the end of it - the vehicle must be re-certified with an appropriately reduced seating capacity. So, no you can't just pull the rear seat out, bolt in any old seat and throw in a harness. A way around it: Use ADR certified seat belts and install a completely additional set of belt mounts. Get those certified, together with the seat mountings. When using the harnesses, remove the rear seat entirely and fit a neat carpeted panel in place of it. Carry the standard belts all nicely packaged in plastic together with a copy of the certification documentation and the official approval papers (Dept of Transport etc). If queried explain politely that the car normally has standard belts and rear seat but for specific occasions these are changed for the alternates. We do this with our 240K GT for navigational rallies etc and Transport SA was satisfied that it was geniune and reasonable to do so. btw, there is NO point in a beaut seat and flash harnesses if you don't invest in a roll bar with appropriate rear braces. Again, see NCOP

If it's still in a car, hotwire it! Disconnect wiring from coil +ve, wire direct from battery +ve to igition coil +ve, leave the ignition coil -ve wiring as is and crank it over. Should fire right up. Just disconnect battery +ve to stop. Hard to pin down! If bores are good, so that at most a small ridge has to be removed and pistons can be re-used I've done it for less than $500. btw, which city are you in?