70 240Z For Sale on Ebay??

[Stickerman]

Why badger the guy over the VIN? From what I see he keeps getting questions about the VIN from people that have no interest in purchasing the car.

[mally002]

I don't think anyone is badgering him, but it does look suspect. Why in the world would anyone buy a car without knowing the VIN. I was actually interested but the seller would never disclose the VIN to me so I just left him alone.

[auzziez]

I spoke to this guy on the phone. The car was advertised some 2 months ago on Craigs List and he wanted an email address/phone number and he did contact me. I use a separate email address to catch SPAM etc. Anyway, I suggested that I'd go look at the car since I am in Tampa and, at that time, the car was supposedly in Deltona, FL, which is closer to Daytona, FL in the NorthEastern part of Florida (more or less). I didn't go see it because I found a car here in the Tampa/St. Pete area, and I let him know that. Now the car appears to have moved to Plantation, FL which is closer to Ft. Lauderdale, SouthEastern part of Florida. Although there may be a car there, there's something fishy about this guys ads.

[Kathy & Rick]

I'll tell everybody right up front that this guy is a big BS'er. He claims a 9/69 build date for VIN# 3XX ~ well, the VIN's didn't even get out of the single digits in 9/69. Briefly, the first few were production "mules" that never left the factory; the last few were flown out to various venues: to evaluate the effects of hard use, or to introductory car shows to get a feel for how they would sell. Subsequently they were either destroyed after they served their use, or transformed into race cars. I received this information, corroborated totally independently from two different National departments out in [then Datsun] HQ in Gardena, in 1976 while this information was still fresh and well-known.

I've been into Z Cars basically since the beginning, and was actually w/Bob Sharp for awhile. So I've seen a lot of early Z Cars come and go over the years, and, being interested in what blocks of VINs were produced during what months, I've pursued a sub-hobby of trying to figure that out. Carl Beck in FL has a similar background in Z Cars and has been doing the same; now we are jointly trying to complete the puzzle.

VIN#00013 is an early 10/69 car, and the earliest 11/69 car I have heard of is #26 down in FL. (Carl, it just occurred to me that I don't have your #00020 or Jim's #00016 and 19 on file, could you please fill me in?).

VIN #00171 is an 11/69 car, which means the alleged #3XX couldn't even be a 10/69, much less a 9/69. And the latest 11/69 VIN I knew of till recently was #418 (I know both the original owner and the second (current) owner personally. But last month I expanded the highest 11/69 to #456 based on an indisputable EBay entry I saw.

In 12/69, production tanked while they were correcting a crankshaft vibration issue. I've never seen a 12/69 build, and it is believed that the high VIN is in the 500's. Which means there were only about 100 12/69's, maybe even fewer. BTW Mally002, is your #797 a 12/69, or a 1/70? Help me fill a gap~ thanks!

So for the guy to say he has a low 300's VIN w/a 9/69 build date is totally absurd, and that's as charitable as I can phrase it. I challenge him to produce the door jamb data plate, or any other evidence he might have to support his allegation. I'll tell the world,

"IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!!!!!"

I'll tell you why else the guy is all wet: not all 1969 build dates were

titled and registered as 1970's, as he claims. You ask me how I know? I have two of them and know of others that are also registered as '69's.~ In the same way as you will find a wide spread

registered as 70's or 71's-- I recall a 4000 something titled and registered as a '71! There was a lot of inconsistency back then.

Carl, wanna add anything to the above? Correct me wherever I'm wrong, I did this presentation pretty much from memory. Thanks.....

All Z Best,..................Ranger Rick

Edited October 4, 2009 by Kathy & Rick

[Carl Beck]

Hi Rick:

#16, #17 and #19 are all 10/69, while #20, #22, #23 and #26 are 11/69. Then #27, #29, #30, #32, #36 are 10/69.

The cars didn't come out of the factory in perfect sequential order. For some reason some were held-up during assembly and completed at a later date. As you can see from above -HLS30 00019 is date stamped 11/69 while HLS30 00020 is date stamped 10/69 etc. etc..

Since we have only seen about 1/4 of the 69 240Z's produced - we may never understand why there is such a mix of VIN's and Dates. #94 is a 10/69 production for example, #587 and #589 are stamped 11/69 while #48 is stamped 02/70...

We do know that 52 240Z's were produced in Oct., 388 in Nov. and 97 in Dec. Their exact order of completion, nor the process for stamping and applying the required Date Of Manufacture data is unknown at this point. Two of the units were Right Hand Drive - so no date stamps on them.

I seriously doubt the car in question carries a Sept. production date.

I have #328 listed as: was in a scrap yard in Penn. - - reported parted out in Winter Park, Fl ?????

Could this be #328 saved from the crusher???? I guess someone will either have to buy the car or at least go look to see what the VIN is.

FWIW,

Carl B.

[Bonzi Lon]

To add a little more mystery on the VIN numbers and dates. HLS30-00110 has a production date of 12/69, blue/blue, the earliest blue/blue on Carl's list, engine #2796. The next blue/blue is #302 with 11-69 production date, and engine #2487.

(Note: HLS30-00110 is NOT on Carl's list because I have not posted it there, yet.)

Bonzi Lon

[Kathy & Rick]

Love you guys, this is great!!!!!

I just love to thrash around Z history w/guys who

know a lot about it, and you guys are tops. Thanks!

I appreciate your inputs because you supported the

point I was trying to make, that an early VIN could be

delayed and come off the line later; but a later VIN

couldn't be inserted earlier. Such as, "Hey guys,

it's only 10/69, so let's do up a VIN plate #328 and

stick it in the mix early to see if these sharp American

guys can pick up on our little prank."

[Mike B]

Hi Rick:

#16, #17 and #19 are all 10/69, while #20, #22, #23 and #26 are 11/69. Then #27, #29, #30, #32, #36 are 10/69.

The cars didn't come out of the factory in perfect sequential order. For some reason some were held-up during assembly and completed at a later date. As you can see from above -HLS30 00019 is date stamped 11/69 while HLS30 00020 is date stamped 10/69 etc. etc..

Carl,

I think you mean HLS30-00019 is date stamped 10/69, while HLS30-00020 is date stamped 11/69. Also, your Zhome.com registry info has some discrepancies with what you posted above, so I am not sure which is correct. Zhome.com shows HLS30-00022 with a 10/69 production date and you listed it as 11/69 above. It also shows HLS30-00027 and HLS30-00036 with 11/69 production dates and you show them as 10/69 above.

I appreciate your inputs because you supported the

point I was trying to make, that an early VIN could be

delayed and come off the line later; but a later VIN

couldn't be inserted earlier. Such as, "Hey guys,

it's only 10/69, so let's do up a VIN plate #328 and

stick it in the mix early to see if these sharp American

guys can pick up on our little prank."

Rick,

Apparently a few cars did have production dates on the door ID plates that were later than we would expect based on their VIN #. Carl notes in his zhome.com data that 13 VINs above 500 had 1969 production dates, including the following:

HLS30-00684 has a production date of 11/69

HLS30-00784 has a production date of 11/69

HLS30-00789 has a production date of 12/69

HLS30-00793 has a production date of 12/69

HLS30-01321 has a production date of 12/69

HLS30-01776 has a production date of 12/69

-Mike

[mally002]

That is odd that the higher vins carry a 1969.......My 797 car has a 1/70 date, why oh why couldn't they have pushed it through earlier.........:disappoin

[Kathy & Rick]

Thanks for the feedback, Carl, I appreciate it.

And Mike, thanks also, that was some great info you

supplied and coming from the files it did, I can't

refute it. But it still is WEIRD to me how that could

possibly happen, any ideas?

My little mind can onlythink in terms of the data

plates having the build dates stamped in advance,

then not having enough production that month to

use them all, setting the extras aside.

Later this little pile of data plates is found and not

wanting to waste them, the boss says, "Get those old

data plates outa here, stamp whatever VIN number is

on the line and rivet them on.".............Conjecture....

Edited October 5, 2009 by Kathy & Rick

[Carl Beck]

Mike:

#22 is indeed 10/69

#27 and #36 corrected on the Register - thanks.

Rick:

We may never know exactly how cars came out of the factory - nor when the data plates were applied. We do know that they were required by our Emissions and Safety Regulations, and I have to guess that the employees of Nissan did everything they could to comply with our laws. "Waste not want not" - is certainly a possibility.

Of 100 69 production cars reported with original engine numbers -

16 are 10/69

75 are 11/69

9 are 12/69

Still - someone needs to go see what car is for sale...

FWIW,

Carl B.