Carl Beck

Hi Larry: No the statement is not correct. 75 though 78 280Z's with manual transmissions had the R200. Only 77/78 280Z's with A/T came with the R180. Why? I don't know. But if I had to guess I'd say that the R180 was strong enough for the average A/T driver, and it saved a bit of weight. I have seen/read references to the "early" vs "late" R180's (don't know the dates that go with the terms "early" nor "late" in this case).... but as the story goes, the early R180's had two spider gears (one of their weaknesses), where the later R180's had four. Of course adding either the Nissan or Quaife limited slips to the early R180's results in them then having 4 spider gears and thus they are considerably stronger. I have not personally pulled any "late" R180's out of the 77/78 280Z's nor later 280ZX's so I have not seen any R180's with the four spider gears. Would love to pin this "story" down if anyone has first hand knowledge. FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi XRAY/dogma420 (everyone): Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) first took effect in law on 1 Jan. 1967. Since that time several have been added, and many have been modified over the years. FVMSS 110 -- applies to tire selection and rims and all FMVSS's apply to the vehicle manufactures that sell motor vehicles in the USA. Basically it requires the manufacturer to equip the car with tires, load rated to carry safely the GVWR the car manufacturers provide. (there are other standards that tell the tire manufacturers how to test and certify their load ranges on the tires). In effect, the Federal Government is requiring the car manufacturers to equip your car with tires that can safely carry the maximum weight of the car, when it is being used per the manufacturers recommendations. The required labels are all about giving you the information you need when you go buy replacement tires. (so you know what load range tires to buy, as well as the speed ratings and sizes). GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Rating Maximum loaded vehicle weight per the Standard is the combined weights consisting of: a) Curb Weight (the car with a full tank of gass and all oil and coolants) Accessory Weight (the additional weight of accessories like A/T, A/C etc) c) The number of passengers times 68 kilograms (or 2 times 150lbs) d) The maximum vehicle cargo/luggage weight (this is set by the manufacturer) Note... 1. passenger weight is a set number per the Standard (150 lbs per passenger) 2. if the manufacturer wanted to, they could raise the GVWR by installing tires with higher load ratings. Curb Weight, Accessory Weight, Passenger weight would be pretty well fixed number, but an increase in cargo/luggage weight could be achieved by installing tires with higher load ranges at the factory. The requirements for Labels, that provide the required information to the consumer, are set in the Standard as well... they do allowed the manufacturer to place the required information labels in either the Glove Box or on the Drivers door jam. Just exactly why Nissan decided to move the GVWR info to the drivers door jam at the beginning of 1972 I do not know. (maybe it saved them one label in the glove box, by adding the info to the existing door data tag??). Just exactly why the GVWR went from 2400lbs to 2820lbs. at that time, I do not know (could be as simple as higher load ratings on the tires they were getting at the time). What is important to you as an owner, as Walter mentioned, is that you know what load range tires you need for your Z as well as the inflation pressures required. Also important to know that you can increase the GVWR of your car, by buying better tires than the OEM''s (better - meaning tires with higher load ratings if you need to carry more/heaver cargo/luggage). Since it only seems to have lasted a few months in the beginning of 72.. the 2,400lb. GVWR on the door tag, could have simply been a mistake... Could be they just forgot to add the 400lbs for luggage/cargo at first. FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Chris Wrote: >Carl, >Looking at your pictures again, I am noticing discrepancies between what I >have and what you have. Hi Chris: Well I guess the purpose of the public posting is working then - yes? <vbg> >The chassis number HLS30-05401 is listed as 05041. That is because the seller listed it wrong on ebay in his description. I have the picture of the door jam data tag... it is actually HLS30 05041. (you may correct your listing). >Also, why are you listing the chassis numbers as six digits? They are five digit serial >numbers. "Why?"....I keep them all as six digit numbers in my files... so they sort correctly in my listings. They are six digit numbers for cars with VIN's above HLS30 10000. I should have corrected them in the html format - after copy/paste from my complete listings.. to the published format on the web. I've corrected that now as well - thanks. >Then, you have a red car listed as a serial number I have for another car altogether! I have three red cars listed.. #11553, #40904 and #68727. #11553 is Bob Berke's car.. #40904 was listed twice on ebay by Peak Nissan. They had the VIN listed wrong in their description the second time as HLS30 4904.. but the VZ Certificate shows HLS30 40904 (and the car is obviously not a Series I car) #68727 was as I recall - pictures and VIN's I received from the seller. I do not have a picture of the door jam tag, nor VZ Certificate... I'll check my incoming e-mails again. What do you have for it?... >Holy Smoke! We need to get together and compare notes! I thought we were... at least as far as the listings of "found" VZ's to-date...that was why I put them on-line - even with partial data .... just so that we all knew what had been reported to date. Let me know what you have that doesn't agree.. and we'll work to reconcile the listings.. kind regards, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Chris: 96203 show up fine on my browser... anyone else having trouble seeing it? HLS20... oops... corrected - thanks. Great - I'll add 630 to the register just to account for it.. and post the picture. No problem...I just wanted to assure that I was keeping my end up and keeping the public list of known VZ's up todate - so everyone would know whats been found and reported. The building boom in Florida won't slow down for the next ten to twenty years. You might as well take some time off for "the ZDayZ" with me ..it would be good to get out and drive a 240-Z again. later, Carl

Hi Vicky: Oh come on Vicky....I love that picture <vbg>... has some human beings in it.... that's what the Z Car is all about;-). Most of the other pictures have only the cars in them... .because they were taken from "For Sale" ad.'s.... Nonetheless, if you are not happy with the quality of the picture of Scott and yourself...I'll check the club website... etc. I'll let you know when I find something... kind regards, Carl

Hi Chris: Are you saying that you have found 26 of the VZ's? With Joseph's latest additions we have pictures of 13 of them on the VZ Register so far. Is that the half you have? IZCC Vintage Z Register: http://zhome.com/IZCC/ZRegisters/VintageZ.htm VZ Pictures: http://zhome.com/IZCC/ZRegisters/VintagePictures.htm There has got be a picture of HLS30 00630 somewhere in the net archives. I'll keep looking... FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Kats: The "Red" one is most likely HLS30 00630, sold by the Rick Cole Auction company at the Monterey Historics. This was a car donated by Nissan Motors for a charity event. As I recall, the sale price was something close to $34,800.00 and the car went to Japan. At the time, I was trying to help the buyer for the Vintage Z Program find a car to prepare for this event. I had located HLS30 00240, a red Z and tried to talk him into buying it for this event. The owner however wanted more for the car than Nissan was willing to pay at the time. (as I recall the owner wanted $6,500.00 back then). FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA http://ZHome.com

Alan wrote: >...snipped... >None of this had anything whatsoever to do with the Works 240Z and >260Z rally cars, as it happened over a decade later........ Hello Alan: thanks... I stand corrected... I should have said late 70's.. six years later...Andy Dawson ran the dog boxes with the Quaife gears in 79 in his Team Datsun Europe cars AIR.. Would you not consider them as "Works" cars? Most books /magazine articles seem to call them that.. I guess because of the direct support from Nissan.

Hi Vicki (everyone): There are basically two questions here. "What does and LSD do?" and "How does the LSD do what it does? ;-) Here is a very simplified way to think about it. What Does An LSD Do?: As the name implies.. they are supposed to Limit The Slip, or loss of grip that the tires have on the ground. All the LSD's sense either the difference in speed, or the difference in torque that can be applied - between the right and left output axles on the differential. As they sense this difference, they attempt to bring the two axles back closer together in rotational speed. How Does An LSD Do...What It Does?: The clutch type LSD's can be divided into two types. One, as you mention used a series of clutch friction disks, the other uses a viscous fluid coupling type clutch. Both work via sensing the speed at which the output axles are turning, and temperatures increase in both as the speed climbs). These are both commonly called "speed sensing" type LSD's. The mechanical type LSD's, use a worn gear drive arrangement. Instead of reacting to speed/temp... the worm gear drive reacts to torque differences between the two output axles. Thus these mechanical LSD's are usually referred to as "Torque Sensing". OK... So What Is The REAL Difference?: The speed sensing differentials are limited in their ability to bias torque between the two axles. So in effect they simply slow down the axle that is turning the fastest by reducing the torque applied to it. The axle turning the fastest is usually the one with the least grip on the road. The torque sensing differentials however, bias the available torque toward the wheel with the most resistance .. that being the wheel with the best traction. The speed sensing LSD's do this to an extent as well, but to a much smaller extent. While the torque sensing, mechanical units are usually more expensive to build, they are also far more durable. Pay me now or pay me later... Also they usually sell for higher dollars used... because they are far more durable. Like any technical subject it is actually far more complex than this, but overall this is a logical way of viewing it. FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Ron (everyone) You may be right, but I don't recall Borg Warner selling a gear type LSD. For anyone interested... a bit of history about the Torque Sensing Differentials. Actually, Vernon Gleasman from Cleveland, Ohio, an inventor and mechanical engineer who holds more than 100 patents invented and patented the gear type LSD in 1958. He produced it for a limited time, in limited quantities in his shop.( I have a very long story about why I know this... but the short story is.... Myers Pump in Ashland, Ohio built Hemi Powered, Self propelled Spraying rigs... that operated in the fields.. and they used some of the first torque sensing differentials from Mr. Gleasman...). Triple-D Inc. also of Cleveland put the Gleasman Torque Sensing differentials into production on a larger scale in the mid 70's AIR. The Gleasman design was then licensed to Gleason Power Works in the early 80's. Gleason renamed it the "Gleason Torsen" (torque sensing). Gleason was bought out by Zexel around 89 and they still produce the unit for limited applications (but on very high volumes). Quaife Engineering in England also licensed the design and they produce it for a large number of applications, but usually on smaller volumes of each. Quaife built the units for the Nissan Mid-4 by the way. Several years ago, we tried to put together a Group Buy within the IZCC.. hoping to have the Gleason/Torsen units produced again for the R200/R180 differentials. Zexel simply could not build small quantities of anything in a cost effective manor, because they are a mass producer. At the same time, Dr. Alan Robbins (who has the BSR cars) ran into the Quaife Representative at an auto show somewhere.. and wound up working out or supporting a group buy of sorts. Quaife produced and sold a certain number of units to their US distributor(they would not sell them to anyone other than their distributors), the US Distributor in turn laid a certain number of a large order of them off on another Vendor(Dr.Robins Shop).. to sell to the Z Car community...So Quaife now has the torque sensing units available again for the R200/R180's. Quaife Engineering by the way built the old 5spd. Dog Boxes for the Works Rally Cars back in the early 70's...(fifth gear was over to the left and down... al la the Porsche 914/6 etc). FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com 72 240Z, L28, 5spd. and Gleason/Torsen 4.11

Hi Kats / Chris (everyone) From some of your statements, I am lead to believe that you mentally picture the production processes and techniques in use at Nissan-Shatai in 69/70 to be that of the typical mass production assembly line type. In effect, your thinking that like the Ford/GM/Chrysler Production facilities of 1960's and 70's one completed car rolled off the assembly line and out the factory door every so many seconds or minutes... Each one sequentially after the other. You are therefore confused or conflicted when #27 is reported completed before #26. (keep in mind that could be only a matter of 1 day difference). From the business articles in magazines etc of the time, related to Japans then building industrial might, I get the impression that most smaller Japanese automotive assembly plants were either using, or moving toward the use of modular manufacturing systems and techniques; as used for example by Mitsubishi as far back as 1937/39, for the production of the Japanese Zero. (this is actually a significant milestone in the history of industrial progress.. which ultimately had a significant impact on the world's automotive industry). With modular manufacturing for example, the body shells would most likely have come from one production line in a traditional fashion, at the end of which their VIN would have been stamped into them (conception?)... from there the body shells could have been spread out to several individual "Assembly Teams" on the plant floor, who would have worked as a team to complete each car. The time spent with any specific Assembly Team would vary, and the order in which the cars reached completion would vary from team to team; and it would vary within the individual teams as well. (the time spent with the Assembly Teams would be the time in the womb;). As each Assembly Team completed a car, it would have been rolled out the door (Birth). Just looking at the production volumes for 70/71 one would guess (and it would only be a guess) that it would take at least five and maybe as many as ten Assembly Teams to meet the monthly production averages. Oct., Nov. and Dec. of 69 would have been the initial start-up period used to work out the details of how the Assembly Teams would sub-divide the labor/tasks and order/arrange the processes involved etc. Each team may have had five to ten units in process at any given point in time. If modular manufacturing was used, it would be quite easy to see how on any given day as many as 25 to 50 cars would be pooled up on the plant floor. It would also be easy to see how #27 made it to the door prior to #26 or #36. Kats, if you get the opportunity maybe you can do some research, with the people at Nissan-Shatai specifically related to what production processes and techniques were used in the plant at that time. If Nissan-Shatai was using modular manufacturing techniques and Quality Teams (Assembly Teams) it might provide some answers to our questions. FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

hi ezzzzzz: The VIN sequence for the North American 240Z's ended around HLS30 100xxx for the 1972 Model Year. The highest VIN we have found to date for a Series III 1972 Model Year Z for the North American models, is HLS30 100262. (Date of Manufacture is 08/72) For the 1973 Model Year (Series IV cars).. Nissan started the VIN's HLS30 120001. Why leave such a large gap in serial numbers? We don't know for certain, but older Nissan Service Tech's tell me it make it far easier for them to spot the 73 Models, which had some significant changes as far as setting emissions and tuning the cars. The 1973 Model Year cars had to meet significantly more strict emissions and safety standards than previous models. (so we got the "Flat Top Carb's and 2.5mph bumpers plus steel headlight buckets). So any time you see a VIN on a North American 240-Z above 120xxx you know right away that it's a 73 Model... (I guess you also know you need a set of older SU's to make it run right;) As Carl S pointed out - it is most likely an 03/73 production car. If you get a chance, record the original engine serial number off the engine compartment data tag and let me know what it is...I can add it to the data base.. FWIW, Carl B. Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi ego2511: I might respectfully suggest that one way of telling, would be to get on the World Wide Web and buy a couple of books on the subject. One such book is Brian Long's book DATSUN Z - Fairlady to 280Z is about the most current, and it does give one a pretty good idea of what composed the various models. Veloce Publishing PLC ISBN 1-901295-02-8 There are a couple copies used on Amazon.com -but they are pretty expensive there as well. ($108.00 and #125.000) You can go to : http://www.veloce.co.uk/shop/index.php Search for Datsun... and you should find a paper copy for $46.75. There is also a list of Books, some of which you can still find on the Web.. See: http://Zhome.com/ZCMnL/Books/references.html FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA.

Hi Zthing: Well the bad news is that you don't have the original engine, the good news is that now you don't have to worry about it either. As your Z ownership progresses... at some point down the road, you might like to add an L28 or even a Turbo L28 ....and you won't have to worry about keeping the car "pure stock"... If you recorded the actual engine number correctly... that engine would be from a 240Z built 06/70. That would also explain having the E31 cylinder head. FWIW, Carl

OK... So make that $9.5K... prices on these cars ARE going up! We will have to watch that Yellow car now... If the white car was worth $9.5K to someone... then the Yellow car just might bring over $12K Carl B.

Hi Carl: I knew I saw that number somewhere. To introduce the 1979 280ZX, Nissan published a book simply titled "DATUN 280ZX". They gave copies away at the Dealerships if you went in to test drive a new 280ZX, they also sent copies to customers that had answered earlier surveys. One of charts they published in that book, broke Z sales out by Country.. 1970 GB = 2 1971 GB = 264 1972 GB= 549 1973 GB= 1,114 FWIW, Carl

Hi Kats (everyone): Like Alan said, the difference in the day the car was actually completed (driven out the door) between 10/69 and 11/69 could be 1 day, or 62 days. (1 Nov. to 31 Dec.). Indeed, if as Alan tells us the data plates were put on the cars days or even weeks later, just prior to shipment... that difference in actual completion dates of the cars wouldn't change. Given that compliance with the US import laws/regulations was the GOAL of having the data plates on the drivers door jam, stamped with the Date Of Manufacture expressed in terms of Month/Year, on the cars headed to North America. Given the production schedules that would have been in existence at the time, it was an easy matter to check a copy of the production schedule, see what month the unit was reported out as finished - then stamp the data plate and affix it to the car. Really wouldn't have mattered when the data plate itself was stamped and affixed to the car.. the data off the production schedules/reports would have remained the same, and that would have been the audit trail established, and kept on file for the required number of years at the plant. Production dates and serial numbers required to be recorded, reported and retained by law, are not an insignificant data point. They are used to support compliance audits, to base recalls and/or corrective actions on and later might be used to base legal actions on. I find it hard to believe that given the typical attention to detail for which the Japanese Auto Manufacturers were noted... that a subject as important as complying with legal requirements would have been handled with such reputed disregard. When and where the required data tags were put on the car, doesn't mean that the data stamped into them, wasn't accurately transcribed from carefully keep records at the time. At this point, I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of the data itself. Nor to doubt the integrity of the people charged with recording it. FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL http://ZHome.com

Zthing wrote: >WOOOHOOOO!!!! I struck a gold vein of information. Thanks again people. > >Carl, the plate in the door jam reads 3/72 and HLS30-73112. Same HLS >number as the ID plate in the engine compartment. Hi Zthing: Ok.... now look at the Data Tag in the engine compartment again. It has both the VIN and the original engine serial number stamped into it. The Engine Number will begin with "L24-" Check that number against the number stamped on the engine block just below the #6 cylinder spark plug. If it's the original engine, the numbers will match. (let me know what it is for our data base - should be something close to L24 90xxx to L24 92xxx). If you look on the firewall, just to the left of the Master Vac for the brakes.. you will find the chassis serial number stamped into firewall. Sometimes you have to move the vacuum line from the Master Vac out of the way to find it. The chassis serial number should match the last numbers in your VIN. >I am trying to get the Datsun in the garage asap. Right now it's under the >car shelter. As soon as I can get it in there, I will start making my list of >needed parts. Hope to have it in the door by the weekend. I have the >garage from hell. Boxes of PC parts, Motorcycle parts, etc. stacked >everywhere. This shall be remedied soon. At any rate..you people are a >great help. Thanks again. I will check out the recommended sites above. One of the best "additions" I've ever made to my garage, was the addition of commercial grade "Package Racking". The difference between "Package Racking" and "Pallet Racking" is that Package Racking has flat surfaces to hold packages, boxes etc.. and Pallet Racking has only steel beams upon which Pallets are placed by fork lifts. Sam's Club how carries some fairly good, and fairly inexpensive Package Racking (rivet racking type) but nothing as strong, nor in most cases as wide as the commercial stuff. The commercial stuff is cost prohibitive for private use... UNLESS you call around and find companies that resell it USED. Go in person/business to see them, and the products they have to offer... I also found that they will take less than quoted prices if you are there in front of them with CASH offers. Really good stuff can be had for around $200.00 per section (which would include four shelves with the plywood to cover them, and the additional strengthening supports under the plywood.) With the current prices of plywood and lumber it's hard to build shelving for much less and impossible to build it as strong or as wide without upright supports. I have three sections, 8 feet long, 7 feet high and 4 feet deep. Two have about four shelves for large item storage (doors, fenders, hoods, interior parts like seats etc. One section has about six shelves for storing less tall, flat items like carpet sets, door panels, and containers with all manor of smaller parts. It was simply amazing how much stuff you can put safely on one of these sections.. I'd highly recommend the purchase of this type of storage unit... you simply can not beat having shelves that are close to 8 feet wide, with no uprights obstructing access, nor limiting the size of the items that can be placed on them. Plus it is far less expensive than adding the additional now useable, square feet of floor space to your garage. good luck with your project.. See my white 72 at: http://zhome.com/Classic/Refresh/Refreshing72Z.htm regards, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Guys: The biggest "real" difference between 72 and 73 interiors, was the addition of the Federal Safety Standards requirement for flame retardant interior materials. This didn't effect the "looks" of the 240Z's very much. We did get Gold and Orange PL510's with Blue interiors however... uck...

Zthing Ask: >...snipped.. >but would love to find a book....or site....that would educate me on >the differences, if any, within a single years production, or even a >model span (all years of 240)..... Hi Zthing: For the 1972 Model Year see the "Series III" notes at 09/71 and below: http://zhome.com/History/DesignChanges.htm I think we have most of the minor differences listed there. What is the VIN & Build Date on your Car? FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Guys: Boy... 240-Z's must be way less expensive where you live... The Yellow car: Actually looks like it might be a pretty nice example. Let's say that it inspects out... as described.. and that in fact it is a stand up example..One that would stand up to serious inspection. Lets say that the paint and body were done correctly for a serious "refresh".. car stripped to a body shell, then body and paint work done to at least factory quality or better.. then the car was reassembled with care to the details etc.. It would sell pretty quickly around here for between $12K and $14K today. The minor problems with the Air Cleaner, door panels etc could be corrected without too much work/expense. (Carl, I think that might be a Fairlady door panel on the drivers side... a lot of them came in and got sold as OEM for the US 240-Z's... which of course they weren't). But then he has speakers in the door panels, so you'd have to replace them anyway if you wanted "stock".... A rust free California owned 240-Z in unrestored, but very good condition is today a $5K to $6.5K car...(solid frame rails and floorboards etc). "Refresh" it today and you will easily spend a year of your spare time and an additional $18K. From the pictures and description... this Yellow car looks like a solid $3 car. The White 72... We don't know the quality of the "respray" but it sounds like the car was just mask off, and top coated.. Wrong hood, wrong carpeting, cracked dash... Lots of minor issues and problems.. Nonetheless, it should be in that $5K to $6.5K range...This car would most likely be a very good driver, that later would have the possibility of being fully refreshed or even restored.. the current owner most likely has twice that amount in it... and in a few years he'll be kicking himself in the rear end, for ever letting it go... a few years from now he won't be able to replace it for twice that amount either... If it inspected out.. to be as represented... it would most likely be a pretty good deal on a 240-Z today at anywhere near, plus or minus $6.5K. Someone back east might go as high as $7.5K... Of course we all know that pictures tell you nothing... we would have to physically inspect either of these closely... There is however a big difference between the two, in terms of their overall quality. FWIW, Carl B. Clearwater, FL http://ZHome.com

Chris wrote of his Beliefs: >..snipped.. >In the begining, there were six? build configurations of the S30. The S30, >S30-S, HLS30, HS30, PS30, and PS30-SB. That doesn't indicate an American >export focus to me. Hi Chris (everyone): As you have shared your beliefs with us, I like to do the same before leaving this hijacked thread. I have to base my conclusions, and to an extent my beliefs on the best available evidence; that being what Mr. Matsuo wrote, and which is supported in several other sources. Based on that, it would seem to me at least, that you are confusing the "beginning" with the end of the design cycle. In the "beginning" there was a 1600 roadster sized, 2.0L 4 cylinder powered, convertible. If we are to believe that the Z Car began with Mr. Matsuo and not Mr. Goertz.... ie. that the "beginning" was Mr. Matsuo's roadster, not Mr. Goertz's or Yamaha's fastback coupe. Mr. Matsuo tells us that his beginning concept evolved over time into a car that was aimed at compliance with a whole raft of US Safety requirements. Becoming next a fastback coupe that Mr. K said he thought would be best for the US market.. , which in turn evolved into a body widened, made longer, made higher to accommodate the L24 that only Mr. K insisted on. When the question of having a 2.0L engine for Japan was raised, management directed the use of the S20 from Prince Motors. Which, according to Mr. Matsuo; "incidentally" resulted in the Z432 (or PS30/PS30-SB). At exactly what point in time the JDM was equipped with the L20 I do not know, but given Mr. Matsuo's account we would have to reason that it was some time after the management directive to use the S20, because at that point the question of a 2.0L engine for Japan was still at question (no L20 2.0L engine = no S30-S, S30) At the end of the preliminary design cycle, there was one body shell, the one who's size and shape was driven by the American Market and Mr. K. Upon that core body shell all other configurations are based. There is no question that during the various design concepts, alternatives and prototype stages from 1965 to 1968, both Right and Left Hand Drive configurations were mocked up and presented to Nissan Management. This would seem to have been standard practice, as all the roadsters before it were. Likewise the Z car was seen by Nissan Management primarily as an export model, as all the roadsters before it were. The sale of those model variations however represented sales in addition to the primary target market. Chris wrote: >....snipped..... >I think that in order to fully understand the American Datsun 240 Z, one must >at least be cognizant of what was not exported to America. I believe that to fully understand the reason for the success of the Datsun 240-Z, one must be cognizant of what the formula for it's astounding success, as well as it's unique place in history, were. Why it was so completely "different in concept" than all other imported sports cars of the era in the USA. What exactly it is about the Datsun 240-Z that made the whole greater than the sum of its parts. There were several sports cars in the same price range offered in the primary marketplace at the time. All better known Brands to the American public, all having larger sports car market shares in America than Datsun, all with similar technologies. To fully understand the Japanese Domestic Models, one must at least be cognizant of what drove the design of such a large Sports/GT coming from Japan, during an era of relatively small Japanese automobiles and very small sports car sales in Japan. If your impressions are correct, then Matsuo and Katayama just got lucky. That may be possible, but none of the surrounding information, nor the actual production and sales figures would seem to support such a position. If my impressions are correct Katayama's marketing approach of designing cars to target specific export customers expectations of quality; combined with Matsuo's ability to iterate, evolve and continually incorporate new design requirements into his designs, resulted in the marketing success they forecast and twice the sales promised. As for bragging rights, the rights are Katayama's, Matsuo's and Nissan's. They got it right, by solid market research and skilled design - not by luck. Katayama and Matsuo got the concept of a Sports/GT for America right - when the rest of the sports car manufacturers selling to that same customer base held fast to their traditional concepts of what a sports car was, and completely failed to grasp the basic concept of the Z Car... until most of them went out of the sports car business. The "whole concept" is physically represented by the U.S. spec. Datsun 240-Z, aimed squarely at the American market, the addition of all the other model variations account for the sum of the parts. IMHO if you miss the conceptual reality, you miss the real story of the Z Car. It would seem with the benefit of hindsight, that the British and Italian competitors missed the real story, and failed to offer anything competitive. Also interesting to see that the Porsche 911, which offered about the same Size and Power continued on successfully for decades here in America. (even in a much higher price range). I'll close my saying that I personally believe that the important part of this discussion, for those following along, is grasping an understanding of the whole concept; seeing the Forest, while the BS being thrown around are the arguments about the specific hue, intensity and saturation of the color of the individual leaves. The whole concept of the Datsun 240-Z for America, is what put Mr. K in the Automobile Hall of Fame, and it is what makes the Datsun 240-Z one of the ten most important cars in US Automotive History. FWIW, Carl

HI Mike: Mr. Corbitt and I exchanged thoughts on this subject in Feb of 1999. His son was helpful in getting digital images of the data plates and the car to me. I had written one of the Magazines in Australia as a result of an article they published about HS30 00004 in which they repeated the commonly held belief that HS30 cars with VINs below chassis numbers 00500 were 1969 Production Year cars. This and previous articles like it, lead to several people, who were selling Right Hand Drive 240-Z's, making the statement that their car as a 1969 production year car. Cars with VIN's higher than HS30 00100 were commonly advertised as being 1969 Production year vehicles. As I researched this subject, collected information from the various owners and their cars it became apparent to me that the HLS and HS models had separate chassis serial number series assigned to them. We found many cases where both HS and HLS cars had the same chassis numbers. HLS30 00016 and HS30 00016 etc. At any rate, my intention was to dispel the myth that the first 500 HS30 series cars were 1969 production year vehicles. It was not only incorrect, it lead some owners of 1971 Model Year cars to believe that their cars were built in 1969. Mr. Corbitt wrote the following: ......."So much of what you set out in your Email made sense. 04 was first registered in Australian in April 1970 and was used by Nissan, initially for evaluation and then as a "draw" car from about October; no-one got a test drive. I first saw the car then and ordered mine, delivered February 1971, which was when the first shipment of cars arrived in Australia. I was fortunate enough to remember 04s registration number and approached the then owner around 1985 re buying it.".......... Based not on an absence of absolute proof, but rather on a preponderance of the evidence, and lacking any conflicting evidence; that being based on the original engine serial number, the arrival date in Australia and the cars configuration we agreed that it was "most likely" built in Jan or Feb of 1970. Is it possible that HS30 00004 was built in 1969? Yes, anything was possible, but the preponderance of the evidence would tend to it being a 1970 production year car. The fact that one or even two HS30 cars might have been actually produced in 1969 is fine me. I'll gladly state that one or two of them were built in 1969 if and when, we can find a actual car that supports that fact. My main goal was simply to dispel the original myth or confusion, mostly found in Australia, that lead many to believe than any HS30 model with a chassis number below 00500 was a 1969 production year car. If HS30 00003 is out there, and we can verify that, I'll be happy to report it was ""possible"" that HS30 00003 was built in 1969... it really doesn't change the main objective of dispelling the Myth, as it related to the first 500 HS30's or the second 499 or the third 498... FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA http://ZHome.com

Chris wrote: >Congratulations Stephan! You just got bullshitted! Took it hook line and sinker! When my good friend Chris accuses me of bullshitting about this subject, I am more that shocked! I thought that he and I agreed that the BS was mostly on the other side of this discussion. Having discussed this subject at length, researched much of what I've reported here and shared that freely with Chris... I simply do not understand how he can make that comment. We can all argue about the absolute accuracy of any documents, documented production numbers vs. actual findings etc etc... This isn't about being American vs the rest of the world (although Alan alway seems to want to paint it that way). The story of the Z Car is about the success of the automotive design path taken by Mr. K and Mr. Matsuo. That design path was to design for specific customers in specific customer markets. Chris, do you seriously belive that the Z Car was designed "for a world market" in 1967? Do you seriously believe that Nissan Motors Ltd. designed and build sports cars for their domestic market in 1970 and just got lucky that they sold a few in America? Do you seriously believe that this dispute is for bragging rights... rather than a dispute about what the true significance of the Z Car is in term of automotive history? Yes my opinions as express here and everywhere are mine, but the are supported by almost every written source of information I can find. What information have you found, that you have failed to share with me, that now leads you to make a statement like that? FWIW, Carl

Hi Mike "Core"... Of course the "S30" body shell is the "Core". The argument is about for whom and for what purpose, the car was designed and built. I believe that Mr. Matsuo and Mr. Katayama are the best authority to define the answer to those questions, and they have. They both say that the Z car was specifically designed for the US market. Mr. Matsuo explains in the book he co-authored how his initial concepts for a "world class" sports car evolved into the Sports/GT that Mr. K wanted specifically for his US customers. Mr Matsuo and Mr. K tell the story of how Mr. Matsuo was getting no-where with his designs as far as the approval of his supervisors... and how once he enlisted Mr. K's support, things started to move forward. Mr. Matsuo also outlines the evolution of the design from his initial roadster size, 4 cylinder, convertible... into the larger Sports/GT that Mr. K wanted.. Mr. Matsuo tells us that Mr. K insisted on the L24 for the US market, and how that drove even farther the size and shape of the car. Mr. Matsuo also tells us that it was Nissan Management that told him to use the S20 for the home market (as they had recently merged with Prince.). Mr Matsuo had designed his car to use the 2.0L four from the 2000 roadster... "Core" of course the S30 body shell is the core... and it is the size that it is, because it had to hold the L24 for the US market, and it had to hold US size customers. Bob Sharp tell a very interesting story about that in a previous issue of Sports Car Graphic. If you dont know Mr. Sharp, or haven't seen him... he is over 6'2"... He evaluated the original Silvia Cpe for Nissan... and his feedback went directly to Japan (his and many other US Dealers)...that's another interesting story. The bottom line is, as far as I can see, documentation from the main people involved all say that the Z car was designed specifically for the US market. Nissan Management in japan also supports that idea, as every interview with Nissan Management that I can find states that they saw their sports cars as export cars... not domestic market cars. I'll be gone... until the weekend.. so save your breath ;-) FWIW, regards, Carl