JDM Headlight cover difference.

[Mike B]

The first documentation I have of 63900-E4126 & 63901-E4126 is in the Nissan 1970 FairladyZ parts catalog Model S30-PS30. It is the very last 2 part numbers listed under the heading of Option Parts. I was a little surprized that Kats didn't happen across that listing, when I was looking at his hole description sheet and seen the "mystery" notation. The first pic below is labeled as H_Covers73CompCatalog, which leads me to believe there was quite a stockpile of the "early" version still available long after the superceded "later" version appeared.

Ron,

I looked at a couple of old Datsun Competition Parts Catalogs (1976 and 1978) and a 1993 Nissan Motorsport Parts Catalog and they all only list the 63900-E4126 & 63901-E4126 for the headlight covers. That might explain why all of the NOS sets that North American members here have appear to be the "early" version.

It looks like my headlight covers and rings are in storage, so I probably won't be able to check on them for a month or so.

-Mike

[geezer]

I looked at a couple of old Datsun Competition Parts Catalogs (1976 and 1978) and a 1993 Nissan Motorsport Parts Catalog and they all only list the 63900-E4126 & 63901-E4126 for the headlight covers. That might explain why all of the NOS sets that North American members here have appear to be the "early" version.

Yes, I think there are reasons for this being the case that we are not quite clear on yet. Just theory on my part but two possible scenarios come to mind. Perhaps Nissan contracted an alternate supplier and at the same time factored in changes (which was & is a common practice) and designated the resulting different types as options for different markets. If so, it would be prudent to continue what we have called the "original" design for the North American market for ease of supplying replacement parts. After all, the mounting is different and this would serve to simplify the inventory as well as lessen any confusion.

Or, perhaps Nissan was caught by surprise by the DOT regulations regarding the use of headlight covers and simply over produced the type we have referred to as "early" and the revised headlight covers were already on deck. According to Kat's the other type we have referred to as "later" in this thread, was a common sight from the beginning in Japan.

Don't take any of this seriously...just thinking out loud.

[ajmcforester]

Nice theories, but now how to prove them is the big question. It would take a good document to prove these ideas, however they seem to fit the picture well

[Unkle]

Someone at Hybridz has a supposedly NOS set listed in the classifieds. They are asking $1,250 http://forums.hybridz.org/index.php/topic/96453-nos-parts/

-Mike

Well what have we done - now he wants $1500 shipped.

Anyway I'll wait for a pair that aren't worth 1/10th of my car.....

[hls30.com]

Guys,

I know I have been well beyond scarce-and ready to take any and all heat for putting myself in that situation-but I still have my matched NOS originals in the boxes-as pictured at the end of page 42 of my gallery (found here, http://www.classiczcars.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&page=41&ppuser=4106 )and on page 43 as well-don't use the viewer it brings up to progress through the images, it does not progress by page, you will need to actually go to page 44.), and if there is anything I can measure, photograph, etc to help with this, let me know. I have one box with the JDM NOS parts in it, and I know exactly where they are.

Will

Edited November 29, 2010 by hls30.com

[geezer]

This is kind of like luring a moth to a bright light. Hi Will, I hope all is well. I know this is a subject you have considered more than most. We can count you as another member who has bought NOS 63900-E4126 & 63901-E4126. Any thoughts or additional info?

[Carl Beck]

Hi Ron:

Just a side story on the headlight covers.

I don't think that Nissan was caught off guard by any of the D.O.T. or EPA regulations. They had a very competent engineer working hand-in-hand with the Federal Agencies and the rest of the Automotive Industry while these regulations were being drafted, reviewed and finally approved. When Mr. Katayama became President of Nissan Motor Co. in U.S.A in 1965 - Mr. Kawazoe, {former V.P. of East Coast Division} was re-assigned to work that coordination between the Federal regulators and Nissan. Mr. Kawazoe reported directly to the President of Nissan Motor Co. Ltd on these Policy issues, and he was the Chairman of the Japanese Auto Manufacturers group that represented all Japanese Manufactures in D.C. Mr. Kawazoe and that group had quite an influence on the final wording of the regulations and the test procedures used to validate compliance.

From my research, I was never able to find a D.O.T. regulation that would have made covered headlights unlawful. I did however find a few State Regulations that outlawed covered headlights - California being perhaps one of the most important one's of them. The covered headlight covers seem to have been precluded because when they got dirty inside - they reduced the light output significantly.

D.O.T. revised their regulations at the auto industries urging years ago. The revised D.O.T. regulations supercede all State Regulations, and allow both covered headlights and bulb type rather than sealed beam headlights.

Just a guess, but sealed beam headlights may have been required in the past - for the same reason that covered headlights were banned in some of the States.

At any rate - it would seem that the covered headlights would be legal in all States now - otherwise almost none of the newer cars would be legal.

FWIW,

Carl B.

[26th-Z]

Carl,

Look up Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108.

"In 1968 when Federal auto equipment and safety regulations were initiated, the requirement for two large or four small round sealed beams was codified, thus freezing headlamp design for many years. At the same time, the new regulations prohibited any decorative or protective element in front of the headlamps whenever the headlamps are switched on. Glass-covered headlamps, used on e.g. the Jaguar E-Type, pre-1968 VW Beetle, 1965 Chrysler and Imperial models, Porsche 356, Citroën DS and Ferrari Daytona were no longer permitted and vehicles had to be imported with uncovered headlamps for the US market. This change meant that vehicles designed for good aerodynamic performance could not achieve it for the US market." The standard was revised in 1970 to accomodate a petition by Ford Motor Company to use square shaped sealed beam headlamps and has been revised periodically since.

[geezer]

At any rate Nissan had to protect themselves from infractions of individual State regulations at the time as well. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think they did this by making the dealers accountable, who in turn sold the headlight covers over the counter only. Did they allow any dealers to install them when the cars were sold new, as they did with other accessories? In the US, they were found listed in the Datsun Competition Catalogs only, along with the disclaimer. I'm wondering if Nissan ever issued a directive covering the installation by dealers, like they did specifically disapproving the installation of lowering kits.

Anyhow, that seems like a dead end, as far as figuring out why a revised version of the headlight covers was developed and used for domestic models. I had thought about the slight differing fitment between FRP nacelles and the steel nacelles but that was a change that was made across the board with all models. It does seem strange, to have two versions available, especially for parts that were for the most part optional, with both sets assigned Nissan part numbers. I would be interested to find out which "types" were available in other countries as well. I vaguely remember hearing of a version with stainless steel trim rings as well but have never seen or know anything about them and don't even know what the part numbers are, or if they actually exist.

[spitz17]

I have a set in boxes off my Fairlady 240Z-L, I'll double check the hole location when I'm home... wow intense!

Edited November 29, 2010 by spitz17

[HS30-H]

Yes, I think there are reasons for this being the case that we are not quite clear on yet. Just theory on my part but two possible scenarios come to mind.

Ron,

Have you noticed that the change to the E8726 suffixes coincides with the introduction of the L24-engined models to the Japanese market, and therefore the introduction of the 'HZG' variants?

Fairlady 240ZG ( HS30-H / HS30-HA & 'HZG' / 'HZGA' ) models used 63900-E8725 ( RH ) & 63901-E8725 ( LH ) headlamp covers, which were - of course - the longer type, to fit the 'Grande' nose.

In my experience, all the original ZG type headlamp covers I have come across have been made from stainless steel, and - generally speaking, as I've had a lot of them pass through my hands - the earliest 'short nose' covers ( and therefore probably E4126 suffixed ) have been chromed steel, and the known-to-be 'later' ones ( likely E8726 suffixed? ) have been polished stainless.

Therefore, 'Zenki' type = chrome, 'Kouki' type ( after introduction of ZG ) = stainless....?

PS: What I'm saying is that the different part number suffix doesn't necessarily indicate the change in mounting hole location......

Alan T.

Edited November 29, 2010 by HS30-H

[spitz17]

Very interesting Alan. I didn't know the "later" sets were made out of polished steel. Mine sure felt like chrome, but then again, I don't know of the differences in feel of polished steel and chromed steel. maybe that's why they haven't pitted yet...

Anyways, here is a pic I posted up before of my 1972 Fairlady 240Z-L (10/1971) which has the "later" mounting hole locations on the headlight buckets.

Edited November 30, 2010 by spitz17