Alan

what info from the article shows that it is a Z432 rather than a Z432-R?

I'm glad you posted your comments, Alan. Many of the things you cited from the article didn't sound correct forcing me at pen-point to consult my Japanese literature. I was hoping you would see this and comment. Thanks.

  abas said:

Alan

what info from the article shows that it is a Z432 rather than a Z432-R?

Well, first of all, 'PS30-00017' ( if the car was indeed "no.17" as the article claimed ) is not on the list of noted PZRs.

Secondly, the description of the car ( even with its obvious inaccuracies and mistakes ) does not sound like a true PZR to me.

I think the journalist would have noticed the lack of numerous items on the car ( such as eyeball ducts, clock, heater / demister systems - unless the owner put these back in, which did happen - centre console, ignition switch, carpets, standard seats, spare wheel well etc etc ) and the presence of others ( acrylic windows, FRP bonnet etc etc ) and noted their differences to the '240Z' instead of saying that they were the same.....

The pictures tell their own story. The car is wearing the full rubber-trimmed bumpers ( not PZR items ) and full window rubber garnishes and drip rail garnishes, as well as some dress-up details. It seems strange to me that the owner would choose a super-basic PZR and then add items that came standard on the stock 432 and other models. Its missing the whole point of the 'R' spec ( less is more ) and seems to me to indicate that the car started life as a stock PS30 rather than the ultra-rare PZR.

I also think the journalist would have noted the spare tyre sitting on the rear deck of a PZR ( if the car had a spare at all ) and the reason for this. He didn't.

Seems to me that the owner was exaggerating slightly, and the journalist didn't know the difference between a PZ and a PZR anyway.

  Quote

Seems to me that the owner was exaggerating slightly, and the journalist didn't know the difference between a PZ and a PZR anyway

I think that's it in a nutshell Alan. It really reads like they saw the car simply as a hotted up version of a 240Z, which I suppose to the casual uninformed observer....that's all it appears to be. I'm just happy I know better...now!

  Quote

Sorry to make a negative post about the article, but I think it is important to point out the mistakes and confusing information to save them from being quoted as fact in future.

Please do not hesitate to set things straight. I certainly appreciate any input relating to the Prince/Nissan performance car history, it's so d*mn hard to come by. Thanks Alan!

Cheers,

Jim.

...and didn't journalists usually have their name somewhere in the article indicating that they wrote it? :tapemouth

A gentleman called 'Skip Scott' wrote it, according to the credit.

Not the same Skip Scott as the a race car driver by the same name, I presume ( ? ).

  g72s20 said:

I certainly appreciate any input relating to the Prince/Nissan performance car history, it's so d*mn hard to come by. Thanks Alan!

I just love reading about the differences between these rare cars - thanks again Alan for pointing out the differences between the PZ and PZR. I have read a few Datsun Z books over the years and some of the info/stats are not factually correct or bias to one market. Alan you don't want to write a book?

again, thx for the corrections..

Thanks for pointing those out Alan! Article looked a bit suss but better than nothing..... right?

I had a ride in a Z432 which was in the U.S. illegally. The owner was a C-5 pilot who had driven the car onto his plane at Yokota AFB in Japan and driven it off the base at Travis AFB in Northern California. He did get caught and had to change out the engine of his right-hand drive car for a U.S. spec engine, but there was no penalty! Of course this was a LONG time ago. My guess is that the statute of limitations has passed.