Interior Ergonomics

[HS30-H]

4 hours ago, 26th-Z said:

I'm glad to see you jump in on this very old thread, Alan.  I saw the previously mentioned deleted thread and found the "proof by numbers" to be just the opposite. 

 

I agree. I think 'numbers sold' is by definition after-the-fact data that doesn't necessarily prove much about design and engineering. Were The Beatles, The Dave Clark Five and The Rolling Stones "designed for the USA"? That's where they sold the most product, so...

I've pointed out the example of The Austin A90 Atlantic on this forum in the past, and it seems appropriate to cite it again now. Austin - like many other British companies - found itself in a situation of 'Export or Die' in the immediate post-war years. Indeed, if they could not export a reasonable amount of vehicles they would not even be allowed access to the restricted steel market to make product at all. They came up with a great wheeze: A car that the valuable USA market would be falling over itself to buy, a sports car designed and engineered expressly for the USA Export market. Heard that one before?

Guess what? It laid an egg. Export sales were pitiful. If you looked just at numbers sold, you'd have to extrapolate that it was not "designed for the USA", but it was...

The point is that there's a whole lot more to it than numbers...      

[HS30-H]

9 hours ago, 240260280 said:

"Rhetorical question: Would proof that Nissan tested the S20 engine in LHD S30-series Z layout (a nascent 'PLS30'?) prove or disprove your "made for the USA" line of thinking?"

My understanding is that Nissan considered this engine to be too complex to maintain and to train mechanics outside of the domestic market. The larger displacement L24 had similar performance with less weight and less parts. It was the better engine for mass production.

But you haven't adressed the (rhetorical) question. You get the point? Nissan's S20 engine was specified for the S30 chassis before the L24 even existed. It wasn't specified for the Export market (for more than one reason) but it was a key consideration for the 270KK/'Maru Z' project team and Teiichi HARA even went so far as to point out that the 'Maru Z' project was helped along in the course of its gestation by the simple fact that Nissan had it available to use, and would look daft not to. All the more so when it was being lined up for installation, homologation and sales in the 4-door C10-series Skyline. Why would Nissan want a hot-rodded salaryman's car pinching the performance package crown from its nascent halo model Sports/GT?

It actually makes the whole "designed for the USA" thing look even more like tunnel vision rather than the opposite.    

[HS30-H]

10 hours ago, 240260280 said:

So what engine is in that test car?

I see you joined here quite recently. Have you introduced yourself anywhere? Did I miss it?

What's your name, and where do you live? Who are you?

[HS30-H]

On 16/12/2016 at 5:43 PM, 240260280 said:

Nissan were designing Z for NA market:

 

And by the way, your choice of illustration is another example of not looking at the bigger picture. Sure the (F)MVSS regulations were a key consideration when designing a vehicle that would be sold in North America, but so were the regulations outlined by Working Party 29.

Your chosen illustration shows the work-in-progress Plan A clay sporting the flush headlamp covers that were technically illegal under those very (F)MVSS regulations...