HS30-H

Once again, many thanks to everybody for their kind words. My apologies for being absent over the last couple of days - but I have been busy getting this car back home and trying to juggle work commitments at the same time. Yesterday ( Thursday ) my friend Kevin and I went down to the port to actually collect the car. I paid the final bills at the shipping company and settled up with the agents who cleared the car for Tax and Customs duties ( taxes on top of taxes......... ). We loaded the car on the trailer and arrived home late afternoon. All went without a hitch. I'll get back here later today - after I have caught up with my work - to try and answer some of the questions that have been asked while I have been away. Sorry to be slow to respond. Just a couple of pics from yesterday:

HoTWire, Yes, I had thought about the Top Hat 'Groovy Baby' series for 70s saloons - but I don't think this car would be eligible because it has so many parts that were Group 4 homologations ( when the Groovy Baby series tries to keep to Group 1 and Group 2 ). And anyway, I don't think the GT-R would be evenly matched with the lighter 2 litre cars like some of the Alfas for example ( I used to own a 105-series and know how well they can go ). And don't forget it will be me behind the wheel ( ie slow ). To be honest, I think its the fact that contact is seen as inevitable that puts me off racing these days. I think historic racing should be a non-contact sport.

Another couple:

A few more:

Sincere thanks to everybody for the kind words and positive reactions. I'll try and answer some of the questions that have been asked, but first I have to clear up one large detail. A few people know about this already - so it won't be a surprise to them - but the truth is that I have been given this car as a gift. I have not paid anything except the transport to docks in Japan, Japanese de-registration and export formalities, the cost of the container shipping ( and all that goes with that ) and the import duties and taxes here in the UK............ I am hugely indebted to my good friend Dr Hiroshi Shimizu in Kyoto, who has passed ownership of the car to me. Dr Shimizu owned the car for over 25 years, and paid for its rebuild and restoration before giving it to me. That rebuild and restoration was undertaken by the other person that I owe a huge debt of thanks to; my good friend Mr Hideki Matsui of NP35 in Nagano - without whom none of this would have been possible. Neither Shimizu san or Matsui san visit this website and forum, but it would be hugely remiss of me not to mention them on this thread, and of course acknowledge their generosity. Can you imagine what it feels like to be given such a gift? Words fail me. I didn't want to say too much about it until it was safely landed on UK soil. I'm not really superstitious, but until the container was opened at Southampton I really thought something might jinx the story at the last minute ( like the ship sinking or something ). Its still not in its new home yet - but its not long now. However, I have to say that I'm still struggling to call the car "mine", and keep calling it "Dr Shimizu's GT-R". I think I prefer it that way for now to be honest. I watched this car take shape over several years in Matsui san's workshop, and I know just how much work went into it. It also has some very rare and sought-after period parts on it ( most of them under the skin and not immediately apparent ) which Shimizu san gathered many years ago. Matsui san also came up with rare parts from his own private collection, and put them on the car. It was not built as a 'replica' of the famous no.15 works car that clinched the GT-R's 50th race victory, but more a kind of nod in that general direction - and NISMO themselves had some input in the colouring and numbering decisions. More details on that and the car's spec in future posts. The car did still have road registration in Japan, and this will enable me to road register it here in the UK on a period-related tax-free registration. Road-legalisation should be fairly straightforward ( mainly front lighting - which I am already working on ) as the regulations for a 1971/72 car are not so strict here ( we are very lucky in that respect ). However, I'm not in all that much of a hurry to drive it on UK roads as it is fairly hard work to sit in there for long periods. It is incredibly loud inside, there is no heating / screen demisting ( all removed ) and suspension is fairly harsh. It also has no fuel gauge. I'm also not going to start putting bumpers and trim etc back onto it, as it was built to be a track day / club race car and I feel obligated to keep it that way for the forseeable future. It is currently sitting on some non-period wheels and tyres ( the Watanabes it used at the NISMO Festival and NEKO Time Machine Festival were borrowed ) but I have a nice set of very wide Watanabes to put on it, and I am negotiating some period-type race tyres from Dunlop. It just does not look 'right' on the 16-inch Southern Ways mesh wheels it has been wearing since the mid 1980s. I'm looking into what race series it might be eligible for - but since it is a model that was never officially imported to Europe this might be awkward. Track days and sprint events should be no problem, and the Goodwood Road Racing Club ( of which I am a member ) have a few of these that I can enter in the near future. I certainly don't want to bend it though......... Nostalgic Hero magazine carried a four-page feature on the car in issue no.113 ( February 2006 ) and they say that they might come to the UK later this year to do a follow-up article. We shall see. Anybody who finds themselves near me in north London is welcome to come and see the car in person. No street rides until it is fully road legal though..... I'm attaching some photos that were taken for the Nostalgic Hero coverage by staff photographer Mr Isao Yatsui, near the NP35 workshop in Nagano - using Mount Asama as the backdrop. If anybody has any more specific questions I'll do my best to try and answer them - but do bear in mind that I am somewhere around the bottom of a very steep learning curve with the C10-series Skylines myself......... Cheers, Alan T.

The car was a little dirty after being on the dockside in Japan for a few days, but the container did its job and the car was undamaged. No way was I going to ship it Ro-Ro. I tipped some Shell Optimax in the tank, connected up a remote battery pack ( letting the fuel pumps do their stuff for a little while ) and she fired up almost straight away. I drove her from the de-vanning platform round to the storage compound of the freight company, and will leave her there for another couple of days whilst the import procedures are completed. She comes back to her new 'home' on Thursday. First KPGC10 in Europe, I'm told. Somehow it seems very weird to see it in the UK rather than in its country of origin. I still haven't got used to the idea yet.......

OK, I know this the 240K sub-forum and I'm technically in the wrong series - but at least the Skyline link is there........... My 'new' car came out of its container at Southampton docks today, after its journey of almost 5 weeks from Japan. The container was loaded on the ship in Yokohama, and it called at Tokyo, Yangtian, Singapore, Hong Kong, Karachi, Jebel Ali, Rotterdam and Hamburg before finally being offloaded at Southampton. The vessel was called the 'MOL Paradise':

Hi Miles, More than once I've tried on this forum to get across the point that Nissan's 'L-gata' engines were designed by Mr Hiroshi Iida and his team as a potential 'family' of variants. They called this the 'L-gata Module', and they deliberately designed-in the possibility of multiple variants of differing capacity by allowing for a basic block design with a deep skirt, the possibility of a long stroke length, and a wide bore pitch. The history of the Nissan L-series engine did not begin with the L16 of the 510-series Bluebird, and the six cylinder L-series engines did not begin when two extra cylinders were "added" to the L16 to make an L24. That is just advertising copy for one particular market. The Nissan 'L-gata' was used in many models in Japan, and was not always confined to a 2-litre capacity. Many people seem to overlook this. I have a Japanese market car that was fitted from the factory with an L24.......... Hi Rolf, Hiroshi Iida and his team designed Nissan's 'L-gata' engine module during the 1964~1965 period, a full year before the merger with Prince. Iida himself has admitted to being "influenced" by what he saw on the Prince G7 engine, but he also says that he was "influenced" by what he saw on the Mercedes ( and other ) engines. I think that is an engineer being candid, and I don't think many engineers work in a vacuum. I believe that Prince actually licensed some design details used on the G7 valvetrain from Mercedes, but Nissan did not. Since the Nissan engine design debuted before the merger with Prince, I think it is fair for us to assume that no data or designs passed from Prince to Nissan before the merger. Iida san himself says he considered Prince a worthy competitor, but that he and his team were directly competing in the market place with Toyota. It was the news that Toyota were working on a new SOHC straight six to be used on their mid-sized and full-sized sedans that prompted Nissan's decision to go for a new SOHC six themselves from 1963/4. Cheers, Alan T.

You make it sound like Nakagawa was responsible for the engine of the "Zero" from the beginning. That was not the case. He came into the story a little after it had begun. Proper lineage of the 'Sakae' engine effectively begins with the 'NAM' - designed by Takeo Kotani and Masatoshi Tsutsumi of Nakajima. This was a completely new design for Nakajima, and it was destined to become the first 'Sakae' engine. The 'NAM II' became the 'Sakae 12' - the first engine used in what became known as the "Zero". Dr Nakagawa worked on the 'NAM III' engine ( an update of the 'NAM II' / 'Sakae 12' ) which became the 'Sakae 21' - used in the late versions of the 'Zero'. We ought to take this implied linking of the 'Zero' aircraft name with that of the 'Fairlady Z' with a HUGE pinch of salt! It is painful to see Sailor Bob take it all so literally - as though it is fact. But the term "Zero" for that aircraft was never really used by the Japanese themselves until after hostilities had ended, and most likely caught on in reverse from the Allied use of the term. The correct Japanese term was 'Rei' ( meaning zero ) - which originated from the both the Japanese national dating system year of 2600 ( the Japanese nation was decided to have been founded in 660BC ), and the Western year of 1940. Both of these years ended in the number zero ( 'Rei' in Japanese ) and this was the year that the Japanese Navy accepted the new fighter into their fleet. The correct romanised Japanese name for the aircraft was 'Rei Shiki Sentoki' ( literally 'Type Zero Fighter' ) - often shortened to 'Rei-sen' - from the full term that translates as 'Mitsubishi Navy Type Zero Carrier-Based Fighter'. Any linking of the letter 'Z' between the aircraft and the car are purely romantic and fairly misleading. This especially when you consider that the Prince Motor Company themselves actually linked their company history ( directly through Dr Ryoichi Nakagawa ) with the Nakajima Ki-43 'Hayabusa' ( codenamed 'Oscar' by the Allies ) - which was developed a year after the 'Rei-sen', but used the same engines and looked very similar. The 'Rei-sen' was a Naval aircraft and the 'Hayabusa' was an Army aircraft. So the direct Prince link with the 'Zero' is tenuous, and the 'Hayabusa' is a much better candidate. Not so. The ex-Prince faction ( "the artists formerly known as Prince"? ) effectively formed their own clique within the Nissan fold, and treated Murayama as though it was their own private fiefdom within Nissan. Their racing-related activities were now being conducted under the 'Nissan' name, but they were still fiercely proud of being from the Prince bloodline. Nissan carried on their own race and rally related activities at Oppama ( they didn't "drop" anything except their very limited forays into building a sports racer ), and a kind of rivalry between the two factions came into being. They were forced to share personnel and technologies, but nevertheless the internal rivalry persisted. Vestiges of this still remain today; the team developing the new GT-R are direct descendents of the ex-Prince contingent that was headed by Shinichiro Sakurai, and have their own remit whilst still being part of Nissan. Nissan has come to accept and arguably foster the distinction. Alan T.

Carl, How many times do I have to tell you this before it finally sinks in? The above section of the book was badly phrased, badly written and - above all - basically inaccurate. This is not surprising if we remind ourselves that Matsuo san was 'interviewed' by the staff writer at MIKI PRESS who actually wrote the chapter, which then got sent upwards in the chain to be subbed. Miho and Brian Long then 'translated' this into English with their own perspective ( literal Japanese to English translation is always difficult, I can tell you - so they have my full sympathy ) and that version is what you are basing your 'research' on. At best it is third-hand, after-the-fact and somewhat muddled. To simplify, the correct sequence of events is that the twin-carb high comp version of the L20 six had ALREADY been decided upon before the 'Export' market L24 was mooted. There was no magic jump from a four banger to an L24 and then a step back to the L20. Katayama simply wanted more torque and power, and lobbied for a larger capacity version for 'his' market. The Japanese market was initially to get the twin carb L20 and a more sporty triple sidedraught carbed version of that L20 ( with around 150hp ) before upper management pointed out that they already had the S20 twin cam, and really ought to use that instead. The pepped-up version of the L20 was therefore dropped and the S20 used instead. The twin carbed L20 was 'the' S30-series Z engine before the L24 and S20 joined it. That S20 installation required changes to the S30-series design that appeared on every first-generation L-series engined car. Most people never even notice these. So you see the Miki Press book is not entirely accurate in its account. I suspect that this is due to a combination of Matsuo re-remembering events long after they happened, and having the useful ( but sometimes misleading ) benefit of hindsight, along with at least TWO sets of writers interpreting his words with their own take on events. He explains it much more logically when you sit down and talk it through with him and ask the right questions. So can we please remember that the twin carbed L20 six was already part of the design before the L24 and the S20? Thanks, Alan T.

No. You ( they ) are getting Nissan mixed up with the Prince Motor Co. When Prince was merged with Nissan, the ex-Prince faction managed to keep themselves fairly intact within the Nissan fold, and continued their work on the Skyline and other ex-Prince models ( and much of the race-oriented ex-Prince activities ) at the Murayama facility. The Z was hatched at Oppama. There was a certain amount of inter-faction rivalry between the two sides that still lingers to this day. So, no it doesn't.

Can I play too? Unless it turns out to be one of the factory race car 'shells that didn't. ;-) Unless it is a 432 or 432-R, in which case it will be on the opposite side. Not always. Depended on the market and specific model. :classic:

This was not long after you finally realised that the 'HS30' and 'HLS30' VIN prefixes ( not to mention the 'S30' and 'PS30' ) each had their own body serial number sequences, wasn't it? I'll keep quoting you then. It adds perspective. "Dribble"? Carl, you make your own big contributions to the myths that surround these cars. Refusing to acknowledge the S30-series Z as a "family" of variants is possibly the biggest single mark of disrespect you could make to the engineers and designers that worked on the project. Next time you meet Matsuo san you might like to ask him ( face to face ) what he thinks of your "American car, made in Japan" quote. He already told me what he thinks of it. If you want to use the quote and still keep a straight face, you might like to apply it ONLY to the HLS30-U model. Alan T.

Er, was it news to you that RHD S30-series Z cars were produced in 1969? If so, I respectfully suggest that you might like to do a little catch-up research ( you might like to start with the 1969 Tokyo Auto Show ). There you go again. "RHD in 1969" is well documented common knowledge. The problem is that you seem to have that sad affliction known as 'Beck-O-Vision', which manifests itself as an inability to understand that the HLS30-U is an S30-series Z, but the S30-series is not an HLS30-U or indeed a '240Z' ( of any denomination ). You get the point? Don't write "240Z" when you mean 'S30' and "S30" when you mean '240Z' ( and don't forget to be specific about which type of '240Z' you mean ). Would you like to rephrase that after reading my advice? The answer is of course that Nissan was targeting several markets with the S30-series Z models. You might have meant to ask in which particular market Nissan was expecting the majority of sales to be made ( yes? ) - and of course that would be the USA, the market where one particular type of S30-series Z cars was aimed at ( the HLS30-U ). . "Verifiable proof" of what exactly? You only have to look closely at your car to see the evidence that the S30-series Z car was designed and manufactured with more than one target market in mind, and for more than one single variant to be produced at the same time. Maybe you have not seen enough other variants contemporary with your HLS30-U to fully comprehend this? I believe ( as far as I remember ) that I was explaining their presence in the Japanese-market cars to somebody that had not seen or heard of them before, and who was at the time the owner of an Australian market model. I think it should be clear to you what "normal" in that particular context would be. It is a question of perspective. You dug a hole and I just stepped over it. Be careful you don't fall in it yourself......... The S30-series Z was a whole family of cars. It is not ME that is telling anyone otherwise. The extra holes in your seat mounts would tell you something if you opened your mind to it - just like the question that started this whole thread off. 26th-Z was very eloquent in his reply, so if you don't like this particular piano player then I suggest you might listen to the way 26th-Z plays the same tune. Alan T.

If you were aware of the Japanese-market seat mounts, then presumably you must have noticed a few other "accommodations" ( DESIGN CONCESSIONS - each way ) for both LHD and RHD versions, and mechanicals other than those seen on your HLS30-U? Perhaps you don't see them? Here are some examples of the kind of misinformation and bias that might have misled you: Did you spot the biggest lie in there? I'll quote it again for you: And that's all you need to remember about that particular commentator. Alan T.

A big "Amen" to everything you said, except this. Your cars were neither the lightest or fastest of the Z range. "Needed and got"? Who said they "needed" them? The footrest was actually a sports-oriented optional item, and not fitted to *every* Japanese market Z as you seem to think it was. I'll leave the question of why it might have been called a 'sports' option to your imagination......　 And have you ever seen the seat mounts on a Japanese-market bodyshell? They might help to answer some questions for you ( even if some of them are questions you might never have thought to ask ). This enduring "designed for the USA market" thing is misleading. The S30-series Z was just ONE of the Japanese cars designed and manufactured in that era that were beginning to accommodate a potentially taller customer base ( in Japan as well as elsewhere ). This was not an Export market-only phenomenon; the Japanese were getting taller too. Just look at the ergonomics of some other models like the C10 Skyline range for comparison. Alan T.

Zedrally, I am perfectly calm.............. ( the Prozac is working wonders ). I thought I made it quite clear which question I was answering in my reply ( The 'H' prefix one )? Any frustration you may have noticed in that reply would be due to the fact that you are asking questions in this thread that I attempted to answer for you in the other - and you don't seem to have paid attention. The 'H' prefix WAS used in the Japanese domestic S130 lineup, and wasn't 'reserved' exclusively for the Export models. You asked a few other questions too ( unless you were just thinking aloud ) - notably about the 'L' prefix in LHD Export S130 models, and hopefully this scan from a factory S130 workshop manual might go some way to answer a few of them. See the attached file: Cheers, Alan T.

FFS! NO! Zedrally, All of this was covered in a previous thread in which you were asking some of the same questions........ Here's your thread: http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20983 I actually listed up ALL of the Japanese-market S130 models in that thread, as follows: I also see a lot of confusion around Shatai Bango prefixes and suffixes on this thread. We should be a little bit more familiar with this stuff by now. It is frustrating that some people can't tell the difference between numbers and letters that were stamped on the cars, and numbers and letters that were not. We should also always bear in mind that Nissan changed the meaning of some of the letters in the prefixes and suffixes ( such is the case with 'H' ) when they produced different models. The letters don't always stand for the same thing on those different models. Alan T.

Thanks Miles, Attempts at 'Translating' Japanese into English can be a real can of worms, so I'm thankful for your input. Cheers, Alan T.

Hi daddz, Well - they probably didn't know about it still being around, and probably still don't ( and are unlikely to be making it their business to know about it ). There really isn't a regime in place to procure and curate this kind of thing. They don't have a proper corporate museum in Japan that would compare to those built by the likes of Toyota, Honda or even Subaru. I heard talk of a 'museum' section or floor being incorporated in the new Nissan HQ that is being built in Yokohama, but this seems likely to be a token gesture rather than purpose built shrine to their past. They have a big collection of cars based at Zama ( 'The Nissan Historic Car Collection' ) but a proper interactive museum for the general public to visit is still a long way off. That's Nissan for you. No disrespect to Ron ( hello Ron ) - but having personally clapped eyes on the unibody in question I would dispute most strongly the assertion that it had ever had a panel hung on it - let alone been a complete car at some point. Despite its current condition ( and all that it has been through ) I think it is easy to see that it has never been built into a complete or even semi-complete car. Line it up next to the Silver Pennybody ( otherwise known as HLS30-00026 ) - even after Chris has it ready for paint - and I reckon you'd easily see the difference. Hard to quantify and express - but if you saw all those virgin wiring loom tabs and the myriad other details you might start to understand what I mean when I say that it smells like it has always been a bare 'shell. Perhaps Andy might pop off a few detail shots next time he goes over to where it currently resides, and post them on this thread for the unbelievers to chew on? Alan T.

The first ones used for racing never left Japan.

Bearing in mind this is an Englishman trying to explain a Japanese term to an American here ( Kats would probably be the best person to answer the question ) :nervous: : 'Sha' = Car ( quite literally derived from carriage, but the Kanji has its roots in the symbol for a wheel I believe ). 'Tai' = Body ( such as the body of a coach, carriage or other wheeled vehicle ). 'Ban go' = Number ( although the two Kanji characters need a little more explanation than that ). So let's call it 'Car Body Number'. Of course, the term 'Shatai Bango' in the vernacular implies inclusion of the Series and Model Type ( 'S30' / 'PS30' / 'HS30' etc etc ) as well as the actual body serial number, and also does not include the prefixes and suffixes that the factory used internally to identify the sub-model and variant more closely. That's my 'translation' anyway. Alan T.

I'm bracing myself for the unexpected. There's a good chance that the order might not have been all that logical. I kind of like your attempt more than I like mine now - but we are probably both wrong ( ? )....... When I was mulling over the possible order of that first 14, I tried to think what the situation would have been like within the different 'teams' of engineers, bean counters and management staff with regard to getting what they wanted. If I were there at the time, I'd be lobbying for my personal area of responsibility to be taken into account - so I'd want input on how certain things were done, and I'd want to know what 'rival' sections were doing that would affect me and my section doing our job properly. I imagined a kind of Tug-O-War between different individuals and sections trying to get what they wanted. Even the publicity and advertising guys would be wanting to get hold of cars to photograph and play with. For sure the competitions departments at Oppama and Omori would be in a big hurry to get their first guinea pigs to experiment on, and would be making suggestions and stipulations for what they wanted. Some kind of pecking order would have come into play. And one thing keeps popping into my head; The sheer lack of time between these very first cars being made in dribs and drabs from May until the factory let the Japanese motoring press loose on complete 'production' cars in October, and debuted the cars for sales orders at the Tokyo Auto Show in November. No wonder they needed to make a few design and engineering modifications - the customers were doing most of the testing! Alan T.

That sounds completely upside down to me. Surely the single thing that is 'set in stone' so to speak is the prefix and serial number stamped into the firewall sheetmetal at time of manufacture. I'd say that all the other tags, labels and paperwork are "references to" that - rather than the other way around? And it might be the legal situation in the USA that the dash tag is the reference point, but it certainly isn't elsewhere. In fact, the dash-mounted "VIN / body serial number" tag wasn't even present on Domestic and RHD Export cars. I don't believe it was present on all the non-USA / Canada LHD Export cars either. It is quite clear what the factory position would be. Certainly here in the UK ( and I know for sure in Japan too ) the authorities are mainly interested in the number that is stamped into the body sheetmetal. After all, if I were to take the metal tags off of - for example - HS30-00001, and attach them to the body of HS30-00999, it does NOT mean that I now have HS30-00001, does it? I'm tempted to stop using the term "VIN". I'd much rather use the Japanese term "Shatai Bango" for when we discuss the combination of model prefixes and body serial numbers. Andy will probably report here on the body in due course. He has only recently taken delivery of it. I'd like to see pictures of it in natural light, and a little cleaned up. My personal impressions of it ( in a dark and dusty barn, with many used parts jumbled around, inside and on top of it ) were that it had all the normal factory-applied seam-sealer, tabs and fixtures present on a standard production car - and looked as though it had gone through the normal factory production processes UNTIL just before being painted in a colour coat. I would say it was likely plucked off the standard production line at that point and diverted with the express intention of being sent as it stood to NMC USA ( for them to distribute to BRE or Bob Sharp as they saw fit ). I half expected to see something special or 'built-to-purpose' because of the alleged BSR connection ( along the lines of the Works bodyshells ) but it did not show any features or modifications that I recognised as out of the ordinary. In retrospect this should not be a surprise, as BSR and BRE were doing their own thing with the cars / 'shells anyway. Alan T.

Hello Kats, I'm enjoying the way that you are presenting this new information. The specifications for the VIN / serial number stamping are fascinating. I'm not very good at winning things, but the sequence order fascinates me - so I'll give it a shot and perhaps make a fool of myself : Here's my *guess*: May 1969 - total 2 cars: 1 = *S30-00001 2 = *HLS30-00001 June 1969 - total 1 car: 3 = *PS30-00001 July 1969 - total 4 cars: 4 = *S30-00002 5 = *HLS30-00002 6 = *HS30-00001 7 = *PS30-00002 August 1969 - total 7 cars: 8 = *S30-00003 9 = *HLS30-00003 10 = *PS30-00003 11 = *S30-00004 12 = *PS30-00004 13 = *S30-00005 14 = *PS30-00005 Probably way off? :stupid: Alan T.