HS30-H

Hi Eric, Some excellent info there from Ben. The four spoke wheels in your pic were indeed originally made by Kobe Seiko. KS made the original magnesium wheels for the 432R, the original 'Works' rally mags - which were never sold to the general public - the original Sports Option magnesium eight spokes for the 432R ( which were later offered for the HS30 ) and also these super-wide four spokes. They came in more than one size. In Japan, these wide four-spokes have been called "Gotti" mags for a long time - although as far as I am aware they were not a direct crib of a Gotti design, and they were manufactured by Kobe Seiko exclusively for Nissan's Works race use. They even have the little Nissan 'hamburger' mark cast into them. "Gotti" might be a nickname linked to a design that they resemble, as Gotti is a famous wheel brand in Europe. They were not actually sold to the general public, but like most things in race use they mostly seem to be owned by private individuals these days. The ones on the white ZG in your photo are in fact replicas. A short ( very short ) run of replicas was made a few years back by the owner of the car ( Ise san - who is a fellow member of Club S30 in Japan ) and they are unfortunately not fully tested and approved. He was recently putting together plan to manufacture a fresh limited-edition run of replicas, but the price is going to be enormous ( and I mean enormous ). I've got some more detailed pics at home, so can send them to you when I get back to the UK. Today I'm also going to visit a friend in Japan that has a couple of original ex-Works sets - so I'll ask him a bit more about them. Cheers, Alan T.

Yes, TRUST ( along with a few other manufacturers ) made such turbo conversion kits for the Japanese market back in the late Seventies to mid Eighties. There were many different versions, and this looks like a genuine one rather than a home-built one-off. As sblake01 has pointed out, and you guessed yourself, it won't necessarily fit an LHD car as it was designed to fit an RHD setup. Cheers, Alan T.

Here we go again........ Carl, I'm sorry but if you really think that the cars in question can truly be described as "Factory" restored - with all the inference of connection with the Factory that they were originally manufactured in - then you are living in another world to me. I think you know what is implied when the word "Factory" is connected with these cars, and there is no way in hell that it is appropriate. How can you say that Nissan Motors USA is "the Factory" in the true sense of that entity being the PLACE where the cars were put together when they were originally made? I think its just bending the truth to suit an agenda. If you want to carry this idea to its logical conclusion, then even Nissan's own spare parts supply operation in Japan becomes a "sub contractor" to Nissan. This is not the case is it? They are a wholly-owned subsidiary company that CANNOT be described in the same way that a true sub contractor should. Once again you are demonstrating that you have never understood the dynamics and machinations of Nissan Japan. I've seen you describe Nissan Shatai as a "subcontractor" to Nissan before, and it tells me that you are misinterpreting their relationship. Nissan Shatai built - as in pressed, welded and finished - the bodies of the first-generation S30-series Z cars. Nissan Shatai ( was ) is a company owned by Nissan. Its part of the Nissan group of companies. If you want to call them a "subcontractor" in the same sense that companies such as Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Koito, Tokico, Kotobuki - and all the other myriad names associated with making parts for Nissan's first-gen Z cars were, then once again you are bending the facts to suit your agenda. You are wrong. No comparison. I hope you really know what the function of Old Woking Service Station had in relation to the "Works" rally cars when you use it as an example for comparison ( I don't think you do )? The Works rally cars were built from the ground up in Japan, and Old Woking simply took them apart for normal rally-related servicing operations. If you think you can imply that Old Woking's activities "re-worked" those cars in the sense that they became responsible for their specification and modifications as Works rally cars, then you are once again demonstrating a skewed view of the facts. You have no idea what you are talking about. I don't call it "silly semantics" when we are trying to straighten out the use of a word that implies a whole different situation to the truth. Why is the word "Factory" being used - as opposed to "company" or "manufacturer" or some other word? You know as well as I do that it links the cars back to the place where they were originally built, which is inappropriate in the true sense of the word in this particular case.

I love this quote: "Note that production of right-hand-drive 240Zs – which were sold throughout other parts of the world - did not commence until 1970." Says who, Mr Knowling? And why point this out so baldly unless trying to make some kind of inference from it? Nowhere in the article does Mr Knowling refer to the existence of the Japanese home market models that were equipped with the L20 engine. He also makes it sound as though they only had the 432 before the 240ZG popped out of nowhere. Perhaps he's using zhome.com for source material? :classic:

Yes, I'm afraid its another magazine article that makes lots of old mistakes. Its in the January 2005 issue of CLASSIC CARS Magazine. Entitled "Style on Trial", it pitches four "Seventies sporting coupes" against eachother in a bid to find "....which car epitomises the Seventies best." Cars involved are Jon Newlyn's gorgeous ( very early ) 1970 HS30 '240Z', a 1973 BMW 2002 Tii, a 1981 Alfa Romeo Alfetta GTV 2.0 and a 1975 Ford Capri II 3.0 GTS. The article is written by Glen Waddington, with some really nice photos by Charlie Magee. Waddington puts the Z as the 'winner' of the group test, saying; "The Z couldn't possibly offer as much as it looks like it could deliver. The fact that it only comes quite close is what makes it a real Seventies icon. It's slick, stylish and just tacky enough to pull the trick off." The style of the article is something that is customary for classic car magazines such as this, and of course they can be entertaining and fun. They do however also need to be factually correct, and this is where Mr Waddington falls out of bed: "The Datsun has the German styling consultant Count Albrecht von Goertz to thank for its sex appeal." Now I'm sure Jon Newlyn would have set him straight had Mr Waddington mentioned that he was going to write this, so I have to conclude that he went away and referenced all the other books and magazine articles that have credited Goertz over the years. Same old same old......... He comes up with a couple of other chestnuts too: "...power comes from a 2.4 litre, overhead cam straight-six that Datsun inherited from the Prince Motor Company, which it took over in 1966. It's basically a Japanese copy of a Mercedes-Benz engine, and the design of the block lived on and evolved into the Nissan Skyline R34 GT-R....." That's nonsense. First of all, the Nissan - not "Datsun" - L20 debuted in 1965, in the Cedric Special Six, a full year before PMC was merged with Nissan. The L20 six might well have shared some design features with Prince's G7 engine, and the G7 used some Mercedes-Benz patented design features licensed to Prince - but its not as simple as Merc, Prince, Nissan, one, two, three. And why is it that when Japanese companies pay to license patented designs its called "copying", but when anyone else does it its not? The L-series six isn't even really IN the family tree of the RB engines that were fitted to umpteen different models of Nissan before the RB26 DETT got as far as the R34 GT-R ( the third GT-R that the RB26 DETT was fitted to ). The RB-series debuted in the 1984 Nissan Laurel, and it was another five years before the RB26DETT was introduced. The RB engines might be seen as Nissan's straight six successor for the L-gata ( whilst Nissan's top brass would have preferred the V6 ) but the DNA of the RB essentially came from the Prince GR-8, which sired the S20 twin cam - design details and DNA of which were carried through into the FJ20 and its derivatives, and on into the RB. That's where Nissan says the RB series genes came from - not the L-series. Last, and perhaps expectedly for a 'British' classic car mag, Mr Waddington displays a sniff of that old antipathy towards Japanese machinery that we have come to expect: "How could the Japanese, famous for the uninspiring Sunny and Corolla, manage to produce a car that could convince the uninitiated it's a Ferrari?" Now, I understand that this is stylistically written from the perspective of the "man on the Clapham Omnibus" circa 1970, but Mr Waddington doesn't go anywhere with it. It's like he is confirming the 'fact' that the Japanese didn't design the thing. In which case he is proving that nothing has changed since 1970, and even automotive journalists - who really ought to be able to do some research on the subject - don't know any more about Twentieth Century Japanese industrial design or styling in 2004 than they did in 1970. In between all this nonsense he actually writes some quite complimentary things about the car. For me, the article is spoiled by the same old mistakes - but he even makes some new ones up to go along with them. It might sound churlish to take apart an article that essentially praises the Z, but if the journalist had made that many mistakes about the other cars in the article then there would probably be a fair few letters of complaint written. Mind you, he might not have made any mistakes with the other cars as their history is well documented. Anyway, letters of complaint and facts-correction have already been sent to Classic Cars magazine - but I doubt they'll be taken all that seriously. Pseuds Corner over and out.........

Go for it, 26th-Z. I am glad to see a thread like this being created, and I too will be an interested follower. There's been such a lot of cr*p written about these cars and the whole project over the years - especially when the cars have been offered for sale - that I'd be pleased to see some substantiated and corroborated data about them. Cheers, Alan T.

Hi Alan, When you say "undersize", are you getting the information from the stamping / engraving on the backs of the main bearing shells? The reason I ask is that I'm wondering if the 'undersize' is that of the main bearing bore rather than the main journal size of the crank....... I've seen a few engines with oversized main bearing bores ( presumably line-bored oversize at the Factory ) but with stock sized crank main journals, and a few engines with oversized bearings in big ends ( again, presumably because they were machined oversize at the Factory, and a 'fatter' bearing was used to correct it ). Could it be that you are misunderstanding exactly what part is 'undersized'? What are the bores for the main bearings in the block measuring up at without the bearings in them? Worth a shot?

I don't know if its 100% true or not, but it was explained to me that the horizontal lines actually help to clear ice ( or snow )...... Apparently, the theory is that the ice melts and drops down - hence assisting efficient clearance, whereas vertical lines will tend to leave vertical stripes of unmelted ice that take longer to clear. I can't imagine this being of any great use when demisting, but there you go. Urban myth maybe?

Glad to hear that you are agnostic. That'll be just you and me then. Everybody else seems to take his word as Gospel, or are too afraid to say anything. I agree that it must have been an intentional decision. The fact that some of the Press Preview event cars were fitted with the HRW means that the system was designed, tested, manufactured and approved well before series production began. That's one of the big points I wanted us to remember, as it might otherwise be implied that the HRW system was 'not ready' for production in late '69 or that there were supply problems. This does not seem to be the case. Yes, I'd agree that the HLS30U ( and indeed all the other 'Export' market '240Z' models ) was more closely related to the S30 model than the S30S, but there is strong evidence that the spec of the HLS30U was cost-cut to some extent in comparison to the spec of the S30 ( "deluxe" ) model. I quite agree that NMC USA underestimated their potential market for a more 'loaded' car, and I think this whole question relates back to the crux of the design process, and the fact that massive Export sales for the Z were never a 'done deal' until they actually started happening..... We have to be careful though. We might get into a Chicken and Egg type of argument. Did the cheap price of the cars boost sales more than a 'loaded' version would have done, hence financing higher production quantities of the more expensive parts? ( I'm probably not explaining this very well, but do you see what I'm driving at? ). Maybe there was more than one reason why they did not fit the HRW to most of the early Export cars. I would have thought it would be a decision that might have been difficult to reverse quickly; surely it would mean changes to sales literature, owners manuals and Factory service manuals at the very least? I agree that discussing this kind of thing can sound incredibly anal to some, but I think its all relevant to uncovering more about how these cars came about, what was going on in the heads of the people involved, and the machinations of a big corporation such as Nissan. Alan T.

Eek! Thinking like that might get you a personal 'interview' with the Tomas de Torquemada of the Z world It seems that most of those early HLS30Us that you have seen had the clear ( non-Heated Rear Window ) hatch glass, and therefore it was most likely not a haphazard situation due to 'mistakes' or supply problems ( speculation on my part there ). However, as sblake01 and Zedrally have pointed out, these clear hatch glasses have turned up ( inexplicably? ) on later cars too, and I myself have seen two or three UK-market HS30s with clear hatch glass - which I put down to supply shortages or some other force majeure type situation. Who knows. Big point for me was the thought that anyone looking at just the situation regarding the earliest HLS30Us might tend to believe that the HRW was only phased in as an afterthought in ALL models, or was perhaps delayed for some reason. Since there is compelling evidence that some of the earliest production cars in the Japanese home market did have the HRW, this would not be the case. That's what made me wonder whether this was an item dropped from the spec of some early 'Export' cars in order to save costs (?). I can imagine that having no HRW would save a little labour time, and a fair amount of parts cost. Don't forget that we are talking about a difference in the wiring loom ( in the case of the S30S anyway ) and the relay / switch etc too. Would it be possible that NMC USA staff ( and I'm thinking of the buck stopping at Katayama san ) might have considered the HRW an unnecessary feature - particularly for California? Does that sound silly? Personally I would have thought a Factory-fitted HRW would be a great boon on any car - indeed a necessity - but I still remember that a lot of European cars of the late Sixties and early Seventies did NOT have them as standard equipment......... Anyway, as I mentioned in the previous post, the S30 and PS30 models had the HRW from the off whilst the S30S model did not. Interestingly, I can't find any differing part numbers for the interior plastic "Garnish-tail rail" between the S30 / PS30 and the S30S. They all had the same part number whether they had the HRW or not. That's curious. Makes me wonder if the slots for the wires were hand cut for cars with the HRW? Part numbers: *90301-E4100 - GLASS tail gate window ( clear ) *90301-E4101 - GLASS tail gate window ( heated element type ) *86722-E4100 - GROMMET heat glass switch ( this is the blanking plug for the console panel when no HRW is fitted ). Some photos: A scan of a couple of pages from Nissan's first "Service Shuho" booklet from November 1969, introducing the new Fairlady Z models to the dealerships. Page no.138 has a line drawing of the HRW element system and wiring, and mentions that this is fitted as standard to the S30 and PS30 but is an 'Option' on the S30S. Page no.165 shows the operation of the HRW switch on the console panel. I think the gloved hand is Matsuo san's.

And maybe relevant to this new thread would be my original post from the other:

Hi Christopher, Compliments of the season to you. Thanks for starting a new thread, and my apologies to everyone for taking the other thread OT. I thought it would be pertinent to bring these quotes from sblake01 and Zedrally from the other thread over here onto this new one:

Christopher, Can I ask you if you have come to any conclusion regarding the 'missing' HRW ( defroster ) in the earliest of the HLS30U models? You have in your post above noted the blanking plugs for the driving light & parking light switches. I suppose the driving / fog lights were always intended as 'Option' parts ( at least in most markets ) and the parking light switches were a Japanese-market necessity, but what about the HRW? As you know, this was 'standard' equipment on the S30 and PS30 models, and an extra-cost 'option' on the S30S. Since the time you told me that your car had the clear ( non-HRW ) hatch glass, I have been wondering if this was a case of a cost-cutting decision on the spec of the HLS30U model that was very quickly reversed. If all the early cars didn't have the HRW then I could understand the earliest of the HLS30Us not having them too ( due, for example, to something like holdups in supply ) but considering that the S30 and PS30 models were quite clearly fitted with them ( even at the Press preview event in October 1969 ) I wondered if you would agree that the HRW might have initially been left off of the spec for the HLS30U? The HLS30U model at the Press preview event was quite clearly not fitted with the HRW, whilst the S30 and PS30 at the same event were. The blue HLS30U on the Nissan show stand at the Tokyo Auto Show ( labelled as a "Fairlady Z Export Model" ) was not fitted with the HRW, whilst the S30 and PS30 also on the show stand were. Interesting isn't it? Alan T.

Don't know about the US, but NISMO wants to get back into international sportscar racing - and they say it would most likely be with the "350Z" ( ie - the Export version of the Z33 ). This would be in the renamed 'GT2' division for 2005. British team RJN Motorsport ran an RHD 350Z in selected rounds of the FIA GT Championship this year, with the support of Nissan and NISMO. They are one of the companies in the running for the contract to prepare and run the 'Works' cars for Nissan in 2005. Article scan from UK magazine Autosport here:

Thanks Chris, I appreciate you sticking up for my point of view. I realise that no harm is meant, and I honestly mean no harm myself in pointing out the difference ( although offence is taken all too quickly - and frankly, it seems - all too happily ). Notice that Ben ( v12horse ) got it right in his picture captions, and even pointed out the fact that the GT500 Fairlady Z is based on a Japanese market-only homologation special. Ben has the gift of learning and thinking in a worldly way about these things, and considers what he writes very carefully. Carl, I noticed you did some swift editing again :cheeky: Too bad you can't do the editing in your head before you put it down on the page. Alan T. ( Edit: Carl - I think you still have some editing left to do on your spelling ).

Vicky, Take a look at Carl's reply to me and tell me if you think I'm being just a little bit paranoid? I'm sorry if I misunderstood the meaning of your "Geez :stupid:" - but can you see where I'm coming from? My original comment was just a general point, and not really aimed at anyone in particular. Stickling is stickling. I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't. If I make a mistake then I'm very happy to be put straight on it. Be my guest. Alan T.

Personally, I'd put all that stuff on the '72 - but with the proviso that the body was kept totally stock, and maybe also in a Factory-stock colour. Mr. W is doing something similar with HLS30-00027 I think. Lots of period-correct ( and tasteful ) accessories and options. With 26 and 27, he can have his cake and eat it.... Having said that, do just what you want to do. Its your car. :classic: Cheers, Alan T.

Who's "the teacher" then Carl? Vicky, you're taking my comment completely the wrong way. If you really think I'm trying to score points off somebody then you must think I'm really sad. All I'm interested in is getting this stuff straight. It might be a small point to you, but calling the JGTC race Z cars "350Z"s is starting off on just the same wrong foot as calling all first generation Z cars "240Z"s. Why not nip it in the bud? These are JGTC race cars for Christ's sake! They came over to the USA to show you what they have been getting up to over there in Japan for the last few years. Can't we at least do them the honour of realising that Japan has some homologation specials that the rest of the world does not? Geez. :stupid:

No, I don't think they are. They are based on the Japanese market versions, not the Export versions.

Ouch! Shot by both sides.......... :squareeye Sell the parts to fund the 'resto'? Have you got the ATSUGI, TOKICO or AMPCO coil-overs? Which Comp tranny - Direct Drive Opt.1, 2 or 3? Those 50's are worth a pretty penny too.

Were they calling them "350Z"s? I think Ben got it right in his photo captions. The NISMO JGTC race cars are Fairlady Z-based.

HLS30? Ooh, the irony! I already guessed you'd be familiar with Mr W. If HLS30-00028 turns up you'll have to 'save' him from himself........ You'll be in your element here, for sure. Cheers, Alan T.

Welcome to the site JLPurcell, No doubt you are familiar with Mr Wenzel's twins, and have already been playing early VIN bingo with them. :classic: Cheers! Alan T.