Leaderboard

This point about Nissan's efforts in WRC and IMC is IMHO very much on topic, and I'm happy to contribute. In my research for my exhibit this past weekend, it was quite interesting to see exactly how large an effort Nissan put into competing at the EAS specifically. Barely a decade after the Mobilgas Trial, Nissan showed up to the EAS with a veritable fleet of P510s, and took 6 out of the top 13 spots. They then won it in 1970, 71, 73, 79, 80, 81, and 82, with the last few years arguably being Nissan's most successful rallying years ever. As is indicative from the enormous capital resources Nissan must have poured into the Works teams, they clearly coveted winning specific FIA rallies. Now, I myself am not in a position to say whether that was a smart or poor use of marketing Yen from an economic standpoint, but I'm very glad they made the effort! I made up some rudimentary overview slides for the exhibit, highlighting 8 rally cars and their achievements, which can be downloaded from my site for any who are interested in that sort of thing. Here's what the exhibit looked like, with pictures attached. I'll add at this point that I'm absolutely 100% certain, based on the receipts in my possession and the sleepless nights over the past few days, additionally factoring in the mental toll I endured and cash outlay I spent in getting this exhibit ready, including hotel and travel costs, opportunity costs at work, and family time at home- that producing this exhibit was a certifiably INSANELY POOR DECISION from an economic and mental health standpoint. But hey, I had an absolute blast at the show - it was probably a unique opportunity in my lifetime to do something like this - so the marginal utility was sky-high!

I've spoken to my long-time Nissan mechanic about this very question. His opinion is that the crankshafts were not at all faulty for road-going cars - they were perfectly acceptable when driven in normal, road-going use. But they were not correctly counter-balanced for high-RPM use. He did mention that he's rebuilt engines from low-vin cars with 6-figure mileage on them that contain the non-counterbalanced cranks. I'd venture to say there's confusion between "faulty" and "fitness for expected use"? I'll stop talking about this now - I'm not really helping things - but this conversation was fresh in my mind as I just had it yesterday, before I saw all these posts about it.

Once again confirming there is no such things as a series 1,2 3 .. Changes like with other brands just went througout production

Great exhibition! I am sure your efforts will be rewarded . It is a wonderful thing that people don’t need to visit Nissan gallery in Japan to see a real Works rally car with historic displays. I have two old films , 1958 Australian rally, and 1970 Safari rally. I wish I have them digitalized so I can show you. I am so sorry they are not about 240Z , but may help to understand what Nissan did for international rally. Kats

I really think so too Alan . I have to wait to get like button until tomorrow. Kats

Well it's not simply an implication anymore. I've poked around inside the 78 module enough to determine that they DID incorporate current limiting technology into it. 74-77 did not have current limiting, but 78 did. I have no doubt the 79-83 matchbox modules incorporated current limiting as well.

Got under the ole car pulled on all sorts off stuff and everything was tight. Re torqued the front wheel bearings very precisely as per the manual (21.5ft/lbs) and then backed off 60 degrees. @Racer X that's what I mean by too loose or too tight. If you don't back off the nut after you torque it then it's too tight. Once I finished the job I put the wheels on and gave some pretty hard tugs. Noticed a little slop. Spent about 10 minutes finding the source of the slop, and it turns out the gland nut to the passenger front strut was super loose. Tightened it up and went for a test drive and sure enough the front steering wheel shaking is gone. Still fighting a vibration, but it is much smaller and most definitely from the rear. Pulling the driveshaft and making sure it's balanced good. Then I will go down the route of checking runout:) One step at a time.

They are called hand stamps (or punches). They come in sets, numbers, letters, symbols, and in various fonts and sizes.

I've owned my '71 240Z (12/70 build, HLS30 16896) for about 15 years, but it has mostly been in storage. I'm starting the process to get it on the road as a safe driver so I can attend a few meets, etc.. I finally took the time to read through the bag of paperwork that came with my car and along with the original owners manual I discovered that my car was purchased in March of '71 at Morris Motors (changed to Morris Nissan and now known as Charleston Nissan) in Charleston, SC, by A US Naval Academy graduate who became a nuclear submarine captain and he had the Z shipped with him as his command changed. It was shipped to Scotland and Hawaii and finally, to Washington State where he was the Commanding Officer at the Bangor submarine base. As far as I can tell, he (or his widow) sold the car to an artist who lived in a small, central Washington community and then it was sold again to a couple here in Bellingham, WA who I ended up buying it from. I found it interesting that my car has travelled around the world and thought I'd start a thread for others who may be fortunate enough to know the history of their cars and may also have an interesting, unique story of the history of their cars.

View Advert 70-76 Datsun Threshold Plates A pair of door sill threshold plates from a early 240z. Have the Datsun name on plates. Should be correct for 1970 to 76 Z cars. In good condition, have not cleaned or restored them. They are undamaged and should clean up very nicely. $132 including USPS shipping in lower 48 Advertiser S30Driver Date 09/12/2022 Price $132 Category Parts for Sale

EDIT: Just to be clear, I don't have any open orders with Whitehead but had been reaching out a few times, no avail. This explains why I haven't heard anything in return: http://whiteheadperformance.com/product-category/240z-260z-280z-70-78/240z-280z-diff-differential-axles-lsd/ Whitehead Performance is now permanently closed. Thank you for the support and business over the years. We are working to fill remaining orders Dismiss Perhaps I'm the last to know... Cheers.

Model years had been a thing in the States for many years before the 240Z appeared here. Any kid growing up here knew all about 55 Chevys and 67 Camaros and 72 Cuda's and 69 GTO's. You could tell a 68 GTO from a 69 by its tail lights. Same with the Chevy's. Even the tail-light lenses of the Camaros had a date stamp molded in to them. It was a point of pride to be able to tell a model year at a glance when you saw a cool car. HS30 seems to be saying that other countries don't define cars by year. Apparently a "model" exists as an entity through many years and changes are implemented as needed or desired, at any time during the model's production. I did not realize that the States is the only place that defines cars by model year. Interesting fact, I learned something about the rest of the world. Nissan did catch on to the model year nomenclature by 1973, apparently. They changed the wording of the Foreword in the Service Manuals. Here's 72 and 73.

Yes, I'd say late 80's to early 90's. Before that there was constant confusion caused by indirect, misapplied or misunderstood terms. Like early 71 or late 71. (how early is early? early in what year? which year - the model year or the calendar year? etc etc. Once we realized that Nissan had documented the 4 model series (1970, 1971, 1972, 1973) in their Technical Service Bulletins we started referring to them. The first segment of chassis serial numbers sold to the public according to Nissan began at HLS30-00013, the second segment of chassis serial numbers started at HLS30 21001, the third at HLS30 46000 and the fourth at HLS30 120001. It avoided all the misunderstanding related to terms like model, year, model year, calendar year. Series I and Series II were needed to individually identify each of the two 1971 Datsun 240Z offered for sale. Then tell the difference between the two different 1971 Datsun 240Z's in the marketplace. Looking back at my notes: "The Z Car List" was started in 1987 by Bob Wissman IZCC #176. Before that we had about 300 subscribers on an E-Mail Copy List. The IZCC (a virtual club in the Metaverse) was started by John DeArmond in 1992. #2831 would have been issued in the Feb. of 1996. By 2008 we had over 15,000 subscribers to "The Z Car List". Many new members over the years had just started to look for a 240Z to buy - still asking - what is the difference between early or late 1971 Model Year 240Z's? Which is best? How do I tell them apart? etc etc. (you can see from this discussion that all still goes on today)

Bad? It's terrible. You really should put your car details in a signature. It's PITA to search around to confirm what people are talking about. Your 280Z should not have replaceable u-joints. Those clips holding the caps in should not be there, they're not even Nissan style. That is an aftermarket shaft or somebody has modified the staked shaft that came with the car. Might be why the u-joint failed and it might still have a vibration after you install new joints. I'd get a new shaft or a used 280Z shaft. Watch out for 1975 shafts, they're different.

I should rephrase the question as "what did Nissan change on the 240Z when they started selling them as 1971 models?". So far, everything seems to show that the cars stayed the same until HLS30-21001 arrived. The "late model 240Z". That a late 1970 and an early 1971 are identical. This conversation started because the guy on BAT called his 1971 "titled" 240Z a 1970 240Z. It seems that the only difference between his car and a 1970 titled 240Z is...the title. The whole thing is not about the physical car but the ink on a piece of paper. If he didn't have the title and a person (maybe a car show judge) couldn't see the ID plates or VIN stampings, there would be no way to tell that it was titled as a 1971. It's identical to a "real" 1970 240Z. That's what I was trying to figure out. In effect, Nissan did not introduce the 1971 240Z until HLS30-21001 seems to be the conclusion. The cars sold before then were just 1971's in ink terms.

Perhaps a letter to the manager of the new (?) Nissan Heritage Zone -- listed as a part of the Global Headquarters Gallery in Yokohama -- might find them willing to support the cost of digitizing the two reels of historic film. The NHZ includes a small reference library and would seem a logical curator for films such as these.

That's why I posted it!

In the workshop where I worked (a long time ago), we always used the plastigage and left that table for what it is. Far too easy to make mistakes taking measurements. I would torque it down to specs when taking the measurements. The gasket will still seal when you do the final assembly. Don't use any glue on the gasket went doing your measurements. If you are fitting the front cover + gasket + shim (0.4mm original) and getting a reading of 0.37mm on the plastigage, I would opt for a total shim size of 0.7mm. Don't go over the total measurement with your shims. The bearings have (small) clearances and with the pastigage you are pushing the bearing to the most rear position. You don't want to push the bearing into a pre-loaded position so a little bit of free play won't hurt.

Wow @kats if you ever get those digitized, I'd love to watch it! I also am smitten with @HS30-H's idea of a Rallye Monte-Carlo exhibit with real fake snow. I'd have to find a set of studded snow tires to go along with it. I'll be a challenge to pull it off at JCCS, where temps reached 100 of Friday afternoon, not least because there would be a mad rush by show-goers for some ice cubes in an effort to cool down!

There's probably a Service Bulleting for 1974 changes too, I'd assume. You've kind of skewed my point. It's not about introducing a new model mid-year. It's about what defines the model. The basic point is, as you've shown, is that Nissan has defined a "1971" as having certain features. Different from a 1970 model. They listed all of them and defined them as "late 1971". By Nissan's own words the guy on BAT could argue that his car is actually a 1970 "model". Nissan seems to be saying that they didn't change anything until late 1971. There is no "early" 1971 240Z. Only 1970 240Z models made in early 1971. I saw your comments on zhome about when Nissan switched but it's not clear how you know that.

Marquis zinc plus in Dundalk, MD. Tabitha is who answers the phone and was very helpful. I could never get there website to run right, so I would just call them.

My ZX was bought at University Datsun in Seattle by a man who at least went to one Blizzard of Oz concert judging by the tickets found under one of the seats. He divorced his wife in 2003, she ended up with the car, commuted to her work at a local grocery store until the rear wheel bearings made too much racket. She then parked it in a garage, over time piling boxes and old VHS tapes on it. I found it when I worked for an appliance installation company when we replaced her garage freezer. She sold it to me for $200. I drove it home that day. It wasn't happy about it.

I removed the baffle plate off of a 91 Mazda B2200 valve cover to clean and recondition the PCV system. Those have screws and RTV. I used the urethane sealant and it's still holding up after 20k miles or so.

I purchased my Z from an Air Force office who gave me an affidavit stating the car was bought new from Del Pranke Datsun in Gresham OR on 08-14-70 the car is stamped 6/70. The Officer bought it from the original owner in Nov 1972 and had it until I bought it June 2009, out of Camas WA. He has certified the car had 53,293 miles when he sold it to me, I drove it home to Centralia Wa where it has lived since. The odo is now 65K and I just added 224mi yesterday.

I bought my '72 and got all the paperwork then realized I was the 3rd owner. A doctor bought it new then sold to his younger partner. His wife wrecked her Ford and partial payed with the 240. The body shop guy never titled it, never got it running and 10 plus years I rescued it from Ford hell. Now my garage queen awaits me whenever I have time. I'll give it to my favorite nephew which will wizz off my sister for choosing only him but we're good buddies, just alike aka "a little goofy" but loved by all.

To avoid all of the drama, just leave off the model year in your advertisement when selling and include the mfg date (i.e., 7/71) as shown on the data plate.

From the VIN’s I have collected, I have 12/70 starting at HLS30- 15361 and running though #18048. 01/71 starting at 18144 and ending at 20533, It would appear that the Metal Data Tags (Door, Engine and Dash) were produced first on an Addressograph type machine - where serial numbers were stamped sequentially, like the 17770, followed by 17771, 17772 etc.. Then the date the car was finished at the top was hand stamped with a metal number Punch Die (aka Metal Numbered Die) Addressograph/Graphotype Machine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85f-H6Bc9BQ

It might actually be beneficial to hear views from people like SpeedRoo, however half-baked they may be. Maybe we can help him straighten it out a little? "Faulty"? How many early L24 crankshafts failed in normal - road - use? The use for which they were designed? Why was the early L24 crankshaft designed and manufactured in the way that it was? You might think different, but I have a hunch that Nissan knew how to design and manufacture a crankshaft properly. We already know that there were problems meeting the required kerb weight and costing of the HLS30U variants (that costing due to an unusually low retail pricing target set by NMC USA) so where to pinch? Personally I'd say that whole subject is a lot less black and white than you want to paint it. And the story of BRE having "discovered" the counterweighting issue and given feedback "to Japan" and therefore solving the issue is for the birds. Happier, thanks (tee hee). You get the point though, right? Nissan - like any Japanese company - takes its home market very seriously. Sometimes people make it sound as though they only existed to feed the USA with cheap cars and trucks, but Nissan's aims were global. Hence we are talking here about a car they built to compete in a world championship European rally, a factor that was taken into account on the drawing board, indeed. On the contrary. Of course they thought it important. That's why NMC USA supported racing in the way it did. How would you have proposed they took part more directly? Factory-built race cars shipped from Japan to take part in local SCCA C-Production races in the different divisions? Or maybe setting up a satellite factory race shop in the USA (or maybe one for the East Coast and one for the West, maybe more...)? It becomes increasingly unlikely the more you think about it. No, the way they went about racing in the USA made perfect sense. Private race teams and private individual racers benefitting from national distributor support was the way to do it. Direct factory team presence would have been disruptive and counter-productive even if there was any possibility of it being logistically feasible, which there wasn't. For Japanese domestic racing and selected international events Nissan could of course take a more direct approach. The car we are discussing here is an example of that. As I've mentioned, Nissan was taking a world view for its activities. That's why it was in Australia before it was in the USA and Canada. That's why it was in Africa. That's why it was in Europe. This wasn't just about selling a few hundred thousand sports cars. I don't know why you find it so difficult to understand how important those 'Big Three' international events - the East African Safari Rally, the Rallye Monte Carlo and the RAC Rally - were to Nissan. It might be possible that one or two people got out of bed and went to work at Nissan Japan whilst dreaming of Bob Sharp winning Sunday's SCCA C-production race at Cumberland, but I somehow doubt it. The farmer in Angola didn't buy his little Datsun truck because he was swayed by the result of a race at Bridgehampton. That's not my view at all. However, there's certainly the occasional whiff of the opposite view from yourself here and there. This recent exchange was prompted by your reaction to the assertion that Nissan's international rallying activities are underappreciated in the USA but, ironically, your reaction serves to prove the point. Why would Nissan have to compete in a USA-based road rally event (not that there was one...) in order for people in the USA to take notice? Are you saying that results of the Safari, Monte and RAC are not of any interest or relevance in the USA? If so, maybe we need to check who is wearing those blinkers you mentioned? Personally, I'd like to give a little more benefit of the doubt. There has always been a hard core of world motorsports enthusiasts in the USA who know what's what, and it is reciprocated. This weekend the subject of this thread was on display at the show in Long Beach. I feel sure it will pique the interest and curiosity of many attendees. The owner is certainly dedicated to the task of helping us all to understand the car and its context more fully, and I am cheering him on with that.

After all that work they put the old bumpers back on🤐 Gives me the impression that it really was a low budget resto. Under the conditions they were working in they managed a decent restoration, all be it the car wasn't in that bad a shape to start with.

It's Indonesia! Relatively poor country. Working in flip flops. Using a paint gun that looks 20 years old! Props for how well it turned out. I struggle to get good results and I have 3 times the equipment they have

Why would you make that statement? They seem to have done an excellent looking BC/CC job with very basic tools!

Thank Chaz. Here’s the update. I’ve mounted and wired up the E12-80 module as depicted above. Temporarily wired it to the distributor just to test and the car started right up and ran fine. With this new location I was able to test my other modules some Nissan some aftermarket. It took no more than 1 min to conduct the swaps. I received the HEI but still waiting on the heat sink to arrive, should be her tomorrow. I took some temperature samples after letting the engine get to operating temperature. The base of the distributor was around 150 deg F and the module located next to the AFM was running about 120 deg F. Touching it felt pretty hot to the hand. I’d like to see it run cooler, if possible. I guess I could get crazy and mount a mini fan that is used to cool computer processors, would be easy to do but probably not required and a total over kill. I wanted to go back and discuss my thermostat findings. I ordered two extra thermostats and after removing my old one I tested all three in a pan of water on the stove. There brands were Stant (old one I removed from ca4), Gates (premium grade) and MotoRad (high flow). After the tests they all opened per the FSM and at 189F we’re full open (these were all 180f spec) . I’ll put pics below of each, The MotoRad look the best made, because it had a more robust construction but it also had a 5mm wider opening at full operating temp than the other two. The Stant and Gates look identical. Here it is on Rock Auto where I bought it. Car temp gauge seems to go to about the F in the middle of the temp gauge now. Before it would go past a bit. https://www.rockauto.com/en/moreinfo.php?pk=4483860&cc=1209248&pt=2200&jsn=10415