geezer

The sale price they have right now for the Legalis-R muffler is not too bad at all. The shipping price made me say ouch but I could shake that off too. Wonder what the other charges would be at the door? Group buy possible? It should bolt right up to my Trust header, which by the way does fit beautifully on a LHD. Looking at the illustration and comparing it with my original Fairlady Z twice pipe, it looks like a direct bolt on.

Thanks for the link Keith and the offer to find metric hardware Chris. I think I have it covered. The reason for these stainless kits not containing the suspension/chassis component fasteners must be for the prevention of possible safety and liability issues. Most of the fasteners in the kit are a A2 70 classification. That is fine for their designated use, but I think I will first look to Nissan for any needed suspension/chassis fasteners, with better strength ratings. They are not all readilly available in the generic industrial supply house inventory; some being considered specialty pieces, in which case OEM is preferred. Worst case scenerio, I clean up what I have, farm out the replating, like I have done with so many other parts, and reuse it.

First off, I just want to say that this initial post is not a product review or an endorsement of any kind of this product. I have not used any of this stainless hardware kit yet and my intention here is just to show all of what is included in it. Because the sellers description, although thorough, didn't include any pics and seemed a bit confusing, in the sense of trying to cover the 240Z, 260Z and 280Z in one all inclusive kit. They did a good job in that regard, with the exception of the rear suspension hardware being absent. I decided to go this route after investigating other options, such as replating my existing hardware or farming it out. What helped me with my particular decision was the fact that my car is a long term cobbled together project that was missing a substantial number of pieces, that took years to gather together. Also, being a car from the "rustbelt", some of the stuff I did have was kind of nasty to begin with. Replating doesn't eliminate pitting that can't be removed. This option was attractive to me, doing a complete rottiserie, modified rebuild of the car, in terms of time savings alone. It does lack the fasteners needed for the rear suspension, etc., so I am now on the hunt to expand this kit with my own additions. My Z's entire driveline is modified from stock and the addition of the rear discs and R200 lsd and other mods may make for some hardware sustitutions anyhow. I have not compared anything in this kit with any of the OEM counterparts yet. I was forewarned about some bolt head sizes or types being different, but again, I'm not that concerned with "correctness", on this car. Here's a group of pics showing all of what is included. There is no repetition of pieces. It took 7 pics to show it all, so you could still read the labels. I apologize for my poor picture taking. I just hoped to get some reaction from those that have considered this option and also provide a view of what you get in the kit. BTW, the seller is MMS & Accessories Inc. in Rydal GA. if interested. I have heard they will take the time to customize these kits for you but I didn't try.

And what are you going to do after breakfast? Just kidding, Its nice to have a Z in the garage that needs your attention. It is great therapy for me and will help me make it through the long winter. I just hope I can give her the time she deserves. Good luck with all the projects!

That really looks great Kenny! It looks like you have achieved a very nice textured finish, that suits the car just fine. Even the guys spending the big bucks for proffesional recovering cannot get the texture exactly like the original. I have been considering doing mine before reinstalling it in the car. I don't have any cracks yet but looking closely, I can see where its only a matter of time, likely after the car is back on the road. Looking at a successful repair like yours, makes me feel better about attempting it myself. Thanks for the pics!

The plot thickens! I guess I was wrong about the E4126 version being the only type sold over the counter in the US. It would be nice to find a date verified period photo, to determine the mounting hole pattern, if different from the E4126 version. The May of '71 pricing of $52.74 for each, would have been more than a weeks pay for me at the time, for a set.

Thanks Dennis. I was way off, but 16,000 yen was for 1 side only. Since the set price was 23,000 yen, that would have converted to just under $64. a set, keeping in mind that was the over the counter price if bought in Japan in 1970. That still seems like a bargain. Wonder what the price was in the US at the time? It is a bit difficult for me to compare buying power today, being retired almost 10 years. I am relating somewhat to my earnings in 1970, which was around $95. a week before taxes were deducted. Since they have been out of production for many years and they are such a desirable item, what someone is willing to pay has risen substantially, but there are deals to be had also, as pointed out in Mike B's recent Ebay auction link earlier in this thread.

That was funny Stephen! Especially when the site I looked up the medical definition on asked the question: fuzzy search? Definition: 'Escutcheon' How to search: 1. Enter a text phrase: fuzzy search? 2. Select a letter, or # for non-alphabetical entries: | # | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z |

:beer:Incredible! That is some good digging right there! Can we assume these are the "real early" version? Even if we don't yet have a better example of the mounting hole pattern, we at least know this version had 4 holes per side. Good find Alan!

Hi kats, I thought that perhaps a little explanation would be helpful. I did not see your headlight cover comparison sketch until Esprist posted it to this thread. It is seldom that I miss one of your posts and I was surprised that I had never seen the drawing before. Then I was even more surprized that you had made the "mystery" notation on your drawing, relating to the example on the right. After reading the notation on the example in the center.."from the beginning", I finally realized why Esprist thought of "early", "later" differently, as you were unsure also. It was because of the E8726 suffix versions being common in Japan. On the other hand, all over the counter sales in North America of headlight covers were the E4126 suffix version. As Mike B pointed out, that is the only version listed in the Competition Parts Catalogs as well as Black Dragon in later years. Every set that I ever seen that came up for sale were the E4126 suffix version. I noticed the E4126 suffix version listed in the 1970 Nissan FairladyZ Parts Catalog long ago, but never gave it much thought until this thread was started and what I considered "early & later" were reversed. Here is a scan of the last 2 pages of that parts catalog. The headlight covers are listed last under the heading of Option Parts. The english translations were written in by the original owner in 1970. I never did the math but it seems that these were high priced items, even back in 1970. Converted to todays pricing I bet $1200.00 US for a set isn't too far off in comparison. Notice the 16000 yen "each" price that has been written in.

What I meant but failed to convey properly is that from the view provided in this photo, without any other knowledge of the pictures origin or view provided in other photos, I would be tempted to label it as an E4126 suffixed cover. In this photo, I really couldn't make out a fastening screw where the arrow is indicating one. Not with any certainty. Of course we know better. Sorry for the confusion. Just another example of my fingers moving faster than my thought process. Edit: Carl noted that the hole seemed to be lower in this photo when he posted it. Dang Carl, how the heck can you see that? Are you getting help from someone?

Hi Michael, thanks for the photo recap. It is helpful having so many examples gathered in one post along with the information you have included. The only thing that I would change is the title line you have included on the top of the photo of the head on view of the 432 at the '69 Tokyo Show, that Alan attached in post #77. It hasn't been determined if the covers are "Later Part No. 63900-E8726 and 63901-E8726". I am leaning towards them not being that type. For one thing the part number didn't exist at the time. Also, the red circled holes just don't look to be positioned right (too low). The red question marks do represent a few of my other points of uncertainty on that photo as well. For me, the only uncertainties I have about this entire thread, are the identification of the headlight covers on that 432 on display at the '69 Tokyo show and what to call the two common versions we have referred to as "early", "later". I think Alan has successfully pointed out that at the time of the '69 Tokyo Show, it is possible that there was another version. At any rate the questions remain. Were they prototypes void of an assigned part number? Were they a stepping stone to the eventually listed E8726 suffixed headlight covers? Thoughts? Edit: Michael, perhaps a title for your post will aid in future searches as well.

There were probably storerooms filled to the rafters with parts of every kind that were designed and built in very limited runs, even if never brought on line for production use. I think there is a real possibility of more than one non-finalized version of these headlight covers, sitting on a shelf somewhere, at the time, waiting on a decision from someone, to actually assign a part number and schedule for production. The paper trail or any other evidence supporting that theory is likely long gone though.

That's because I'm confused and I am spreading it around amongst the rest of you. Sorry about that, allow me to elaborate and explain what I find confusing and why I described what I see as being a mixed bag. I said... "Looking at Kats drawing, he depicts the example on the left as being representative of the 3 holed version found on the 432 at the 1969 Tokyo Auto Show. I agree with the notation made on the drawing. It clearly is a prototype version that never went into production." ...meaning ... if what is shown in the drawing is really on the car, it had to be a prototype. I wasn't sure what I was seeing in the photos. After seeing the latest pictures of the car in post #84, I can see that you are correct in your assessment of the retaining screws you had circled in red. The photos in post #84 trump all the previous examples. Up until now, I just couldn't say for sure...But taking a good look at the photos and trying to guesstimate the distance downwards from the leading edge or corner, those screws appear to be positioned a little lower than an E8726 suffixed version are. Kats shows those holes quite a bit lower. I think you are correct. Looking at Kats drawing, it doesn't appear he was sure of the hole pattern on this car. My best guess is that Kats prototype label could be correct after all though, even if there are 4 holes and not 3 ...or... it is an E8726 prefixed version that has its image slightly skewed in the photo( without actually having an assigned number at the time). This kind of reminds me of the "early", "later" hubcap discussion, where it turned out there was photographic proof of both versions existing early on but the "later" version did not debute on the production line from the start. In post #82 the two pics are of E8726 versions. So, those are all stainless? In post #83 with the photo of the first S30 Series race car, the E4126 version is shown. As well, the scan dated March '70 showing the cover only on the PS30 Fairlady Z432 is the E4126 version. Those are easy for me to identify because I have a set in front of me that I can position the same as in the photos, as a visual aid. Thank you everyone, for all the photos and allowing us to get a better idea of what was what and what is.

Well guys, after studying all of these photographs, I came up with a mixed bag. I will tell you first off that I am the wrong guy to make a determination that can be relied on, with a few of them. Anyhow, post #72 was easy. Both of the Works 240Z rally cars are fitted with the same type. I think it is obvious, that we can tag them with an E4126 suffix. In post #73 suffix E4126 is sitting atop suffix E8726. Now we get to the tough ones. In post #77 the highlighted red circles sure do seem to indicate the fastening screws. They appear very concentric also, but I would be hesitant to bet the farm on what I think I am seeing. I don't know if it is a case of stubborness on my part to concede that it is a suffix E8726 or maybe some different part, or if it is an example of "camera trickery". The same goes for post #78, the side by side photos. It sure appears to be a screw, in the same location, on the left hand photo, just as in post #77, but its taken from the same photo, isn't it? The right hand photo in the side by side photos is a suffix E4126. The left hand photo in post #80 is a little tricky, I think because of the camera angle, but I would be tempted to say that it is a suffix E4126. OK, lets hear what you guys are seeing.

Looking at Kats drawing, he depicts the example on the left as being representative of the 3 holed version found on the 432 at the 1969 Tokyo Auto Show. I agree with the notation made on the drawing. It clearly is a prototype version that never went into production. The second example in Kats drawing is the version that has been referred to as "later" in this thread and more than likely, not thought of as "later" to someone more familiar with what has been a common place sight in Japan. This is what I believe contributes to the confusion. Athough the third example on the right in Kats drawing has a notation as being found on the 432R, it is not a common sight in Japan, but I have pointed out that it was listed in the earliest parts lists in Japan. It is the only OEM version that was available over the counter in North America. Putting prototype versions aside, and the perhaps confusing "early" or "later", etc. labels aside, I still maintain there is no refuting the fact of which production version came first. Not that it even matters to me or anyone else. Its just that I wanted to explain why I tried to correct Esprist, on the way he referred to the different versions. I possibly could have been the only one thinking this way. In the spirit of the threads original title and purpose (no pun intended), I felt compelled to point out in terms of early and later, just to get the facts correct, which I now understand, wouldn't seem right, depending on your "world perspective" or knowledge of what is "in the books". The addition of "whole story" and inclusion of prototype parts that don't even have assigned part numbers, in my view, just complicates the threads original intent. It is interesting none the less.

It never is the whole story is it? We can only piece together whatever clues, evidence, proof, validation, testimony, documentation, etc. that we come across. Then we can decide what we choose to believe. I certainly am not claiming to know the whole story but I do find some of what we know to be compelling at the very least. Using your own example of sequential suffixes indicates "early" or "later" when comparing the two part numbers. Although the two sets of headlight covers were produced and sold concurrently for many years, in different markets, one type had to be first and we know which set was first to be included in the parts listings. You mention: "I've seen plenty of other examples on these cars where parts have changed in construction and/or detail without changes to part numbers." Yes of course, we have all seen examples of that but this is not the same. In this case the parts have been changed in construction and/or detail, as well as a new part number assigned. To me, the photo from the 1969 Tokyo auto show qualifies as "early" only in the sense of the time period. I would not testify either way in a court of law, to what type of headlight cover I am seeing in the photograph. I just couldn't say with any reasonable amount of certainty. I think we have all been fooled in similar circumstances. Chrome or polished stainless can distort quite readily in these old photographs, especially with the lighting provided and reflections created. Prototypes, pre production or pilot cars could be outfitted with just about anything the designers were developing, shown in the media, previewed by the public but never put into production. We've all seen it. Chris's remarks caused me to remember back to the '70s. I am old enough that I did drive a 240Z in 1970 (that belonged to a friend), loved the cars and was fairly familiar with them. Like Chris, I don't recall seeing any Zs equipt with headlight covers, other than perhaps in a magazine article or such. Along with your explanation Alan, I can understand how the headlight covers were much more predominant in Japan. We really didn't have that many S30s in this area. Come to think of it XKEs were and still are more plentiful around here. I'm not meaning to be argumentive. Its safe to say I'm out of my league, when discussing some of these topics. To me its like a big jigsaw puzzle. Sometimes the pieces fit, sometimes they don't.

I comprehend your point and also believe that it is a very plausible theory. My only disagreement was with your post script... PS: "What I'm saying is that the different part number suffix doesn't necessarily indicate the change in mounting hole location"...... The point that I am making is, the assigned suffix, in my opinion, represents the cumulative changes to the part, defining all changes made. Until being enlightened about the likelyhood of the trim rings being changed to stainless, I thought the only changes were the trim rings holes pattern and lense profile. Unless there is another part number that I am unaware of, I am 99% sure that all trim rings with the E8726 suffix will have this hole pattern. Also, if any of the E8726 suffix trim rings are proven to be stainless, I would likewise be 99% sure they all are. If this is proven to be the case, how do we best refer to the two types? "early" & "later", "original chromed" & "stainless"? Doesn't much matter, as long as the differences are noted. I for one will not likely remember "Zenki" & "Kouki", unless I write it backwards on my forehead. I believe you have swayed my opinion on the ratio of "over the counter sales". I still would like to know what the reasoning was for not making the changes across the board, at the same time. The only reasons I can think of are possibly economics and not wanting to stock both types in the much larger North American market. Very helpful discussion, for me.

Glenn, that is the hole pattern I expected to see on your 240Z-L but I never expected them to be stainless. Just another example of differences between markets & models I guess. Alan, I have never seen a date associated with the E8726 suffix. I would think the suffix change would have more to do with a design specification change of the particular part in question, moreso than coinciding with the introduction of different models. Not that I am saying it didn't coincide with the introduction of the L24-engined models to the Japanese market. Thats good to know. The change of material from chromed steel to polished stainless would certainly merit a suffix change. I would think that a mounting hole pattern change would also merit a suffix change. Just as Kats was mystified by the hole patterns of 63900-E4126 & 63901-E4126 because of its uncommon nature in Japan, I am likewise ignorant of headlight rings made of stainless, never seeing them. The only time I ever see them are in pictures and the only noticeable difference is the hole patterns. Thanks for clarifying that. There was a major difference between the way things were done in Japan from what I've gathered. I am referring to the way optioned parts were ordered and fitted to the cars before delivery. Do you know if this was the case with the headlight covers in Japan? I'm guessing more were ordered and delivered fitted than bought over the counter just because of the fact we never see NOS "later" versions come up for sale.

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.

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?

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.

You are progressing very well Dan! I enjoy looking at pics of Zs turned inside out and comparing them to what I've found on mine. Looking great so far, keep up the good work.

I asked for pics, not because I am interested in buying them but it would add to the information base of this thread and perhaps help others in the future make better informed decisions when shopping for a set of headlight covers.

There are several members here who have a NOS set of the original "early" headlight covers, still in the original boxes that I know of. They would be able to verify the hole positions as well as the part numbers of their set and I am certain the numbers will coincide with what is stated in post 41. Over the past several years whenever a set of OEM, NOS covers came up for sale, they were the "early" version. Heres what I know. 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. I'm not sure of the date of availability for 63900-E8726 & 63901-E8726, but according to the notation in Kat's hole description sheet they were seen "from the beginning" in Japan. All the "later" type I have seen have been removed from FairladyZs. I've never seen a NOS "later" set come up for sale but maybe I just didn't notice. The last two pics are just a couple of good example pics, from the recent Ebay auction that Mike B linked in post#39 of the "early" type. EDIT:Added Kat's hole location sheet pic