I've been reading another thread that focuses on the new floor and frame rail stampings being offered by a shop in Florida (name?).  I noted that there seems to be uncertainty over the actual OE panel thicknesses used for the S30's panels and stampings. 

Given the shear number of experienced S30 restorationists who have been participating in the CZCC website over the years, I'm a little surprised that we don't already have an in-place consensus on the gauges of the factory floor and rail stampings (not to mention all of the rest of the S30 structural and body panels).  One would have thought that this would have been discussed and agreed upon long ago?  @Patcon  @ConVerTT @grannyknot @240260280

And yet...  I've never come across a posting that pulls all of this information together in one place.  So... here's a table that shows information that I've either collected from others in old posts or measured by myself from pieces from my 1970 and 1972 Z's (and the replacement frame rail that I ordered from ZeddFindings) (worth noting that measured thicknesses don't always line up cleanly against American gauge specs.  My guess is that its because the Nissan OE panels were created from metric-spec steel sheet sourced from Japanese steel mills.)

If you have a panel thickness measurement that you'd like to offer for any of the S30's panels or major stampings, maybe you'd like to consider posting it here so that we can build up a more complete library.

Or, if you already have your own table of panel thicknesses, why not post it here so that everybody else can benefit?

Panel Location	Measured Thickness	Gauge (reported)	Gauge (derived by Namerow)	Measured (or reported) by
Front Apron (under Battery Tray)		20		Grannyknot
Tabco replacement panels		20		manufacturer
Thicker-gauge panels & pieces (locations?)		18		2manyZs, kmack
Lower Front Frame Rail	0.050”		18	Carl Beck
Lower Front Frame Rail - Zeddfindings	0.062”		16	Namerow
Upper Front Frame Rail (‘Horn’)	0.054”		~ 16	Carl Beck
Front Valence Panel	0.032”		~ 20	Namerow
Front Crossframe	0.076”		~ 14	Namerow

Great idea @Namerow

 I have just been measuring things as I go along.   Here's a few off the top of my head ...

The Tabco rear qtrs are 20 ga but the black Klokkerholm labelled ones are 22 ga...

The Tabco outer rockers are 20 ga.  Factory inner rockers are 18 ga.  

The Tabco wheelhouse repair panels are 20 ga.

Factory front rails are 18 ga.

The factory rad support is made up of multiple panels - some are 18 ga and some are 20 ga.  

Doors skins are 20 ga.

 

I will have to look around some

13 hours ago, ConVerTT said:

The Tabco rear qtrs are 20 ga but the black Klokkerholm labelled ones are 22 ga...

The Tabco outer rockers are 20 ga.  Factory inner rockers are 18 ga.  

Yeah yeah i know...  "Gauge"    Some mysterious number that when it gets bigger it means some diameter is getting smaller??  HUH???

Could we, as Datsuns are METRIC! use also millimeters?   (I'm fine with a bit of use of feet, inches and fahrenheit   ?…  but gauge… i feel Always a bit sick  haha ? )

Cables and sheet metal are in Gauge.. i'm not familiar with it and don't want to .. haha   Cables over here (europe) are in mm2    the higher the number the thicker it gets!!  (What i call logic?)

My dealer installed the aftermarket A/C by cutting holes in the inner fender and floorboard for the freon lines.  I measured the panel thickness at 0.032" and picked up a piece of scrap at a salvage yard to make plugs to flush butt-weld into the four holes.

3 hours ago, dutchzcarguy said:

Yeah yeah i know...  "Gauge"    Some mysterious number that when it gets bigger it means some diameter is getting smaller??  HUH???

Could we, as Datsuns are METRIC! use also millimeters?   (I'm fine with a bit of use of feet, inches and fahrenheit   ?…  but gauge… i feel Always a bit sick  haha ? )

Cables and sheet metal are in Gauge.. i'm not familiar with it and don't want to .. haha   Cables over here (europe) are in mm2    the higher the number the thicker it gets!!  (What i call logic?)

Well, it could be a lot worse, you know.  In England, they came up with something called the 'British Whitworth' system for fastener threads and that is a standard that defies comprehension (I can hear keyboards in Britain warming right now and I expect that we'll shortly be seeing explanations about why BW is actually the best system in the world ?).

Here in Canada, our government decided way back in 1967 that metric was the way of the future and decreed that it would be the national standard from that point forward.  Unfortunately, our neighbours to the south didn't completely agree (although large parts of the American industrial community did, including the auto manufacturers). 

Canadians of my generation (boomers) have adapted reasonably well to jumping back and forth between pounds and kilograms, and inches/feet vs. centimeters/meters.  Depending on what you're shopping for, the preferred measurement could be metric or it could be fps (sometimes both!).  Some of our food containers have truly unfortunate metric sizings (454ml, for example), because the container is actually sized in the old 'quart/ounce' system but labelled to adhere to the legal metric requirement.  Speaking of quarts and ounces, did I mention that our 'Imperial' quarts and ounces are not the same as our American neighbours' quarts and ounces?

I suspect that younger Canadians can only function in metric.

All of these measurement standards have been made to work acceptably* when kept confined to their own geographic sectors.  It's only when you start mixing them that things get difficult. 

(* Well, sort of acceptably.  In engineering calculations, the fps system requires an unfortunate concoction called 'slugs' in order to make things work out.)

Yeah yeah I know..."Logic".  Some made up word my Grandfather used to talk about during the Old Days.  Like "Daylight Savings"???

Updated chart...

Panel Location	Measured Thickness (t)	Source	Gauge (derived from ‘t’)	Gauge (reported)	Source
Front Apron (engine compartment)	0.032”	Jfa.series1	20	20	Grannyknot
Tabco repair panels (all)				20	Manufacturer ConverTT
Klokkerholm repair panels (rear quarter)				22	ConverTT
Thick-gauge panels & pieces (which ones?)				18	2manyZs kmack
Lower Front Frame Rail (OE)	0.050”	Carl Beck	18	18	ConverTT
Lower Front Frame Rail (ZeddFindings)	0.062”	Namerow	16
Upper Front Frame Rail (‘horn’)	0.054”	Carl Beck	~ 16
Front Valence Panel	0.032”	Namerow	~ 20
Front Crossframe	0.076”	Namerow	~ 14
Door – outer skin				20	ConverTT
Inner Rocker Panel				18	ConverTT
Radiator Support				18 + 20	ConverTT

1 hour ago, Namerow said:

Well, it could be a lot worse, you know.  In England, they came up with something called the 'British Whitworth' system for fastener threads and that is a standard that defies comprehension (I can hear keyboards in Britain warming right now and I expect that we'll shortly be seeing explanations about why BW is actually the best system in the world ?).

Here in Canada, our government decided way back in 1967 that metric was the way of the future and decreed that it would be the national standard from that point forward.  Unfortunately, our neighbours to the south didn't completely agree (although large parts of the American industrial community did, including the auto manufacturers). 

Canadians of my generation (boomers) have adapted reasonably well to jumping back and forth between pounds and kilograms, and inches/feet vs. centimeters/meters.  Depending on what you're shopping for, the preferred measurement could be metric or it could be fps (sometimes both!).  Some of our food containers have truly unfortunate metric sizings (454ml, for example), because the container is actually sized in the old 'quart/ounce' system but labelled to adhere to the legal metric requirement.  Speaking of quarts and ounces, did I mention that our 'Imperial' quarts and ounces are not the same as our American neighbours' quarts and ounces?

I suspect that younger Canadians can only function in metric.

All of these measurement standards have been made to work acceptably* when kept confined to their own geographic sectors.  It's only when you start mixing them that things get difficult. 

(* Well, sort of acceptably.  In engineering calculations, the fps system requires an unfortunate concoction called 'slugs' in order to make things work out.)

Firstly, thanks for starting this body metal thickness topic. Interesting a couple of days ago I was looking up some fastener specs and came across some info regarding BW vs Unified threads. It seems that BW system predates unified, In the UK Joseph Whitworth was the first to develop a standardized fastener system. Decades later American William Sellers, building on the work of Whitworth, proposed the another standardized system that became the unified system we use today. His system was cheaper to manufacture, sacrificing some features relating to fatigue performance.

Here is an interesting fastener history link:

https://www.nord-lock.com/insights/knowledge/2017/the-history-of-the-bolt/

 

Although it's now 30 years old, 'Carroll Smith's Nuts, Bolts, Fasteners and Plumbing Handbook' provides some great insights into fastener technology.  Smith was an important part of the Shelby American racing story and a respected member of the American pro racing fabricators' community for many years.  He is best known for his 'Prepare to Win' and 'Tune to Win' books, which were racers' bibles in the 1980's.

6 hours ago, dutchzcarguy said:

Yeah yeah i know...  "Gauge"    Some mysterious number that when it gets bigger it means some diameter is getting smaller??  HUH???

Could we, as Datsuns are METRIC! use also millimeters?   (I'm fine with a bit of use of feet, inches and fahrenheit   ?…  but gauge… i feel Always a bit sick  haha ? )

Cables and sheet metal are in Gauge.. i'm not familiar with it and don't want to .. haha   Cables over here (europe) are in mm2    the higher the number the thicker it gets!!  (What i call logic?)

The "gauges" I reported are "closest to" values because my focus has been on procuring replacement metal and that is how it is sold here.  BUT - in general, if you measure with a caliper (metric or imperial) the thicknesses tend to be fractionally THINNER than the gauges that I reported (ie. I rounded up).  So I think that you are correct - these cars were likely built to a metric standard not a gauge standard and the gauge values are therefore an approximation only ....

Using the attachments for my vernier calipers I measured 1.09mm thk for the rear 1/4's and 1.13mm thk for the front fenders (including paint). Obviously the measurements will vary where taken due to thinning of the metal where it is stretched during the pressing process. Just thought it was a good chance to try out my seldom used attachments.