Cadmium Or ZINC?

It is Pi Day - so I wanted to get this Posted today. The Cad/Zinc question has been ongoing for a long time. With today’s technology for environmental testing very broadly available - I wanted to find out what the answer to that question actually is.  I sent 22 assorted nuts, bolts, fasteners and small parts to an environmental lab for testing.   Now we know, and I can’t argue with that.

More details for each part analysis are on the Z Car Home Page;

https://zhome.com/ZCMnL/tech/CAD:ZINC/Plating.htm

What year 240Z did the parts come from? Was it a 1970?

From your Zhome page -

"applied to them 56 years ago-"

2 hours ago, Zed Head said:

What year 240Z did the parts come from? Was it a 1970?

From your Zhome page -

"applied to them 56 years ago-"

These were retained OEM parts I had intended to send out to be refinished - they came from 69-73 production year 240Z's that had passed through. In total they would 1/2 fill a 5 gallon bucket.

10 hours ago, Carl Beck said:

Now we know, and I can’t argue with that.

We already knew, because Nissan told us. Literally.

Well done Carl. It's never too late to see the light.

7 hours ago, Zed Head said:

What year 240Z did the parts come from? Was it a 1970?

This is the part where you tell us that Nissan "might" have had '...remaining stock of Cadmium-plated parts that they were gradually using up.' 😄

I respect Carl greatly for the post! It's a shame his humility couldn't be reciprocated

5 hours ago, Patcon said:

I respect Carl greatly for the post! It's a shame his humility couldn't be reciprocated

Humility? Where...!?

The "now we know" title tells it's own tale. Self-certificating hubris from one of the main "it's Cad" protagonists. NOW we know. Not when Nissan told us - in writing - in 1969, but NOW. Pfft.

I don't know if you noticed, but previous discussions here on classiczcars have seen - for example - direct evidence of plated finishes from the manufacturer dismissed as just "a piece of paper". So excuse me if I see this thread a little differently than you. YMMV, of course.

Nissan Engineering Standards (NES) plating/protective finishes for S30-series Z's componentry:

4 hours ago, HS30-H said:

NOW we know. Not when Nissan told us - in writing - in 1969, but NOW. Pfft.

4 hours ago, HS30-H said:

direct evidence of plated finishes from the manufacturer dismissed as just "a piece of paper"

Your logic skills have failed you in your writing. Maybe it was late. Writing on "a piece of paper" is not "direct evidence". That's the point of what Carl Beck has accomplished here. The piece of paper was not good enough. You're trying to claim a win on both sides of the debate. Taking credit for recognizing "now we know" while also claiming victory for the past "piece of paper" as direct evidence. You can't have it both ways. We didn't know from your piece of paper. But now we do know. No credit to you, all credit to Carl Beck.

Stuff happens and has been happening since people were invented. Trust but verify.

Nissan admits falsifying emissions tests in Japan

The firm says tests at Japanese factories had "deviated from the prescribed testing environment".

The CPA Journal

The Story of Boeing's Failed Corporate Culture - The CPA...

In Brief The Boeing case is a cautionary tale of what can go wrong when a company fails to develop and implement sound internal quality controls that

49 minutes ago, Zed Head said:

Your logic skills have failed you in your writing. Maybe it was late. Writing on "a piece of paper" is not "direct evidence". That's the point of what Carl Beck has accomplished here. The piece of paper was not good enough. You're trying to claim a win on both sides of the debate. Taking credit for recognizing "now we know" while also claiming victory for the past "piece of paper" as direct evidence. You can't have it both ways. We didn't know from your piece of paper. But now we do know. No credit to you, all credit to Carl Beck.

I'm not "taking credit" for anything. That's - as is so often the case - just a scenario going on in YOUR head.

The data I have cited (for many years!) is from Nissan's own documentation relating to these cars. They published it to inform and assist the owners and repairers of their products. It's not 'mine'. It 'belongs' to all of us should we care to refer to it. Of course, that would require the faith to actually believe it too...

I would have thought the classiczcars.com community was one where such official documentation would be given the respect it deserves, but you have dismissed and damned it at every possible opportunity. A particularly strange tic considering that you cite so much other official data from Nissan in support of your thousands of posts here.

Your "just a piece of paper" - and the above post where you bring up past corporate misdemeanours by Nissan and Boeing - would apply just as well to Messrs ENVIROpass of Quebec, Canada, would it not? Either you trust these sources or you don't. Why would you dismiss the original Nissan Engineering Standard data but accept ENVIROpass's test results without question? The reason is of course obvious. It's all about the messenger, isn't it?

I would look forward to your mea culpas on the threads where you have so ardently pushed back against the Nissan Engineering Standard data and supported the "it's Cad" narrative, but that's not going to happen, is it?

Official documentation from Nissan. Nope, that's not conclusive.

An assay of 15 random items from Carl. Yep, that'll do it.