Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mat Big Hat

Unusual Kenmeri QLD

Recommended Posts


This cars been for sale for some time. Could it be a feasible option for someone interested from the states?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so it is a genuine gt-r body? i thought he was never able to prove this. if it is, then brian can resell the car to somebody in japan for big bucks

This is not a 240K But a Datsun Skyline GT-X2000. based on the GT-R of 1973. With the VIN # KPGC110. Vehicle came in from Port Moresby. (papers from Nissan) to Australia 1976. Three owners only. Garaged on blocks, for 7 years Club plates for last 2 years

Origonal 6 1/2 factory wheels, 4 wheel disc brakes, GT-R rear spoiler, GT-R wheel flares,GT-R front grille and tail-lights. With oil cooler in grille. Trim has no marks except for depression where driver arm sits on drivers door. Duco has some small imperfections. This car has been a display car for some years

Engine is RB20 with tripple Weber carbies on purpose built manifold.Still running electronic ignition. Mated to all steel 4 spd gearbox. All gauges including tacho are working to this motor. Interior is all black with over-head console. The dash is not wood grain but alloy finish, as is the centre console Skyline 2000 badges on inside of door trim. Origonal body and S20 manuals with mechanicals details as well. In perfect condition.

No rust. All chrome and s-steel parts are near perfect. This car was used as daily driver for 9 years.

Must sell due to too many cars and a new project coming.

Offers near to the asking price. Contact for more photos etc There is also a 2 door as donor car for spares

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is one of the chassis left over from the GT-R production run (hence the KPGC110), so they used the left overs for the early skylines.. i don't think it has the flares built into the bodywork, but the core chassis is GT-R, that is what i gather..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not much doubt about the accuracy of the claim it is a KPGC110!

I've been advised by a former Datsun/Nissan dealer that Nissan did not use a serial number sequence unique to each body variant (this policy varies from manufacturer to manufacturer).

Instead each body was sequentially numbered regardless of the prefix so the body immediately before Ray's KPGC could have been something as basic as GC110-005369.

The point is that #005370 is early & would indicate a true production date in the first months of 1973, possibly March or April, which supports Ray's statement that it is a 1973.

Since the GT-R in KPGC110 form was available in Japan at least through the first half of 1973 I doubt very much that it was a 'leftover' body shell.

Why it got to Port Moresby and with an L20 would be an interesting story that we are unlikely to ever know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa, whoa, whoa there gentlemen! The facts are getting somewhat forgotten here with some of the excitement.

With all due respect to the former owner - and now the new owner - of this car, I'll try to make some objective observations whilst still being polite.

it is one of the chassis left over from the GT-R production run (hence the KPGC110), so they used the left overs for the early skylines..

Since when did this become a "fact"? Does anybody really believe that Nissan had several thousand C110 GT-R bodies hanging around in a corner of their factory waiting to become something else???!!! Let's get real here, please!

The GT-R models ( unlike our beloved S30-series Z range ) were very well documented right from the start of their production run, and the chassis numbers of all the C110 GT-Rs sold to the general public ( and even the ones that were not ) are well known to arch enthusiasts and marque / model experts in Japan.

i don't think it has the flares built into the bodywork, but the core chassis is GT-R, that is what i gather..

I think you may have been misinformed? The C110 GT-R model had special high-clearanced rear quarter panel pressings that were spotwelded to the inner arch panels, and these are quite clearly visible when the ( FRP ) rear overfenders are removed. I don't believe the car in question left the factory with these rear quarters, and the overfenders seen on the car now are not factory-fitted items.

Not much doubt about the accuracy of the claim it is a KPGC110!

It clearly has a VIN PREFIX of 'KPGC110' - but the body serial number does not conform to the KPGC110 sequence ( it is WAY too high - the C110 GT-R never got past three digits ). The body also seems to lack many of the C110 GT-R-specific details ( especially in the engine bay ) so - let's be clear about this - the VIN prefix on the car doesn't make any sense.

I've been advised by a former Datsun/Nissan dealer that Nissan did not use a serial number sequence unique to each body variant (this policy varies from manufacturer to manufacturer).

Instead each body was sequentially numbered regardless of the prefix so the body immediately before Ray's KPGC could have been something as basic as GC110-005369.

I don't know where this guy got his information, but - and I'll try to be polite about this - it is just nonsense. All Nissan VIN prefixes ( certainly in the case of the S30-series Z cars and the C10 and C110 Skylines ) had their own body serial number sequences. Hence we would - theoretically - be able to stand outside the factories concerned and pull out S30-00030, HLS30-00030, PS30-00030 and HS30-00030, as well as GC10-000051, PGC10-000051, KPGC10-000051, GC110-000051 and KPGC110-000051 etc etc. There was no mixing-and-matching of body serial sequences across VIN prefixes - why would there be? How would that make any sense?

The point is that #005370 is early & would indicate a true production date in the first months of 1973, possibly March or April, which supports Ray's statement that it is a 1973.

#005370 is "early" for what VIN prefix series though? I don't get what you are saying here? 'GC110' VIN prefix production started around September 1972, but 'KPGC110' VIN prefix production started around January 1973 according to marque & model expert records ( and Nissan themselves ). Are apples being compared to oranges here?

To cut a long story short, all we really have here is an anomalous VIN number and body serial number combination, and a body that was ( reportedly, as it has been greatly modified since then ) factory fitted with running gear and other details that did not fit the VIN prefix. There are a lot of questions about all this, so please let's not kid ourselves that we are looking at a real C110 GT-R here, and let's not take too seriously the idea that somebody could "....resell the car to somebody in Japan for big bucks......".

Alan T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The manufacture date of the car is August '73 or thereabouts. That obviously would not fit into the time frame Alan laid out for 100% true GT-R builds. And again there are numerous discrepancies in the details of the car. What does appear to be the only sure thing is that the car has a KPGC110 VIN as assigned from the factory. But any assumptions after that do not really apply.

Do any of you guys buy toy cars? Like Hotwheels etc.? I have a rather large collection myself. Nissans only of course, but from all brands and all sizes. My point in this is that I have on occasion bought one with a "backwards" paint job. Or one having wheels that were reportedly not available. Accidents happen in any type of mass manufacturing. Most are nothing more than a dinner time conversation. Some get out of hand. That is what I consider this. The car technically has a "GT-R" VIN. But it lacks much of the defining aspects that make a GT-R. So is it a real "GT-R"? Depends on who you ask. If you apply the usual critique of car collectors, no. The car never had an S20, and most likely did not have factory flares. Hard to be a GT-R without those. To the rest of us who are not as critical, yeah, why not. It's a clean car. It's a '73. It has a KPGC110 VIN. And the flares and fenders can be worked to closely match the original. But the car will most likely only be worth slightly more than a comperable condition KGC110 because of the curiosity factor.

Brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when did this become a "fact"? Does anybody really believe that Nissan had several thousand C110 GT-R bodies hanging around in a corner of their factory waiting to become something else???!!!

I am sorry, but if you are going to quote me, then how about you quote the whole thing? in no way did i say that this was a FACT! merely my understanding from what i had heard..

I don't believe the car in question left the factory with these rear quarters, and the overfenders seen on the car now are not factory-fitted items.

i am sorry.. i thought that is what i just said? that this car didn't have the moulded GT-R fenders.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan's contention that Nissan did use a unique number sequence for each type may make more sense than the other story I was given.

There may be some very real discrepancies in the build of the vehicle compared to what is widely regarded as standard for a GT-R but there is no doubt that in law unless the prefix can be shown to be fraudulent then the bodyshell is what Nissan said it is - a GT-R

Dunno about anyone else, I've never come across anything from Nissan to say that a KPGC110 could be anything other than a GT-R.

Unless you can PROVE that the prefix is fraudulent OR that Nissan used the same prefix for something else then you are stuck with Nissan's own definition.

btw, if anyone cares to use some decent image processing software then they will quickly identify the extra marks in the second digit of the serial number as impact damage from a sharp object. The impact point was slightly above and to the right of the middle of the 0 and traveled in an upwards and to the right path.

The K and GC of the prefix are an exact match in style to those in the KHGC on one of our cars so I think it is fair to say that it is probably genuine (even if anomalous).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not directly relevant to this but sort of related - if there are 'marque & model expert records' out there then maybe Alan can tell us where Nissan started the SERIAL number portion for the KHGC version? And maybe when?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hmm, maybee i'm hallucinating after alan's retort, but don't the first two digits of the firewall vin look tampered with?

Mat,

I thought I was hallucinating when I first read some of the things written on this thread, so I know how you feel.

When I was first asked my opinion on this particular car ( by the previous owner ) I did bring up the possibility that the firewall VIN stamp could have been ( expertly ) "tampered with" by a previous owner some time in the dark and distant past. Not having had the opportunity to look closely at the car in the metal, it is hard to come to an opinion on whether that is the case or not. If I was going to have a close look at it, I'd want to see the reverse side of that firewall panel just as much as the outside face.

I believe there is no stamped VIN tag present with the car that would also show engine type, taxation class etc (?).

I am sorry, but if you are going to quote me, then how about you quote the whole thing? in no way did i say that this was a FACT! merely my understanding from what i had heard..

I'm sorry Kent, but you wrote ".....that is what I gather." and you appeared to agree with it. That's the way I read it, anyway. The more people that do that, the more conjecture and inaccurate supposition becomes accepted as - yes - "fact". My intention is not to attack you, just what you are repeating and effectively endorsing.

In my opinion, and based on common sense just as much as what we could call 'facts' about the factory KPGC110s, it would be plain daft to believe that Nissan 'used up' spare and unused C110 GT-R bodyshells to make different C110 models, and not change the VIN prefixes on them. Do people honestly believe that thousands of 'KPGC110' VIN-prefixed bodyshells were made? The car in question has a body serial number in the five thousands whilst the known factory C110 GT-Rs sold to the public didn't even make it over three digits - so where are all the others? This car doesn't even appear to have some of the main characteristics of a true C110 GT-R bodyshell - so how can anyone say that it is "....one of the chassis left over from the GT-R production run."???!!!

i am sorry.. i thought that is what i just said? that this car didn't have the moulded GT-R fenders.....

I'm not sure that you understand what I'm getting at? I'm talking about the characteristics of the bodyshell itself, and not the parts that were attached to it. The factory GT-R 'Overfenders' were FRP mouldings that were pop-riveted to the body structure. The rear quarters and inner arch panel pressings of the GT-R were different to all the other models. That's a FUNDAMENTAL difference in the actual sheetmetal of the cars, and the car in question does NOT appear to have the GT-R style pressings and structure ( at least according to the information supplied to me by the former owner ), so how can it have been a GT-R bodyshell? I'm not talking about stuff that was bolted onto the car ( that's a whole other can of worms ), I'm talking about structure. Have you seen a real C110 GT-R with its Overfenders removed? If you have, then you will know what I am talking about.

The manufacture date of the car is August '73 or thereabouts. That obviously would not fit into the time frame Alan laid out for 100% true GT-R builds.

Hold on Brian. I only stated that C110 GT-R production is noted as starting in January 1973. I didn't say that they were all made in January 1973, and I didn't say when production is noted as having finished. I don't see why a true C110 GT-R couldn't have been made in August 1973 or thereabouts - so the build date doesn't really tell us one thing or another, as far as I can see.

Alan T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another theory, (completely made up) .....

It was a monday morning at the factory, or a friday afternoon, and the guy pressing the numbers into the firewall panels messed up and forgot to reset the stamps back to KHGC after pressing up some GT-R firewalls. LOL

Though I agree that it wouldn't be to hard to make the H into a P.

Also, my KHGC is #4253 and thats a late 73 (estimated build date) as its a 1/74 compliance date, not that it really means anything in relation to KPCG chassis numbers, but if the car VIN was modified from KHGC, then its probably not an early 1973 car.

Either way. Ray isn't trying to pass the car off as a GT-R. He says its a GT-X 2000. Though his statement the GT-X is "based on the GT-R of 1973" isn't exactly correct. (Thats like saying my '88 GTS-X is based on the GTS-R).

He's been trying to sell this car for a few years now hasn't he? I remember when he wanted $13 000 for it. He should try his luck on ebay with it, if not just for the advertising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, this is really intriguing, so i spent some time examining the pictures of ray's car from lachlan's collection, pics of before, during and after the white paintwork and rb20de build

here's some of what i've discovered:

the green painted (original colour?) firewall vin # pic appears with the group of photos, but there is not another shot or angle of the vin

there's a pic of the instrument cluster, and the entire thing appears to have been spray painted silver

there are no telltale signs of gt-r "spartan" bits (or any jdm bits for that mattrer)

the wheel flares are not the typical gt-r style but seem to be flexible and are mounted a bit lower on the body, and (now this is important) the car was originally flare-less

a pic of the rear disc brakes shows only a rotor hanging on the axle with the drum removed, and the caliper sitting on top and the hydraulic line twisted backwards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan,

yes i am aware that the inner guard and outer 1/4 panels on the GT-R are completely different to the rest of the C110's, i wasn't talking about just the add on flares, which i know are pop-rivetted to the body.. obviously i didn't explain my self properly.

another theory (and it is just that a theory, not fact.. and in no way provable by me so don't have a go at me :) )

Why couldn't nissan have made a whole bunch of stamped chassis (without outer panels), then when the GT-R wasn't selling in high numbers as they may have expected (ie. the oil price crisis etc. that caused the end of the GTR until the R32)(now i don't know if the GT-R's were a strictly numbered production run, ie. only 75 will be made type deal??), they converted the extra body's into run of the mill cars? to be sold as GTX's etc.... i would imagine that back in the 70's things like this could have happened (humans were in charge, and humans are prone to make interesting descisions), they were a far cry from the computer tracked manufacturing plants of today, where i agree.. this wouldn't happen..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm sure the new owner will be happy to take questions and examine the car more closely to help sort things out :devious: .

Brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Though I agree that it wouldn't be to hard to make the H into a P.

A lot harder than you realise if the result is not to show up, particularly when the surface is cleaned with an acid and then washed off.

I've had some training & experience in this sort of forensic examination and believe me, it's a real bitch to completely conceal evidence of tampering.

Even when the result at the site is extremely good there are often tiny signs of movement in the metal further away and modern image processing software on a real graphics workstation can reveal features you would be surprised by.

Also, my KHGC is #4253 and thats a late 73 (estimated build date) as its a 1/74 compliance date

As our KHGC is #302 and complianced in 2/73 then less than 4000 were built in almost 12 months including both GT and GL badging?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
they were a far cry from the computer tracked manufacturing plants of today, where i agree.. this wouldn't happen..

Ummmm - from some of the FUBAR's I hear about from relatives & friends working in two of the big 3 manufacturers here, computer lines stuff up even more spectacularly at times.

When a computer build order goes wrong the line doesn't stop and you can't pull either the car or the parts off 'cause there's nowhere to put anything extraneous.

Try a base model green sedan where the parts to be installed included a set of orange & black front bucket seats and a rear wagon seat of totally different colour! They tell me they just threw everything inside the car and let it go for the inspection team to sort out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having spent a bit of time with Ray, and having a good look at the car as well, I see it like this, it is a genuine 1973 Nissan Skyline GT-X. It was built as a GT-X and left the factory as a GT-X. Ray recognised it for what it was and saw the potential for a GT-R clone. Ray built it with a different philosophy to Lachlans(ALFADOG) approach, that is, how to imitate the GT-R mechanicals, was the primary objective with the cosmetics (bodywork, badges etc) being a secondary concern. Ray truly pioneered the retro engineering of the RB20 to resemble the S20. Prince Webers on a "Ray fabricated" manifold, a non functioning dissie and leads to add to the likeness to name two. The rear disc conversion is his as well.

I think the best we could say about the VIN is someone who had first hand knowledge of the assembly line at the plant during this era MAY be able to explain it satisfactorily...other than that I think we're stuck with the frustration of conjecture and best guesses, but then it all adds up to a great thread!!

Why it got to Port Moresby and with an L20 would be an interesting story that we are unlikely to ever know.

The only KGC10 GT-X I know of sold in Australia during the original model life was also bought new from a Port Moresby (Papua New Guinea) Nissan Datsun dealer by none other than Doug Whitford. perhaps It was possible to order a JDM Spec car off shore? No pushback from the governors of local domestic market range?

This particular car still has the dealer optioned triple mikunis on the L20 and an engine bay plate to highlight the fact!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another theory, (completely made up) .....

It was a monday morning at the factory, or a friday afternoon, and the guy pressing the numbers into the firewall panels messed up and forgot to reset the stamps back to KHGC after pressing up some GT-R firewalls. LOL

Why couldn't nissan have made a whole bunch of stamped chassis (without outer panels), then when the GT-R wasn't selling in high numbers as they may have expected (ie. the oil price crisis etc. that caused the end of the GTR until the R32)(now i don't know if the GT-R's were a strictly numbered production run, ie. only 75 will be made type deal??), they converted the extra body's into run of the mill cars? to be sold as GTX's etc.... i would imagine that back in the 70's things like this could have happened (humans were in charge, and humans are prone to make interesting descisions), they were a far cry from the computer tracked manufacturing plants of today, where i agree.. this wouldn't happen..

I think the biggest problem with the theory that this VIN stamp could be a simple 'mistake' is that there would have been plenty of opportunities for the mistake to be discovered and action taken. First of these opportunities would have been the big QC check at the factory, and I can't imagine a car with a VIN prefix and spec that didn't match getting through to the stage where it received its first documents and paper 'identity' - let alone being sent out to a dealer and sold to an unsuspecting member of the general public. It would also set off all sorts of alarms as it progressed through the Japanese systems such as first registration ( GT-R was a different taxation category to GT and GT-X, for example ) and local parking permits ( again, GT-R was wider than GT and GT-X - so that would be picked up on ). Servicing at the local Nissan dealer would be another opportunity, and should the car have reached the age where it needed a 'shakken' ( Japanese roadworthiness inspection ) it would surely have been questioned. Lastly, when the car was exported from Japan to PNG the documentation would have been inspected - and a 'KPGC110' VIN prefix with an L20 engine rather than an S20 would have been noted and questioned ( I have personal experience of exporting from Japan, and they are very strict ).

Lots of 'ifs' there - but you have to admit the chance of it being a simple 'mistake' that got through all the nets seems remote.

The suggestion that Nissan might have 'used up' spare GT-R unibodies on other models also seems to be full of holes: First of all, Nissan didn't have a glut of unsold C110 GT-Rs that caused them to stop making them - they actually made the decision to pull the model because of what you could call 'political' pressure. That is, they didn't want to be seen to be producing such a high performance model during the very sensitive period of what the Japanese call the 'Oil Shock'. This is the same reason that caused Nissan to cancel the projected race programme for the C110 GT-R ( they only produced the two 'Image Cars' - which were standard road cars in drag, and aimed simply at sales hype for the whole C110 range ).

So there were not hundreds ( or thousands! ) of 'spare' bodyshells knocking around the factory, and even if there were you would have to imagine that Nissan would re-stamp / alter / rectify the VIN prefixes if they were going to be used on another model. The VIN prefix is a fundamental part of the identity of the car, and without the prefix being appropriate to the spec of the car the body serial number itself is meaningless. We should also bear in mind that a batch of 'KPGC110' VIN-prefixed cars that were not true GT-R models would also indirectly make a nonsense of the 197 real GT-Rs too.

So, on balance, I think it looks less likely that it would have been a simple 'mistake', or a case of an 'unused' bodyshell being re-assigned. Which leaves other possibilities.........

Having spent a bit of time with Ray, and having a good look at the car as well, I see it like this, it is a genuine 1973 Nissan Skyline GT-X. It was built as a GT-X and left the factory as a GT-X.

Well said. I came to the same conclusion without the benefit of being able to see the car in the metal, so I defer to your opinion at the same time as agreeing with you ( if that makes sense! ). The ONLY thing on the car that points to a 'GT-R' identity is the VIN prefix stamped on the firewall ( and not even the body serial number that follows it! ), so in my opinion it is slightly fanciful for some of us to suggest the 'GT-R' connection when all the other evidence against it is so strong.

Ray recognised it for what it was and saw the potential for a GT-R clone. Ray built it with a different philosophy to Lachlans(ALFADOG) approach, that is, how to imitate the GT-R mechanicals, was the primary objective with the cosmetics (bodywork, badges etc) being a secondary concern. Ray truly pioneered the retro engineering of the RB20 to resemble the S20. Prince Webers on a "Ray fabricated" manifold, a non functioning dissie and leads to add to the likeness to name two. The rear disc conversion is his as well.

Not wanting to cast aspersions here, but I feel that some of Ray's work on creating this "GT-R clone" is now clouding the issue with regard to its original identity. Things that Ray added or altered are being mistaken for factory spec. Maybe it would be more scholarly of us to think of the car in the spec it was before Ray's ownership when discussing matters of its true identity 'ex-factory'?

I remember Ray mentioning that he had an S20 engine that he was rebuilding, and that he was still "looking for some parts" for. I offered to help him with this ( I have a fair few spares knocking around ) but he didn't even tell me what he was looking for. To be brutally honest, I didn't actually believe he had one - but maybe I was just being overly sceptical?

Well, I'm sure the new owner will be happy to take questions and examine the car more closely to help sort things out

I must say, the new owner has ALWAYS been very open, honest, realistic and a stickler for accuracy in his online discussions of these cars. I have every confidence that he will get to the bottom of it, and tell it like it is. He will also most likely turn it into an absolute gem of a car. Good luck to him! :-)

Alan T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.