Hatch Outer Weatherstrip

[jfa.series1]

I recently ordered the hatch outer upper and side w/s pieces from MSA. After getting the upper piece installed I moved to the side pieces. That is when I noticed they did not have the same tubular cross-section as the upper piece. I checked and could see there was no way the flat side piece was going to contact the hatch flange, there would be no effective seal.

I contacted MSA with my concern, they assured me these were the correct side pieces and had been shaped like this for some time. I gave it some thought and went back to MSA with a request to RA the side pieces saying I would order two additional upper pieces and fab my own side units. The RA was quickly approved and we swapped parts. The two new uppers were a net increase of $6.

Here are a couple of shots, one showing the comparison of the "official" upper and side piece profiles, the second is my newly installed "unofficial" side piece that provides full contact all the way down.

Jim

[gmac708]

I am going through the same predicament myself. I ordered the seals from Black Dragon and was really puzzled with the seals.

As you can see from photos...My car was in less than perfect shape when I got it.

I am trying to figure out what they OEM stuff looked like ??? and what is out there to replace it with. I agree with you that the flat seal is basically useless.

I did find this link http://www.vintagerubber.com/datsun240z-upperouterhatchseal-2-1.aspx and poked around and figured out that the 240 seal was later replaced with a one piece seal on the 260Z...

I think I am with you and going to go with the later "one piece" seal from the 260Z

Gord

[EScanlon]

Jim the pieces you originally received are correct for an OEM replacement set. That IS the profile of the side pieces, yes, without the bulb.

Many have opted to do as you have and replaced the side pieces with one continuous piece of weatherstripping of the center and upper section variety.

It does seal better and does keep the moisture out of the hatch, however, it will drive those who abhor any modifications to the original design kind of batty... be prepared to be shunned over it.

E

[conedodger]

Ooooooooooooooo! Shunned by concours weenies! Now you'll have to eat your lunch all by yourself! 8-D

[AZ-240z]

Actually, the tubular one piece was original to series 1 cars. Banzai sells the repro piece.

[EScanlon]

Interesting bit of research. I used the Club's CD:

The Microfiche (Section 121-5, H6) shows items # 60 & 61 (76910-E4100 & 76910-N3000 for 60 and 76911-N3000 for 61) with no revisions nor Use Up To dates given. That covers Z's up to July 73. It shows two part numbers and a discernible break in the outer seal.

Then in Section 143-4, G14 it shows the 76910-N3000 and 76911-N3000 for items 68 and 69. That covers up to the Aug 74 2 seater. Again, same discernible break and two part numbers.

Once you get to Sept 74 to July 76, in Section 143A-3 H2 do you find that there is an option for items 51, 52 and 53. Item 51 is shown as what appears to be one piece that includes both sides while there is also a reference to 52 and 53 as side pieces. The earlier drawings had a discernible "break" between the sides and top.

As I read it, it wasn't until the 260's came out that they went to a single piece, but I may be reading too far into it. And additionally, the references to the "side" part numbers leads one to believe that they are different than the top piece.

But....

Wick Humble's book shows ONE piece for the "Outer" seal (No part number is given) on page 223 item 60 and bills the schematic as "Up to July 73".

Yet on page 167, his description of the Hatch Weatherstrip reads:

"Weatherstrip-- Zs have a three-piece weatherstrip on the hatch jamb. The tubular segment goes across the top run. ... Continue down one side similarly with the plain strip and repeat..." (emphasis mine).

So you decide.

It wouldn't be incorrect to say that it depends on who believes what. Humble's editing of available information (he only included the one set of drawings) contradicts what he writes.

FWIW

E

Edited May 22, 2011 by EScanlon

[AZ-240z]

E,

I do think you are reading to much into it. Lets take the part numbers at face value. E-4100 numbers have always represented the earliest parts. N-3000 numbers, later applications.

My car, 1/71 production, had the single piece tubular weatherstrip when I purchased it new. If you look at Kats web site, he took great care in puting on the correct, single piece outer hatch weatherstrip on his blue car, as represented in one of his pictures. Banzai Motorworks sells reproduction single piece tubular weatherstrips through his catalog on line, and Mike McGinnis at Banzai represents this as correct for the 1970-1972 240Z. He is one of the most knowledgeable, quality restoration experts that I know of. All of the original, unrestored examples I have seen has proven to me that the single piece is correct for early cars.

So, you are correct E to say that it depends on who believe what. It is something that I researched when restoring my car.

Dan

[EScanlon]

Dan, I'm not reading more into it than what is printed.

While the suffix on the part numbers does seem logical, it's interesting that the CD doesn't concur with your recollection, nor does Wick Humble's book which has also been cited as an authoritative reference.

The CD does mention a 1 and 2 item index suffix so it may be as you remember, however, the CD does NOT have any Applied Date limitations on either of the parts. It does however, mention quantity two for the side pieces.

This seems to be one of those items that the available documentation contradicts what people remember after 40+ years.

E

[AZ-240z]

E, lets work it backwards from CD, section 143A-3. Item 51-01, 76910-N3000, is indicated with arrow in the schematic as to top piece, ie., 1 required. The assumption with this part is that it has the tubular cross section profile. Item 52-01, 76911-N3000, is indicated with arrow in the schematic as the side pieces, ie., 2 required. The assumption with this part is that it has the non-tubular cross section profile.

Now if we go back to section 121-5, these same two part numbers are offered in items 60-02, and 61-01, respectively. You are obviously correct that there are no date codes other than that given for the respective sections of the CD. I interpret this to mean that these parts are correct for early and late cars, but, as item 60-01, 767910-E4100 is listed first, or primarily, in this section, it appears to be a stand-alone part for the outer hatch weatherstrip. If there were two side pieces to go with 76910-E4100, they would be listed as 76911-E4100, but that part number doesn't exist. It doesn't seem reasonable that an E4100 part would be paired with an N3000 part, ie., top piece and the two side pieces in my limited experience working with original parts for our cars.

Given the information on the CD, I don't think this is too great a leap in reasoning, especially since I have corraborated this reasoning with the substantiation I posted in #7 above.

Dan

[EScanlon]

Your reasoning is valid. The differences in the part number suffixes support what you are saying, and it does stand to reason that the single item 60-1 would be a single piece and that 60-2 and 61-1 as a set comprise the alternative to 60-1. But the available documentation doesn't disprove or prove either one of our points. It also doesn't specify that the one piece preceeded and was superseded by the 3 piece.

The -01/02 sequences are also used for variations on pieces that had options.

There they used the Applied Date and the Former columns to identify replaced or superseded items. The dash item numbers denote other part numbers in use concurrently or superseded/changed items. (Note: Those dash numbers disappear in the latest E-Fast system.) The dash item numbers many times did indicate replacement part numbers but not always, that's where the ICA (interchangeability) code came into play.

The ICA coding is what was mainly used to identify parts that could be substituted/replaced for other parts, as well as denoting which parts could be fabricated from other parts with the part number relationship shown in the Former column.The ICA coding also shows that there were some distinctive changes that precluded the part being able to interchange from prior to later. This type of coding dates as far back as the Sport / Fairlady Roadster (SP-311) Parts Catalog, with the Fab From being a later addition.

Look at part number 58 in the same slide to verify. There you can see the color option at work.

Part 58 is the hatch finisher, which would have had the interior vent grilles for an early vehicle and not have them for a later vehicle. Additionally it could not be fabricated readily for a later vehicle from the earlier version due to the vents and the embossing.

Using other color items like the seats, slide 122-1 item 1-01 through 1-15, you can readily see the superseded part numbers (in the Former column) as well as the Up To Applied date on several.

Additionally, the cases where the ICA is filled in with a Y in the N column indicates that the part IS interchangeable. Interestingly this is not the case for the hatch weatherstrip pieces.

The Hatch weatherstrip pieces would have had an ICA code showing that the top piece in the set of three could have been made from the single piece that went all the way around, as well as showing that these parts were interchangeable as a set. But there you would be correct saying that I'm reading too much into this.

Look at these screen shots of my EFAST CD system which is the electronic version of the microfiche and is what the parts counter guys at Nissan use to reference parts currently. There you'll see that the Hatch Weatherstrip still does not show any Up To or Former data, additionally there is no ICA coding.

As I've said, you may be completely right, but this might also be a part that was done both ways and no specific documentation was made to any of the parts databases that Nissan kept. The cars I've seen (both at a bone yard and in people's garages) have had it done both ways. One mechanic I talked to (who has been in the business for 30+ years working exclusively on Datsun/Nissan products) stated that he recalled the earlier vehicles being 3 pieces and were later swapped to 1 piece due to the fume problem. His original parts catalog concurs with the CD and the E-Fast, that's the one he maintained and his Dad maintained before him before he took over the shop.

So, let's agree to disagree.

E

[AZ-240z]

E, when I bought my car off the show room floor, it came from the factory with the single piece, tubular, outer hatch weatherstrip. Manufacture date 1/71 series 1 car and purchased on 03/25/71.

Dan

[EScanlon]

Congratulations.

Is this the same vehicle that is still with all it's original un-replaced parts or is it the one that you had repainted 20+ years ago and later restored by Pierre Z? Did Pierre check with you on each and every part he replaced?

When you FIRST bought your car a small detail like the weather strip might have escaped your use and enjoyment. Additionally when you repainted the car, the Arizona heat may have required replacement by then, or when Pierre did it.

Some years ago you said:

http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=42260

"My car had been repainted maybe 20 years ago, and, as I wasn't into totally correct at that time, couldn't remember ..."

with regards to the finish on the inspection lid fasteners, which leads one to believe that other details might have escaped your notice.

This is obviously of utmost importance to you, so in order to keep the peace, have it your way, your car as you remember it, or as you had it restored, had the one piece tubular weatherstrip put on the outside seal of the hatch.

That may be how the car originally left the factory, and later they went to the two part style. But then why did they come out with the non-tubular weatherstrip, and for what purpose? Why would Nissan add the extra cost of maintaining two different part numbers when previously ONE served the purpose? Why would they RETURN to the one part later?

In either case, this is the type of discussion that leaves a bad taste for everyone. You may indeed have noted that weatherstrip back then but not other details. That you still recall that specific of a detail 40+ years later, while needing clarification on other items, well you'll understand why I don't stand in awe. I've known people to specificaly remember something, only to later have proof of it otherwise.

Again, congratulations on being an original owner, and having had your car restored by Pierre-Z. I trust it looks great.

E