All Activity

So far it appears that cadmium was NOT banned in Japan in 1970. Therefore it is possible that cadmium plated hardware was available in the automotive industry in 1970 and early 1971. Carl Back has evidence apparently obtained from a very reputable high level technology company, Honeywell, that cadmium was present on the hardware he had tested from 240Z's. It's not clear how much. Maybe a plating bath was contaminated and there was just a trace. Mistakes happen, and sometimes deception. There are easily imagined scenarios where cadmium plated hardware could make it on to a 240Z production line, especially since cadmium was not banned and was still used in "more than 1,000 Japanese plants" in early 1971 . At this point the argument is between what Nissan's documents say, and what Carl Beck observed, and what general public documentation from the time period describes. That's the whole thing in a single sentence. All that I've done is add a little bit of clarity. Forum members can draw their own conclusions. The main point, Carl Beck's public service announcement, in a way, might actually be for people working with early 240Z hardware to assume that it might contain cadmium and to take appropriate precautions. Especially since the aftermarket appears to be offering cadmium plated hardware. Maybe Carl got some aftermarket bolts? Who knows. https://www.zeddsaver.com/pages/about-us https://www.nemetalworks.com/cadmium-plating-services

Let's take a look at the random example of a bolt from the front suspension. It's one of the hex bolts that holds the balljoint onto the transverse link. Part number from the 1970 Nissan C-187 Parts Catalog for the S30 and PS30 models is: 81-30820-65 BOLT WITH WASHER. Nissan Engineering Standard (NES) tables, the '81' prefix identifies it as a Hex bolt and the '65' suffix - when you look it up on the above table - shows us that it is Galvanized/Zinc Plated.

Mike's removed them now but about a month ago there were some post in Russian that had nothing to do with Zs.

That makes sense, but the problem is really just cosmetic (once I've confirmed that the exhaust problem has been corrected), so I don't think I want to go as far as adding a second strut to correct it. I don't think all cars with the single strut have raised driver side hatches, though, so I'm thinking that there are other ways to address this. If the hinges are worn, that might be a place to start, or maybe the two hinges just need to be adjusted relative to each other to lower the driver's side? At this point I haven't glued the seals back in or attempted to adjust the hinges or latch, so I think I'll move ahead with those steps and see how close I can get things to flush. The upper portion of the new inner seal is almost vertical when installed. When the hatch is closed the vertical portion slides outward against the underside of the hatch to create the seal, so I expect it to compress a little over time as well. As an aside, I was happy to see that, with a couple of careful initial closings where I manipulated the seal at the hinges, the seal is sliding over them properly. Both my original seal and the replacement were mangled by the hinges. I've been procrastinating on the next steps because I know I'm not going to enjoy removing the adhesive from the car before gluing the new seal in, but I'll report back when I've made progress.

At the risk of flogging a dead horse. The fact that Japan banned cad plating and the fact that Nissan documentation doesn't mention CAD are two pretty compelling indicators of what was in use. Not to mention that when you find an old plated part that hasn't been exposed to the elements such as the AM radios chassis and you re-plate in yellow zinc, the finish looks pretty identical to original to me.

What's the problem?

I have a set of aftermarket wheels on my 1977 280z with 195/70R14 front and 225/60R14 rear and I really don’t advise going over 195 front as the steering becomes very difficult. I do have the original wheels (same as you have) but I don’t know what the tire size is on those.

225/60 is out of the question. Either a 195/70 or 205/70. The correct size for that rim is 195/70.

I know these datsun 260z rims quite well and i would never go over 195/70R14 tires on these!! The 280zx has 6 inch wide rims and 195/70R14 tires on! The standard on 5,5 Inch rims is 185 and max 195 i would advice you! Best drive would be i think the todays 185/60R14 but then it leaves a bit of open wheelhousing.. I would prefer a good ride above a good LOOK! ;-)

@Zed Head Have you tried searching using the Japanese language? No, you're putting the cart before the horse there. How about 'Without a document explicitly stating that Cadmium-plated parts were used on these cars when they were made, the assertion remains anecdotal.' Aside from the issue of legislation, have you considered the elephant in the room here? Where does the assertion that the electroplating and protective, sacrificial chromate/passivate coatings we are discussing here were CADMIUM actually come from in the first instance? Where's the source? I've seen 'Cad' being referred to on this forum - and elsewhere - for many years as though it is established fact. Mostly from USA-based individuals. Where did that start, where did that come from? Can anyone provide any official data, document or communication from Nissan which talks about Cadmium electroplating being used on these cars in period? I'd be delighted to see it if such a thing can be found. Meanwhile, we have official, period documentation from the manufacturer - specifically relating to the S30-series Z - published Pro Bono for our use in maintaining the cars, which states that fasteners and fixings were electroplated with ZINC coatings. No mention of Cadmium. I posted an example of this, and you have - so far @Zed Head - all but ignored it. Any specific reason for that?

If you do one at the time you have a (mirrored) example there to see how it sits/comes together again.. and... ALWAYS make pictures BEFORE taking apart.. it's so easy to miss that sequence of the little rings/parts on there! RULE NUMBER ONE: MAKE PICTURES OF EVERYTHING YOUR GONNA RESTORE!

The first versions were (as far as i know) never sold officially, but only delivered for testing as prototypes. Some ended up in private ownership. but i guess those were very few. The upgraded suspension, front and rear spoilers, 5-speed transmission and the different front turn signals, etc were standard equipment on all european cars. Even though the parts catalogue lists things as optional, as far as i know, most (all?) european Datsun importers didn't sell any dealership options and most cars were sold as standard european final spec cars. Aside from Portugal, of course, which had their own specifications.

Yes me too, they look great especially with the old alloys.

Can't say anything about fitment but I do like the T/A's. Had them before and think I'll be going back, black walls out for next tires.

Hi All, Normally I can answer any question I have using all available sources on the internet but with this question I want to confirm with this community before pressing the buy button. I have a stock standard 1977 280z. I have purchased and reconditioned a set of 14x5.5 Nissan alloys (see pictures). I live in Qatar so tire choices are extremely limited. I can get some basic Yokohama ES32 in 195/70R14 if I want a stock black wall look. However I am tempted to import some BF Goodrich Radial TA's in either 225/60R14 or 205/70R14 at 4 x times the cost - because I love the look. My question is that with 5.5 inch wide alloys can I definitely get away with the 225/60s (which have a similar circumference to stock) or do I have to go with the 205/70s (which have a taller/larger circumference)? I have read a lot of people saying that 225s are OK, however I worry that they have 6 inch wheels not 5.5. At 4 x the price of the tires I can get locally I really don't want to get it wrong. Thank you for your help (and please feel free to share pictures in your response).

Doesnt look too bad at all. Im guessing by the posters name that it is going to be listed on Hagerty Marketplace; yet to be listed at time of my posting.

I think it can be unbolted with the fenders on. just enough room with a swivel, a bent wrench, some friends and a 6 pack. lol The backing plates can be retrieved if they fall, use a stick magnet, you might have to remove the ECU, Holding them in place while starting the bolts is another circus act. get some friends back over and a 12 pack. haha!!

Hmmm. Not sure if this will help, but: OEM weatherstrip often makes strategic use of 'rubber stuffing' (technical term -- I just made it up) at locations where the strip has to make a tight bend. It's put there to keep the hollow section from collapsing (which would possibly lead to unwanted wind noise or water ingress). You can't see it. You'll only know it's there by doing a pinch comparison at selected locations along the length of your the weatherstrip. I found it in both the Kia Sportage and Nissan Altima weatherstrip that I experimented with. The 'stuffing', as used, was ~ 4" - 5" long. I wonder if the aftermarket suppliers are doing the same thing? p.s. I used the front-door weatherstripping from a late-1990's Kia Sportage for both my doors and hatch. Very happy with the results.

I've spent some time (too much, it feels like) searching for evidence of when cadmium was banned in Japan and most of what I'm finding suggests that it wasn't banned until after at soonest early 1971. Lawsuits were happening but no statements about an outright ban of any form have been found. Here's one example. Article published March 1971. Cadmium still in use in more than 1,000 plants. "Prime Minister Sato has ordered health checks on all workers in the more than 1,000 Japanese plants that use cadmium—a crucial step, since only a handful of those plants take adequate safety precautions. Last week health officials reported that cadmium has tainted much of the country’s rice." https://time.com/archive/6838618/environment-and-now-cadmium/ Environment: And Now, Cadmium 3 minute read TIME March 8, 1971 12:00 AM EST

They corrected that mistake with the 260's on - by putting struts on both sides. Not only does a single strut cause the hatch to twist but when closed there's always pressure on one side and not the other. The gas strut is constantly exerting pressure forward on the left hinge and not on the right hinge. You probably won't like the cure as it involves finding a parts Z - 260 or 280 - and removing the mount from the right side strut that's welded on there and moving it to your car so you can add a right side hatch strut. And I don't remember if the early Z hatches have captive nuts for strut mount on both sides or not. We had a guy in Scottsdale rebuilding a 240Z that wanted to add that second strut before he painted so we cut that bracket off a parts car for him. I've never tried to replace the hatch hinge pins (which might get worn). We learned early on to leave the hinges in place whenever possible as they're such a PITA to properly adjust once you've loosened or removed them.

That's what this whole back-and-forth has been about. He has - for many years - repeated the claim that the original plating on the cars [from the factory] was 'Cad'. I say the period Nissan documents specifically tell us that it was Zinc. Why would they do that if it was in reality Cadmium? You seem to be far more ready to accept Carl's anecdote as proof than you are of an official technical description - published by Nissan Japan themselves, in their native language, as part of the component part numbering and identification for the S30-series Z cars, from 1969 onwards - which tells us differently. I have posted an example - with a literal translation - and yet you discount it due to "interpretation"? Same thing happened with the so-called 'Build Sheet' up-thread. Written clear as day, but inexplicably ignored.

I'm seeking the truth. If it ruffles feathers like yours, then so be it. This forum has for much of its existence been a productive host for those of us who seek the truth about the S30-series Z cars, the circumstances that produced them and the people behind them. That has involved a few myths being busted, the occasional sacred cow being put out to pasture and people - including me - learning truths that were hitherto unknown. We didn't get there by accepting the status quo and we should not be happy to live in an echo chamber. As I said before up-thread, many of the facts and data that YOU - a relative newcomer to this scene - take for granted were uncovered and/or revealed right here. Your 'RAE' jibe is not the barb you think it is. We are all Armchair Experts here. For me, proudly so. Perhaps you see yourself as an exception?

Gents, if you see this again, please use the "report" feature. It was broken previously but I fixed it today.

I ordered and received one of these seals from Scott's as well. I can confirm that it's much better than the Precision version. With the Precision version there was a big gap all the way along the bottom of the hatch, which welcomed copious quantities of exhaust into the cabin. The hatch sat visibly higher than the edges of the quarter panels. The hatch was higher on the driver's side, and stuck out slightly at the back on that side. I removed all the weatherstripping (both inner and outer) and checked the fit. I was surprised to find that the hatch still sat slightly high and stuck out slightly at the back on the driver's side. I removed the support strut and that allowed everything to align. The strut is a replacement. I'll have to check the source. With the new hatch seal in place, but not glued, the hatch sits pretty nicely. It's very slightly high, but I suspect it will settle, and I haven't tried adjusting the hinges or latch yet. Once I connect the strut, though, it's noticeably higher again. It's lower than it was with the Precision seal and there's no gap along the bottom edge, so I don't think exhaust will be a problem, but it's higher than I'd like it. Has anyone noticed a strut causing the hatch to misalign? Any ideas about how to correct it? I'm a little surprised that the strut can move the hatch backwards. I would have thought the hinges would prevent that.

@MH77280Z has done this on a 280 if I remember correctly. May be of some help to you. After seeing what you did to your older garage, I'm a little claustrophobic and it made me cringe, I am so happy for you and your new space. 🙂