I've been prompted to start a new thread on this subject after reading - for what seems like the thousandth time - somebody describing the OEM steering wheel on a late 1970 production HLS30UV as "Plastic". 

No. The OEM steering wheel on the '1969 through 1973 production S30-series Z was WOOD. Real wood.

They were manufactured for Nissan by specialist Izumi Motor Co. Ltd, based in Shinagawa, Tokyo. Izumi made a wide range of steering wheels for Nissan, as well as selling their own aftermarket 'sports' stering wheels with a cheeky 'Izumi' engraved script which aped Nardi, one of their inspirations.

Izumi used a patented high-pressure heat moulding process. Real wood fibres, impregnated with resin, were laid - following the grain - in a heated mould around the steel hoop of the steering wheel. High pressure, combined with that heat, moulded the wood permanently around the hoop and cured the resin. The result was a wood steering wheel, complete with finger grips on the rear, with no joints or seams. No splinters.

My theory is that people found them a little 'plasticky' or just couldn't believe they were real wood, and it stuck. After 50+ years it is hard to shake this off, hence me reading a comment on yet another Bring-a-Trailer auction from somebody who is convinced they are plastic.

Evidence: I've cut one up. I'm making a 'special' wheel using this 1970 production Izumi as a base (it was already damaged, so don't weep...) and can therefore show what's under the surface. I'll let the photos speak for themselves...

   

A chemist could separate the wood fibers from the binder and analyze the binder.  It's not complicated and probably not too expensive.  Infrared analysis just needs a tiny sample.  Actually might not even need separating.  A chemistry student at any research university could probably get it done for free.  One path to knowing.  Like counting horse teeth.

On 12/30/2022 at 1:20 AM, Zed Head said:

A chemist could separate the wood fibers from the binder and analyze the binder.  It's not complicated and probably not too expensive.  Infrared analysis just needs a tiny sample.  Actually might not even need separating.  A chemistry student at any research university could probably get it done for free.  One path to knowing.  Like counting horse teeth.

Let's do this, and clear the myth once and for all 😄

1 hour ago, bartsscooterservice said:

Let's do this, and clear the myth once and for all 😄

I regret that i didn't save some of the parts i broke off of my old steeringwheel.. i remember it was very hard and looked like stone powder, but hard as rock..  thought it be a mix of poly and woodpowder then. You had to be careful not to cut yourself on that stuff!

Edited December 31, 20222 yr by dutchzcarguy

7 minutes ago, dutchzcarguy said:

I regret that i didn't save some of the parts i broke of my old steeringwheel.. i remember it was very hard and looked like stone powder, but hard as rock..  thought it be a mix of poly and woodpowder then. You had to be careful not to cut yourself on that stuff!

I invite you to take another look at the photos I posted at the beginning of this thread. Does that look like "stone powder" to you? How about "wood powder"? It's almost like you're talking about a different substance completely.

Mine has a clearly-visible structure of oriented strands and what might fairly be described as 'grain'. I'm pretty sure that if I showed it to anyone on the street in a blind tasting experiment they would say 'wood'. 

Why still this push-back on the nature of the majority component?

 

On 12/30/2022 at 12:20 AM, Zed Head said:

A chemist could separate the wood fibers from the binder and analyze the binder.  It's not complicated and probably not too expensive.  Infrared analysis just needs a tiny sample.  Actually might not even need separating.  A chemistry student at any research university could probably get it done for free.

1 hour ago, bartsscooterservice said:

Let's do this, and clear the myth once and for all 😄

There are several world-class research universities in my home city. In the new 2023 term I will ask about the possibility of testing. I doubt they would do it "for free", but I will approach them nonetheless.

 

I could not see any grain in the parts i had i remember vividly.. maybe my wheel didn't have woodparts in it.. i don't know. it looked like hard powder.  (Can we stop about this topic? 🙂 )

There are several different perspectives someone might have about a project like that.  Reverse-engineering, a forensic analysis challenge, a training exercise for the use of characterization instruments, even an example of a "green" technology.  Or an early historical example of a wood-polymer composite.

If you make it apparent that you're not profiting from the work the resistance to doing it for free will be minimized.  It's a cool project related to a cool car.  Guaranteed to raise interest.  Even better, if a writeup of the work was done, shining some light on the university, everybody wins.

I would make it clear that the main question is about the type of binder used.  Is the binder a synthetic polymer or is it organically derived from wood itself?  One is realer than the other but neither produces 100% "real wood".  The issue of whether or not it should be called real wood will be irrelevant. 

50 minutes ago, Zed Head said:

I would make it clear that the main question is about the type of binder used.  Is the binder a synthetic polymer or is it organically derived from wood itself?  One is realer than the other but neither produces 100% "real wood".  The issue of whether or not it should be called real wood will be irrelevant. 

With all due respect, I don't think I'll be priming any independent research with your 'guidance'. One would - hopefully - imagine that a scientific examination wouldn't need any parameters - let alone restrictions - set by a third party.

I don't get your comments about "real wood". Are you still saying - after all this - that something other than "real wood" has been used here? What is the opposite of "real wood" anyway? Is "real wood" somehow too exotic a substance to have been used? I would err to the contrary. It makes complete sense to me.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I have to wonder what the definition of "real wood" means to you? What percentage of content in the finished product do you honestly think is wood/not wood?

Simply going on what I have in front of me, I would happily stand by my assertion that the majority percentage of the material content being discussed here is organic wood. I don't see any point in it all otherwise. Indeed, what's behind the pushback? Do people actually *want* it to be 'plastic'?

 

I offered a path to knowledge for those that want to know what, exactly, the steering wheel is made of.  Sorry that I placed it in your philosophical discussion thread about what "real wood" is.  

Anybody who has actually worked with wood, real wood directly from a tree, would not consider the wheel to be made of real wood.  It is made of wood, but the final product is not real wood.  

Just like in the construction industry, beams made of real wood glued together are not a considered or called a wood beam.  They are called laminated wood beams.  A fine distinction but informative.  It tells you what it is.

Real wood has inherent flaws, like susceptibility to swelling or rot from moisture, or shrinkage and warping from losing moisture, like in the hot environment of a car.

Your continuous arguing is ironic in that you seem to want to show and protect the superior qualities of the Z car yet you're arguing that the Z's "wood" steering wheel is made of an inferior material.  If it was real wood most of the wheels today wood be warped and cracked.  Like real real wood wheels.

People that know real wood understand its flaws and know what the term means.

https://www.timber-technologies.com/wood-products/laminated-beams/

Forgot to say that this thread is a lot like the premise for Blade Runner.  Do you just pretend it's real and enjoy it?  Does the truth really matter?  Love is love, right?

Here's some interesting discussion about nomenclature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultured_meat

I have conjured up the proper term, I believe.  Unnatural wood.  It is wood, some would call it real wood, but is not as nature produced it.  It is unnatural wood.  The term acknowledges the woodness of the wheel but recognizes the state of the wood in the wheel.

There are alternative words for those who don't like it.

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/unnatural