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?

If it's this one http://carpoint.com.au/used-car/DATS...s/2252865.aspx I'd do some careful checking with Motor Registration & maybe police before commiting to anything. A member of Classic Zcar Club > CAR FORUMS > Datsun 240K has mentioned that he couldn't find either the Nissan body plate or the ADR plate even after searching through the boxes of bits. Just might be nearly impossible to register in NSW!

YEAR: 1973 MODEL: KHGC110 (blown L28 power) BODY TYPE: 2dr Hardtop COLOUR: Yellow Yeah, I know - strictly speaking it's not a Skyline, it's a 240K GT

Lack of exhaust back pressure won't cause the engine to fail to fire. We've tended to concentrate on the ignition but... Assuming you get a halfway decent spark, get someone to crank it over while you use a screwdriver as a stethoscope to listen to the injectors. You should hear each of them ticking away evenly as the engine cranks. Reduce the load on the battery and starter while doing an injector check, pull the plugs and disconnect the low tension leads from the coil. It will spin over a lot faster and you should very quickly be able to smell fuel (no smell would make me suspect problems in the injection and/or fuel supply)/ You have spark, tested how? Be a bit careful with disconnected leads with the engine cranking over, I've known electronic ignition modules to fail when the HT leads were disconnected (back EMF causing a larger than normal reverse voltage spike and bang) Use a spare plug with the body grounded against the engine. You should see a healthy blue flash across the electrode to body and hear the crack. If the spark is more red than blue, check for poor connections to the coil. If it is marginal, CAREFULLY test by inserting a straight screwdriver shaft into the plug lead, hold on the far end of the plastic handle and keep the screwdriver shaft no more than 3mm from a good earth (cam cover is good). With someone else cranking the engine, slowly move the shaft away from earth until the spark just stops jumping the gap. Immediately bring the shaft closer to earth to resume spark jump. You should have got at least 9mm gap before it failed to jump. 12 to 15mm is a healthy electronic ignition on those cars. Anything less than 9mm means it won't fire a cylinder under compression. Make sure your battery is well charged, R31's and VL's don't like starting if the battery is a bit down. Swap parts one at a time from the old engine and try starting it with each change. If it doesn't work, go back to the parts you had on there.

I know you have already seen these on another forum but attached here so other people could see the difference too. Love that little CSP311 Sylvia! I last had anything to do with one of these when I owned a late '66 way back in '68.

Did you swap the ECU from the manual also? Not sure about the R31 but the VL doesn't seem to like the ECU from an auto unless it also has the trans controller (no idea why!) Does it try to start while cranking and then quit when the key goes to run? Have you checked the plug wires for correct firing order? How about for #1 being where it should be?

OK, this is actually for C110 not C210 but there isn't that much difference under the skin! have a look at http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20145 Lachlan has been there done that etc etc

Don't mix up the mounts and distributors or you will tear your hair out on why things don't line up! Unlikely that the original dissy and coil can't fire it so look for gross errors in timing. As Jason says, use the electronic dissy if you can. The only issue I've ever seen with this was ONE car that had developed more resistance in the wiring than originally designed into it so the electronic ignition wasn't getting enough volts to wotk reliably. The standard points system has a resistance wire inside the harness from just in front of those fuel pump wires right around to the coil positive. You can strip that out if you're keen or you can put another wire in parallel to it (either means cutting into the harness down by the right engine mount). Don't go there unless you have to and yell for help if it looks like you might. There are other solutions.

Have a look alongside the right frame rail just behind the engine mount. With any luck you will have 2 wires coming out of the harness, one earth and the other powered with ignition. C110's all have it and hopefully the C210 continued it! What did you swap in there that has two wires on the distributor?

Seems likely that you have the GXE engine loom and the Passage body loom. If the engine doesn't crank over with the key in 'start' position then you probably have Passage wiring expecting to connect to engine wiring that includes a park/neutral safety switch. Since that switch ain't there then it isn't going to get 12V to the starter solenoid. That it all plugs together doesn't mean it's wired the same. You're going to need a Passage manual with wiring diags and a GXE manual with wiring diags. Then you're gonna need lot's of patience to compare them and work out what's missing and what isn't connected where it should be. Good luck oh, and if you have used the GXE ECU then you don't need any other ECU I'm inclined to suspect that the Passage wiring doesn't provide a power supply to the ECU when used with the GXE engine harness

Unfortunate that Nissan didn't have the smarts to quietly ship / sell enough cars with appropriate upgrades. The McLeod/Whiteford car was a bog stock GL, basic L24 intake manifold, tiny exhaust, sedan/hardtop springs & dampers, 250mm front discs etc. The GT intake manifold might have only been good for a small power increase but that would have been enough for a few tenths a lap. Ditto the brakes, the 270mm discs were available but not fitted to the Australian market car so couldn't be used. How much gain? Hard to quantify but probably in the order of a second a lap or so. Suspension from the GT would have reduced the awesome body roll across Skyline and through the Dipper which had to be worth a few tenths! All up enough to have kept the Mazda RX3 behind. You really had to see the thing running to appreciate how bad it was and just how good McLeod & Whiteford were to keep the shiny side up. Then Mazdas wouldn't have led the class and the whole history of Nissan in Oz would have been different. But then again, the current Nissan 350z 'supercar' is a big yawn and the scant info leaking on the next Skyline indicates it will be an even bigger yawn, if not a technicolor yodel.