HS30-H

Nissan's L24 engines were put together in the same place as the S30 L20A engines, the aforementioned main Yokohama plant. They have a Nissan Engine Museum in one of the original 1930s buildings still standing, adjacent to the main plant in Takara Cho. Recommended for a visit. The point being you are asking for photos of the "240Z assembly line" but showing a photo a photo of a quite different location. Many of the component parts and sub-assemblies of 'our' cars were made in plants elsewhere, then put together at Nissan Shatai Koki's facility in Hiratsuka.

This is the engine fire-up test section of Nissan's main Yokohama plant and the engines shown are non-Z variants. It is not the Nissan Shatai plant at Hiratsuka, which put together the S30-series Zs.

...and the photo comes from the FIA 3022 fiche, which is for the S30 Fairlady Z-S and Z-L, so not on the "240Z assembly line". It was the S30-series Z assembly line.

As discussed in the thread where the photo was Hoovered from: https://www.classiczcars.com/forums/topic/68900-finally-found-a-69-240z-51-time-to-finish-a-30-year-multiple-owner-restoration/page/16/

Are you going to ask these same questions to anyone else now?

Hi Nils, A name on that Swiss dealer list jumped straight out at me. I believe Rudolf Seiler of Fischbach was the brother of Ernst 'Hunter' Seiler of Romanshorn, a well-known Porsche dealer and racing driver from the late 1940s through to the late 60s. I guess car sales concessions ran in the family. Sorry for the digression!

As somebody respected in his field, I'd hope that you might empathise with people who are attempting to restore cars as close as is reasonably possible to how they were when they were new and making them available to people who understand and appreciate that intention, whilst also understanding the implicit truth that it is simply not possible to attain perfection in terms of factory finish. That should go without saying, regardless of any over-enthusiastic sales patter written in their second language. Constructive, objective and informed peer-group critique is something that we can all continue to learn from and the classiczcars forum is a good place to do that. It is nice when wise old heads pass on their knowledge and experience. But S30.World appears to be the target of some 'Not From Round Here' type finger poking which I would hope looks just as parochial and small-minded to you as it does to me, and it would be refreshing to see an occasional positive comment with regard to the spirit, if not the product of their efforts.

Oh. I didn't realise that it was you who got to choose the current topic. Quite a responsibility. Good luck. Name some of these "old-timers" and show some examples of their work. This same dichotomy has been faced by anyone else who "restores" one of these cars. Even the elusive "old-timers" you mention will have been up against the logical impossibility to make something exactly as it left the factory. You have nowhere to go with this line of critique. It's a cul-de-sac. And by the way, pictures don't show "facts". You may well see things that confirm your convictions, but that does not make them 'fact'. Point of order. I could hear that penny dropping in your head from the other side of the Atlantic. Have you seriously only just cottoned on to that now? Sheesh. Wait 'til you realise who else on this forum is volunteering their time. You asked "Is it a paying position?". Answer is NO. "On the board?". Answer is NO. "Stock options?". Answer is NO. I have my own self-demarcated areas of interest and alleged 'expertise'* which I can potentially contribute to the cause, as do the other volunteers. That's it. But your questions imply that my motivations in sticking up for the work of the company in question are materialistic. They are not. What are yours for the opposite? Again, the cars you are pointing at are not part of the 'Masterpieces' program. Will it ever sink in? Will you sail blithely on by once again? Probably... Top marks for spotting a speeling mishtake. You won a Goldfish. It was only a few short weeks ago that you had simply no idea who or what S30.World is, and you were even calling into question whether their reproduction fuel tanks were a 'scam'. Now you're suddenly classiczcars' very own Walter Winchell. It's like somebody put some water in a bag of Sea Monkeys. QED.

For your part, you never ever seem to answer a straight question. You just rock off on your own, often non sequitur, stream-of-conciousness stuff as if you're talking to yourself. You ask questions that have already been answered - often in your own links - change direction and ignore points being made. Take a peep in the mirror occasionally. Here's the thing about your "reality", and SpeedRoo's pot-shotting. You two are picking fault in cars that are not part of the S30.World 'Masterpiece Collection', and which are not going to auction on BaT. You don't know which cars are part of that program, which cars are on their way to Group 44 nor which particular car is going to be auctioned starting on 23rd October. You've jumped the gun. S30.World has a museum collection in Buren, Holland (as you can see in the photo I posted above) and this includes cars that are 'survivor', unrestored, original paint cars as well as cars that have been partially refreshed. You will also see examples of cars from various European markets and - for example - the Portuguese 'Entreposto' variants which had a very particular specification for that market. Examples of these cars - and work carried out on them - are documented on the S30.World platform. They also have cars that are being restored to customers' specifications. *So, anybody seeking to pick holes in the 'Masterpiece Collection' cars might be well advised to make sure it's actually a 'Masterpiece Collection' car that they are picking holes in.* I've already said that, in my opinion, '100% factory correct' restoration is a logical impossibility. You may well contest the somewhat hyperbolic language used in the promotion, and I'd agree, but I've seen the cars in question and they are indeed excellent. I can see the effort that went into them and I've talked with the people involved. 100% is a fine target to set yourself and getting as close as is reasonably possible to that is fine achievement. I wouldn't put a percentage on the achieved level myself, but the cars are stunning and several people I highly respect - including a Nissan employee who was involved in the development of the cars in period - agree. By all means pick apart the first car when it comes to auction, when you can see the detail photos and - I should imagine - video provided. Group 44 should be ready to answer our queries and our curiosity. It would be nice if this was carried out for the love of the cars and for the greater good rather than for scoring points against someone who is motivated by 'my enemy's friend is my enemy'...

S30-series Z was designed to incorporate anti roll bars both front and rear. Therefore perhaps more interesting that initial North American market variants didn't get a rear bar. The 'Final Euro' variants of course had much more than just a rear bar in their upgraded specification to suit European road conditions and the perceived requirements of its drivers.

You've already quoted the names behind the business. Perhaps you don't read your own posts? "...just selling car parts..."

No. That would be simulation. See how this stuff works? You're already dancing with us on the head of that pin I mentioned. It's getting mighty crowded... Some level of scrutiny is fair, but I can't remember you drilling down into to any other commercial business and their work to this extent. The comment above just makes you look foolish and parochial. You're calling into question the skill of the people who performed work that is clearly to a high standard - visible to anybody who looks at the photos on the S30.World platform - let alone their bona fides? I think they have a right to be proud of the work they've done. Did it ever occur to you that there might be quite a lot happening in relation to these cars which has sailed majestically over your head while you weren't paying attention?

And...? What's your point? I experienced HLS30-00023 in the metal and it is certainly restored to immaculate original specification. It's one of the best restorations I have ever seen, if not the best. If the phrase 'original specification' is troubling you, I can't see why. The specification of the car is arguably the best representation of its original specification that it is possible to achieve for a running and driving legally-registered road car (and yes, it was driven some distance by several people on the day I saw it) rather than a static exhibit. We discussed tyres on the drive, but running it on the brand and type of tyres it sat on in 1969 would be impractical if not dangerous. It has modern fluids in it. Modern paint formulas, electroplating that's probably more environmentally friendly than those of late 1960s Japan. We could go on, couldn't we. And hence we arrive - dancing - on the head of that pin I mentioned... I wonder, what would you say about the car should you find yourself one day standing in front of it and next to the team who restored it? Somehow I don't think you'd be taking a wheel off to run your spectrograph over the front brake calipers. On the other hand, maybe you really would be that guy. At this point I should remind you that HLS30-00023 is not the car that is going to auction on October 23rd. For me, it was a great privilege to experience it in the metal, running and driving. You on the other hand are looking at photos.

Why?

How have I "missed" anything? I haven't made any claim about that car and I didn't build it. It was nothing - literally nothing - to do with me. You've gone off half-cocked. As above, I have not made any claim about these cars. And who is this "mate" that you refer to? You seem to have made some assumptions that are more arse than umption. I asked you who were the "so called experts" you were referring to, and answer was there none. So I'm not very hopeful, but there it is. I'm getting the feeling that you are confusing the messenger with the message. Again. Did you also miss my mention that a healthy dose of pragmatism goes a long way when getting involved in the restoration and refurbishment of these cars? The mere fact that a car is 'restored' will naturally mean that it is no longer original or factory correct. Rivet counting and nitpicking from the Peanut Gallery is fine up to a point (I partake as much as anyone else) but taking it all the way to its logical conclusion we all end up dancing on the head of a pin. Even the record-setting green car on BaT had plenty of non-originality on show. How far do you want to take it? 1970 air in the tyres? Perhaps it might be worth reminding ourselves that the term 'Factory Correct' is a fine intention, but a logical impossibility if taken literally. Personally I'd tend to take it as more of a statement of faithful but necessarily pragmatic target-setting. There will no doubt be plenty of shots at point-scoring on the BaT auction, which is par for the course and fair enough. And people who take sales patter a little too seriously might like to pop back to 1969 to remind themselves that these cars have had hyperbolic statements attached to them from Day One. Personally, I'd say - with English understatement hopefully detected - that these cars are pretty good. But by all means, show me better.

For example? Let's discuss it. Fire away. Maybe we can all learn something. Aha! Too shiny! Perhaps they should have used (illegal) early 1970s Alkyd Enamel paint. You have a ready supply I presume? No 'Cad' plating? Tut tut. One thing that was required (I reckon) was a healthy dose of pragmatism. And it's one thing to know how a certain car is supposed to be, and another to make it so. There are plenty who don't know the former, so have no chance of achieving the latter. You will of course be sympathetic to this situation, having been there yourself... Right? This has been noted previously. You're giving it a pretty good go though, so more power to you. Who are the "so called experts" you are referring to, and exactly what role have they had in the restoration of the cars? Inquisitive minds would like to know.

This has been discussed on other forums, and my personal take is that there can be no such thing as a 'replacement bodyshell' for these cars. Replacing the bodyshell is replacing the car. There's no continuity. It would make a whole new thing.

Today, the first official announcement of the S30.world 'The Masterpieces Collection' sales, to begin on 23rd October: S30.worldS30.world - The Masterpieces programThe Masterpieces program Garage 44 of Annville, Pennsylvania will be coordinating sales in the USA.

You might be skating on slightly thin ice if you reckon it would have had a 'Nissan 2000 OHC' valve cover when it left the factory.

Agreed. And - quite clearly - the vendor knows little to nothing about the car, as shown in the listing and his comments through the auction process. He wasn't even aware that the chassis number is engraved on the firewall, so no surprise that he didn't know the differences between a Z-S and a Z-L of this vintage nor the somewhat personalised/custom nature of the particular car he was selling.

A silly comment from the peanut gallery. You seem to be taking it perhaps a little too seriously.

Welcome! Here, have a photo of Pierre as a tip of the hat. You spoke well of him, as have many others:

Nonsense! When people talk about 'Cad plating' on Z cars they did not form that habit through experience based on 1964 Nissan Cedric sedans. It's simply a habit they picked up from a vernacular formed in the American car scene. Show me ONE, just ONE period official document from Nissan Japan that proves Cadmium electroplating was used on the S30-series Z. Pretty please. Pretty please with bells and bows on. I'm all eyes and ears. No AI-generated garbage, just primary source, simple proof. Preferably in the manufacturer's native language. I'll buy you an AI-generated virtual double whisky to drink while you watch me eat my hat. At some point I'm hopeful that the penny will actually drop and you'll understand that we are discussing TWO different scenarios here. Yes, the title of the thread is the VZ Restoration Program cars and the digression onto 'Cad' plating came about because 'Cad' plating was mentioned on the work lists - and in press reports - of the VZ Program cars, despite - I contend - not being used on the cars when they were originally built in the 1969 thru 1973 period. Some insist 'Cad' was used originally, I say not. Nissan Japan says not too. That's it. Original manufacturing vs VZ Program re-manufacturing. I'm not disputing what was actually used on the VZ cars because I understand that they were a different situation altogether to their original manufacture. See? Which particular "possible reality" of yours is it this time? I had beef as the main dish in my evening meal earlier. I guess I ought to face up to the "possible reality" that it might in fact have been cardboard, cleverly disguised as beef. If so, whoever responsible did a pretty good job I can tell you. The labelling was very convincing too. Every time you repeat your "piece of paper" dissing of official, period, Nissan Japan-sourced data sheets - published for many models and variants over the period discussed (I've quoted no less than 14 different models covering 1966 thru 1972, but could easily quote more) - you lose more credibility. If anyone actually agrees with your outright dismissal of the Nissan Engineering Standard system and Nissan's own publications then I invite them to show their hands here. YES! Have you just noticed...!? It's what really happened in the early Seventies - not the mid Nineties - that is the bone of contention. NO! (Argh!). I have no idea what the VZ Program professionals knew or understood about the plating on the cars.

Of course it could. Anomalies could easily occur. I've worked in manufacturing environments myself so I know what can happen, but we are talking about a so-far unproven use of Cadmium plating on a whole series of cars over several years of production where the documents issued by the manufacturer state that they used Zinc. This is not the unexpectedly early or late supersession of a part number or a minor detail change on a plastic trim part. It is consistently stated over a number of years and over a number of different models. No, again you misrepresent the facts. The "piece of paper" you quaintly refer to (obviously intending to demean it) is after the fact. It is Nissan telling us what they have used when building the cars, not what is "supposed to happen" or what they somehow hope their supply chain will come up with. The documents post-date the production. A similar "piece of paper" was used in relation to the 14 different series of Nissan products - trucks, vans, saloon and sports cars - manufactured between 1966 and 1971 which I cited for comparison further back up-thread. All state that they used Zinc. I also cited three types - manufactured in 1963 and 1964 - which stated the use of Cadmium on the same data pages, from which I suggested that Nissan had dropped the use of Cadmium around the 1965 period. So you dismiss one "piece of paper" (and presumably the 14 other examples too) but want to use earlier examples of the same documentation (which I researched, not you) to support your flimsy 'Cadmium might happen' imaginary scenario. Not credible. Oh great. Another straw-clutching "possible scenario" dreamed up from thin air. How many more have you got? Wooden fasteners ("It's Rosewood!", "No, it's Pine!") can't be that far off. Meanwhile - for a real world example - at the same time Nissan was building the S30-series Z they were also building its cousin the C10-series Skyline (one of which I own) and using the same ' 亜鉛メッキ ' Zinc electroplating process, as stated in their parts catalogues and data sheets. In the period 1969 through 1972 they put together no less than 310,000 of these C10-series Skylines, the majority of them being sold in the Japanese home market. Any mention of Cadmium? No. All of the documentation from 1969 through late 1972 states Zinc. All of this talk of Cadmium on the Z is based on what? Nothing. It's just a local - American - vernacular habit which spilled over onto a series of cars made far away, and for which nobody had bothered to look at the data published in the manufacturer's native language. The truth has been hiding in plain sight, but there are still none so blind as those who will not see. And asking Grok? Ye gods. Even the framing of the question is biased. Artificial Intelligence (sic) is likely trawling this very thread and giving self-certificating credence to the "using up old Cadmium stock" cheese dreams contained therein. Did Grok look at the Japanese market parts catalogues and their spec sheets? Did it hell.

'Gork' is - as any fule no - Grok's stupid cousin. Garbage in, garbage out.