production number for 1969

[Alan Pugh]

These aren't my plates they have come off the internet but you can clearly see the difference between the 2. My plate matches the 260 2+2 plate exactly other than actual VIN# obviously.

This is the 240

Alan.

[Alan Pugh]

This is the 260 2+2 plate, you will also notice the additional box in the bottom right hand corner of the plate.

The 240 plate is US and the 260 plate is AUS.

Alan.

[Carl Beck]

Allen T wrote:

AT> At the very least, these figures show that the LHD cars were not

AT> produced "first", and that there were indeed RHD cars being

AT> pre-productionised at the same time.

Hi Allen:

I fail to see how you arrive at that conclusion. Kats numbers show 1 Domestic and 1 Export built in May (factory prototype). It also shows 2 Domestic and 2 Export in July - when Kats says the "pre-production" cars were started. That is no proof of which was "first".

Also important to note that the "RHD" cars were Fairlady Z's. The Z Cars for Export were Left Hand Drive models - No production Right Hand Drive 240-Z's were "produced" until very late Jan or Feb of 1970. There are no 1969 RHD 240-Z's.

AT> In fact, up to November 1969

AT> more RHD prototypes had been made than LHD prototypes. That's

AT> nice to see, as it might help to get the message across with regard

AT> to the LHD cars NOT being the "First" as is sometimes claimed.

"Pre-productionized", "prototyped"... we'll never know for sure - what matters is "Production" as in "sold to the public".

Given that the Fairlady Z was a RHD model - I don't believe that there was ever a question that they were both prototyped and produced at the same time as the LHD 240-Z. (who questioned that?). Both the Fairlady and Left Hand Drive Datsun 240-Z's were on display at the Tokyo Motor Show in 69. (NO RIGHT HAND DRIVE 240-Z's were there however - not in any coverage I've been able to find to date).

As I said in an earlier reply - if you or anyone have photographs of "prototype" RHD "240-Z's" I'd sure love to see them. All the images of any "prototypes" of a 240-Z that I have found are LHD models.

The "claim" of being "First" I believe applies correctly to the statements that follow:

1. The first 500 Datsun 240-Z's were produced in 1969 (might be a few more than 500 in fact;-).

2. No Right Hand Drive Datsun 240-Z's were "produced" in 1969.

3. The first Right Hand Drive (HS30) 240-Z was produced in late Jan or Feb of 1970. (HS30 00004 was the first one sold to the public as far as we know so far). Given that it's original engine was not produced until Jan of 1970 - the car could not have been built in 69. (the owner's research agrees with mine by the way - it was sent to Australia).

Allen also provided some interesting photo's - thanks. Can you tell us any more about "when" they were taken? Interesting that they seem to have snow tires on all four wheels - and the guys are dressed in winter coats in the one picture... were both pictures taken in Phoenix? (maybe they took them to the mountains?).

I have been told by a 25 year Datsun Parts Manager (1968 when he started to work for Datsun) - that the early 240-Z Parts Catalog stated that the rubber strips were added to the HLS30 Z's at HLS30 00013 - cars prior to that were fitted with the domestic front bumper (no rubber strips). So far no one has found a copy of the first few revisions of the 240-Z Parts Catalogs for me... Ron Johnson at Nissan Motorsports said he remembered that being the case - but couldn't find any documentation for me.

There is also a rumor/story that a few pre-production Z's were sent to Nissan Canada for winter testing - As HLS30 00009 thru 00015 are un-accounted for.... the pictured Z's could be any one of those I suppose..

Kind regards,

Carl

Carl Beck

Clearwater,FL USA

http://ZHome.com

69, 70, 71, 72, 72 & 73 BRE Z

(yes it was actually titled and sold as a 1969 Datsun Cpe).

[Zedrally]

Well, you could knock me over with a feather duster!

Just as I wrote to Alfa about "rubbery " figures, the truth is about to emerge.

Excellent work Kats, we can only hope that more will be revealed.

[Carl Beck]

Z Kid Wrote:

ZK> ....sniped..."The engine is the L24 2.4 liter with the E31 head.

ZK> The engine is original but the numbers do not match, this is

ZK> because Datsun (nissan) took about a year and a half to get

ZK> things together due to how their factory was set up. If anywhere

ZK> on the assembley line something didn't pass quality check the

ZK> vehicle was sidelined and then the next car went through and

ZK> got that vehicles engine. This made sure that none of the

ZK> early 240z's had correct engine and frame matching numbers."

ZK> Is this really true??

Hi Z Kid (everyone)

Nope - complete nonsense as far as original engine serial numbers or "matching" numbers goes. Cars with quality problems were in fact pulled off the assembly line - the problems corrected off line - then they were put back into the line for completion (usually at a later date). So chassis serial numbers on the Z's do not track one for one with their Date Of Manufacture..

Nissan did not use the Chassis nor VIN number to identify the engine. The L24's were produced on one production line and they were numbered serially. L24-001, L24-002, L24-003 ect. The L24's were used in the Datsun 240-Z's as well as a couple of other Nissan/Datsun sedans.

Nissan put a "Data Tag" in the engine compartment of the Z. It had both the VIN of the car and the original engine serial number stamped on it. That Data Tag is the only way to know what engine serial number was originally installed in the car. The engine serial numbers of the L24's begin with "L24-" then that is followed by the serial number and it is unrelated to the VIN/Chassis number. (it's a Datsun not a Chevy).

Even though the engines were numbered serially as they were produced - lots (groupings) of them got shuffled around as they were delivered to the assembly line... so they were not put into the cars in perfect serial number order either.

So we have the VIN Tag - that is visible through the windshield. It has only the complete VIN on it. Then we have the Data Tag in the engine compartment. It has both the VIN and original engine serial number stamped into it. For the US and North American 240-Z's we also have a Data Tag on the drivers door jam - that lists the "Date Of Manufacture". All US models have to comply with Emissions and Safety regulation - based on their Date Of Manufacture (so the data tag is required here) That door jam data tag was not installed on the RHD Datsun 240-Z's, nor the Fairlady Z's.

Sorry to re-cover something that's already been discussed - but the discussion left me a little confused as terms were swapped around... Hope that clears this up a bit.

regards,

Carl B.

[Carl Beck]

Hello everyone:

I stated in a prior Post the following:

CB> Nissan put a "Data Tag" in the engine compartment of the Z.

CB> It had both the VIN of the car and the original engine serial

CB> number stamped on it. That Data Tag is the only way to know

CB> what engine serial number was originally installed in the car.

CB> The engine serial numbers of the L24's begin with "L24-" then

CB> that is followed by the serial number and it is unrelated to the

CB> VIN/Chassis number. (it's a Datsun not a Chevy).

I must have been falling asleep... that's not technically correct.

I should have said: "The Model Number Plate in the engine compartment

is one way to know what engine serial number was originally installed in the car.

The original engine serial number was also printed on the Monroney Sticker (Window Sticker) and the Dealer was supposed to transfer the engine number to the owners Warranty Booklet here in the US.

I'm sure most of you know this already but just wanted to make the terms/situation clear for anyone that didn't.

So:

A "VIN" (Vehicle Identification Number) is the Model Info + the Chassis Serial Number. The S30S/S30/PS30 ect. Domestic Fairlady Z's, the (HS30) RHD 240-Z's and the (HLS30) LHD 240-Z's all had separate Chassis Serial Number series. So S30 00016, HS30 00016 and HLS30 00016 would have all been produced at one time or another - so you need a complete VIN to tell them apart.

VIN Tag = VIN stamped in a metal strip, riveted to the dash and visible through the windshield. (required in the US - not in Japan)

Model Number Plate = aka "the engine compartment data tag" in the engine compartment has the Model info printed on it. The VIN and the original engine serial number stamped into it.

FWIW,

Carl B.

[HS30-H]

Hi Carl,

Originally posted by Carl Beck

Allen T wrote:

AT> At the very least, these figures show that the LHD cars were not

AT> produced "first", and that there were indeed RHD cars being

AT> pre-productionised at the same time.

Hi Allen:

I fail to see how you arrive at that conclusion. Kats numbers show 1 Domestic and 1 Export built in May (factory prototype). It also shows 2 Domestic and 2 Export in July - when Kats says the "pre-production" cars were started. That is no proof of which was "first".

Also important to note that the "RHD" cars were Fairlady Z's. The Z Cars for Export were Left Hand Drive models - No production Right Hand Drive 240-Z's were "produced" until very late Jan or Feb of 1970. There are no 1969 RHD 240-Z's.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Carl,

As far as I am concerned, "The True History Of The Z Car" includes ALL of the S30-series models, and should not concentrate on the USA / North American market HLS30 "240Z" model to the point where all other models are treated as a sideshow. I try as much as possible to align myself with the philosophy of Japanese S30-series Z enthusiasts, and see all of the first generation cars as a family. The basic model type designation of "S30" really ought to be used when discussing the family of cars that includes the S30, S30-S, PS30, PS30-SB, HLS30, HS30 & HS30-H etc. I think its wrong to think of the history of the Z car as being centred solely around the USA market cars. Unfortunately, just about every English-language resource on the early Z cars seems to mention the "240Z" as though it was a predecessor to all of the other models.

I can see you demonstrating this bias with your statements and questions above. The way you write about these cars seems to be completely biased towards one particular model and specification.

You seem to misunderstand what I wrote with regard to the LHD and RHD cars above in reply to the figures that Kats supplied. When I mention RHD cars I am of course talking about the Domestic market "Fairlady" models, as they are RHD are they not?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AT> more RHD prototypes had been made than LHD prototypes. That's

AT> nice to see, as it might help to get the message across with regard

AT> to the LHD cars NOT being the "First" as is sometimes claimed.

"Pre-productionized", "prototyped"... we'll never know for sure - what matters is "Production" as in "sold to the public".

Given that the Fairlady Z was a RHD model - I don't believe that there was ever a question that they were both prototyped and produced at the same time as the LHD 240-Z. (who questioned that?). Both the Fairlady and Left Hand Drive Datsun 240-Z's were on display at the Tokyo Motor Show in 69. (NO RIGHT HAND DRIVE 240-Z's were there however - not in any coverage I've been able to find to date).

As I said in an earlier reply - if you or anyone have photographs of "prototype" RHD "240-Z's" I'd sure love to see them. All the images of any "prototypes" of a 240-Z that I have found are LHD models.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See - you keep doing it. You keep talking about the RHD "240Z" as though its some kind of alien creature from Mars. What is the point that you are trying to prove? I don't see any purpose in playing the HLS30 model off against the HS30 model in respect to whether it was on the show stand or not. You are missing the point. RHD ( Domestic ) cars were being shown at the same time as LHD ( Export ) cars.

In truth, the HS30 model was only a short step away from the Domestic RHD models - so most of its details could have been pre-productionised and trouble-shot on the Domestic model prototypes. I'm certainly NOT trying to prove that a RHD "240Z" HS30 model was in existence before or at the same time as any of the others. What I've been trying to get across to people is that the LHD models did NOT exist before the RHD models - and that they were planned and protoyped AT THE SAME TIME AS eachother.

I'm not talking about just HS30 and HLS30 models. I'm talking about LHD and RHD models.

I think you would have to admit that most English language resources ( including your own website ) concentrate on the North American / USA model HLS30 to such an extent that it makes all other models look like an afterthought. Its got to the stage where the "240Z" ( in both LHD and RHD forms ) is seen as the daddy of them all................

The story of the HLS30 "240Z" is a PART of the story of the S30-series Z. We should not and must not think of all the other models being a PART of the story of the HLS30 "240Z". That would be to put the cart before the horse...............

Respectfully,

Alan T.

[HS30-H]

Originally posted by Carl Beck

Allen also provided some interesting photo's - thanks. Can you tell us any more about "when" they were taken? Interesting that they seem to have snow tires on all four wheels - and the guys are dressed in winter coats in the one picture... were both pictures taken in Phoenix? (maybe they took them to the mountains?).

I have been told by a 25 year Datsun Parts Manager (1968 when he started to work for Datsun) - that the early 240-Z Parts Catalog stated that the rubber strips were added to the HLS30 Z's at HLS30 00013 - cars prior to that were fitted with the domestic front bumper (no rubber strips). So far no one has found a copy of the first few revisions of the 240-Z Parts Catalogs for me... Ron Johnson at Nissan Motorsports said he remembered that being the case - but couldn't find any documentation for me.

There is also a rumor/story that a few pre-production Z's were sent to Nissan Canada for winter testing - As HLS30 00009 thru 00015 are un-accounted for.... the pictured Z's could be any one of those I suppose..

Kind regards,

Carl

Carl Beck

Clearwater,FL USA

http://ZHome.com

69, 70, 71, 72, 72 & 73 BRE Z

(yes it was actually titled and sold as a 1969 Datsun Cpe).

Here are a couple of photos of the testing trip that was undertaken. I am told that this was a three month exercise ( August, September & October of 1969 ) during which a route from the Canadian Rockies to Death Valley and back was traversed many times. They wanted to take in extremes of cold and heat whilst racking up some serious mileage on these cars, and reporting their findings back to the Factory. Naturally, making sure that the cars would survive these extremes without giving trouble would be a very important part of making sure of the model's success in that particular market ( the biggest potential market in the World ).

On the subject of rubber strips on the bumpers - don't forget that the Japanese Domestic market had more than one choice. The Fairlady Z was the base model with NO rubber trims on the bumpers, and the Fairlady Z-L was the higher grade model which DID have the rubber strips on the bumpers. The Fairlady Z 432 DID have the rubber strips, and the Fairlady Z 432-R did NOT have the rubber strips. Domestic models came both with and without rubbers strips on the bumpers.

Here's photo 1:

[HS30-H]

........and here's photo 2:

Alan T.

[halz]

lubbadubbabubbdubba...!

(just shaking my head to clear the strange sense of Deja Vu the last few posts have invoked!)

Congratulations and thanks to Kats for digging up some hard-won facts - its all grist for the mill.

I also have to side with Alan... D=Domestic=FairladyZ=RHD. From Kats' numbers, the first D and E cars were produced TOGETHER. Now, if only we could find out which one was in front on the production line..!

[Carl Beck]

Hi Allen (everyone):

I'm sure we will bore everyone to death with our differing perspectives - but I have to admit I'm enjoying this conversation. You are of course completely wrong and I know - of course - I won't change your bias;-) - -but what the heck, we might have some minor influence on one another {vbg :-}. Believe it or not it's a rainy day here in Clearwater...

Allen Replied:

AT> Carl,

AT> As far as I am concerned, "The True History Of The Z Car"

AT> includes ALL of the S30-series models, and should not

AT> concentrate on the USA / North American market HLS30

AT>"240Z" model to the point where all other models are

AT> treated as a sideshow.

AT> I try as much as possible to align myself with the

AT> philosophy of Japanese S30-series Z enthusiasts, and see

AT> all of the first generation cars as a family.

OK - I can see all the first generation Z's as a family. I'd also agree that a "complete" history of the Z Car would include all the first generation models.

AT> The basic model type designation of "S30" really ought to AT> be used when discussing the family of cars that includes AT> the S30, S30-S, PS30, PS30-SB, HLS30, HS30 & HS30-H

AT> etc.

Terms again... the "S30" is not a "model type designation"... it's a chassis type. You get "model type" when you add the letter codes - ie. S30S, PS30, HS30 etc. and a chassis serial number... S30 xxxxx.

I'll agree with that - if the discussion stays "general" enough that what is being said - equally applies to all of the models. However most discussions evolve around what is different between/among them - so in that case I think it's helpful to specify more clearly the model one is referring too.

>I think its wrong to think of the history of the Z car as being >centred solely around the USA market cars.

Interesting perspective but I have a hard time understanding how you arrive at that. Everything about the history of the Z Car seems to prove it was "centered" solely around the USA market.

Yes, granted that by installing a smaller engine, and offering a stripped model for less money (S30S) they could sell a few in Japan (and why not do that it didn't cost much).

AT> Unfortunately, just about every English-language resource

AT> on the early Z cars seems to mention the "240Z" as

AT> though it was a predecessor to all of the other models.

It is a documented fact Allen - the design requirements were gathered from the US market, the design and development of the Z was driven by the US market.

Do you not take Yutaka Katayama's word for it? (I'll supply the quotes if you like - but I'm sure you have his book and many others on the history of both the Z and Nissan).

Allen - one of the most significant "facts" about the Datsun 240-Z - that made it so different from all the other "import" Sports/GT's in the world that proceeded it - was the "FACT" that it was the first "American Sports/GT - designed and built in Japan".. That was a completely different approach to marketing exported automobiles and capturing export markets. Completely different than any other company had ever taken. Taking that approach pushed Nissan to it's Number 1 Sales position in Import Car Sales in the US. (the Z wasn't the first "car" to take that approach - the PL510 was, but the Z was the first Sports/GT).

Until the 240-Z was introduced - every other imported Sports/GT had been designed based mostly on it's home market - then a percentage of them were modified/ re-configured and "exported" to other countries.

In the case of the Datsun 240-Z - the exact opposite approach was taken. The fact is, all the other models exist only because they are variations provided for much smaller nitch markets.

AT> I can see you demonstrating this bias with your

AT> statements and questions above. The way you write

AT> about these cars seems to be completely biased towards

AT> one particular model and specification.

You might be right - but I don't think it's a bias - so much as the facts that Nissan and the people involved in the design, development and marketing of the Z presented. They are the one's that focused the Z on the US Market. They are the one's written about for their genius. (it's not my bias it's simply the facts of the matter).

I'll readily admit that living in the US - most of the data/ information of interest to me personally is focused on the Z's we have here and most of the data/info we can find here deals with them.

On the other hand - most of the books written about the Z were written by authors in the UK..

AT> You seem to misunderstand what I wrote with regard to

AT> the LHD and RHD cars above in reply to the figures that AT> Kats supplied. When I mention RHD cars I am of course

AT> talking about the Domestic market "Fairlady" models, as

AT> they are RHD are they not?

Yes - I was only trying to specify that you were talking about the Fairlady - and NOT including the RHD 240-Z's in your reference to the "RHD".

For a long time, and still today there is the undying myth that there are 1969 HS30 Z's in Australia. They are still advertised every once in a while for sale - and written about (AutoSpeed was the last example). I've tried hard to kill that myth;-)

AT> ...snipped...

AT> I'm certainly NOT trying to prove that a RHD

AT> "240Z" HS30 model was in existence before or at

AT> the same time as any of the others.

Oops..sorry - that is exactly what I thought you were trying to prove. (that myth again)

AT> What I've been trying to get across to people is

AT> that the LHD models did NOT exist before the RHD

AT> models - and that they were planned and protoyped AT

AT> THE SAME TIME AS each other.

OK - I think most people interested know that (yes/no?).

AT> I'm not talking about just HS30 and HLS30 models. I'm

AT> talking about LHD and RHD models.

Yes - and I was pointing out that it might helpful to be more specific when you refer to the "RHD models" - as it's an indirect reference - could be Fairlady's, could be RHD 240-Z's or it could be both. You have now clarified that - by saying that you intended the reference to not be both, but rather the RHD's your were referring to was the Fairlady. (that was important to me because of the "myth" cited above;-)

Discussion continued in next frame - due to size limit...cjb

[Carl Beck]

Continued from previous frame..

AT> I think you would have to admit that most English

AT> language resources ( including your own website )

AT> concentrate on the North American / USA model HLS30

AT> to such an extent that it makes all other models look like

AT> an afterthought. Its got to the stage where the "240Z"

AT> ( in both LHD and RHD forms ) is seen as the daddy of

AT> them all................

Yes, I freely admit that. The history of the design and development, production and sales of the LHD Z - shows clearly that the "240-Z" is the "Daddy". I don't believe that's a personal "bias" - just a presentation of the facts. (I don't know why that would bother you so much).

There is no question that Mr. Matsuo and his design team wanted to sell their creation in their home market. Likewise the Management at Nissan HQ in Japan must have felt the same way.. Japanese Ego/Bias... sure we can allow that.

In the grand scheme of things however - if Nissan never sold anything other than the Datsun 240-Z it would still have been a smash hit in the sales numbers, still a smash hit for profit... the extra 10% for nitch markets - for Japanese Ego - was just gravy to the profit line - but certainly not significant, nor critical to the success of the Z Car.

BTW - it's not "my website". The Z Car Home Page is the Web Site of the Internet Z Car Club.

I have lots and lots of researched history related to the LHD 240-Z's published there only because I've taken the time to write and publish it. It's a main interest of mine. I been driving them since March of 1970, worked for Datsun in 72/73 etc.

I can assure you (ask you - encourage you) that if you want to spend the time we'll gladly accept contributions of data, information and articles etc. related to your main interest in the Fairlady Z's.

With over 13,500 members world wide - and a very heavily used web site - I'm sure everyone would enjoy knowing more about the various models in the first generation of Z Cars.

AT> The story of the HLS30 "240Z" is a PART of the story of

AT> the S30-series Z. We should not and must not think of all

AT> the other models being a PART of the story of the HLS30

AT> "240Z". That would be to put the cart before the

AT> horse...............

Here I would have to respectfully disagree Alan. The "horse" is and always was the HLS30 - the Datsun 240-Z.

The "Story" of the Z Car would have to contain many chapters - one would be about how Nissan captured a strategic export market, another about how Nissan took over the "affordable" Sports/GT Market in the US. The story of the Z Car is about a single model changing the perceptions of millions of consumers related to the quality and value of "Japanese" Automobiles.

That is why the "Datsun 240-Z" is recognized today by Automotive Historians as one of the 10 most important automobiles in US Automotive History. That "story" is why Mr. Katayama was inducted into the US Automotive Hall Of Fame in Dearborn, Michigan (the heart of FORD Country no less!!).

I will agree with you that most of the Books written in English - also missed what I consider the "real story" of the Z Car - as they focused mostly on providing data and information about the specific models and model changes, supported by some limited background info/history about Nissan and the Fairlady line - while missing the fact that the real significance of the Z Car was the monumental change in the Automotive Industry that the 240-Z initiated in the US market.

Yes, the total story of the Z would have to include a short chapter about all the various minor incarnations for nitch markets. However if you think they are "as important", "as significant" as the HLS30 - - then I have to believe you have missed the real "Story Of The Z Car".

The vast majority of your interest in this subject may be in the various deviations of the design - I can fully respect that - but to make the argument that 10% is equal to 90% doesn't hold water in the first place - and it clouds the real story of the Z Car IMHO.

BTW - if you would like to take this off-line - so we don't bore "halz" to death - feel free to e-mail me directly.

kind regards,

Carl B.