HS30-H

Please go back to my post #138 and tell me how you think it justifies your response. As far as I can see - as was my intention - I was respectful, offering "Don't want to ruin hopes and expectations here..." as a preface to my explanation of what the document actually says. Tactful in my book. And in reply, I got this: "Whenever one posts anything on any site in the on line universe one runs a considerable risk that he/she will be challenged. My answer is "let's see you do better". If you can, I'm talking first hand , personal experience, and not something from another site somewhere, I'll be among the first in line to offer congratulations. And yet ZSpert himself is very happy to challenge anything that he sees wrong, and is - usually - completely correct in doing so. Nothing wrong with challenging. The "risk" is a good thing. There are no sacred cows on this forum. Peer group critique is an essential part of research. So where does the "let's see you do better" and all the rest of it come from? I posted my explanation and the document speaks for itself. The simple fact is that it clearly IS NOT the "4/71 240 Build Sheet" that it is labelled as being. So where's the factual push-back? All I - we - got was a flounce. He's taking his ball home. He also wrote: "You see, I don't have anything to prove to anyone save myself." On the contrary, if any of us posts a 50+ year old document on a specialist forum and makes a claim as to what it represents, it needs to be correctly identified and understood. If we don't get it right, then who will? No 'long term member of the Z community' should get a free pass to a status of infallibility. And yet: Mea culpa. Sorry for the 22+ years of "esoteric factoids" on this forum, LOL. I would have thought that esoteric factoids are the very lifeblood of a forum like this, but maybe your preference is different. And "meant to bloviate"? Apparently you have the power to "...reach into someone's mind a read their most inner thoughts."...? Of course, bloviation has been around on this forum for a good while. I invite you to pop back to post #32 in this very thread to see an arch exponent at work. Half of it is nonsense, but it goes down as history. It's all just a matter of being a *popular* Guru, see?

Yes, they are a reputable company and yes, their products are good. Many people across the world - including several who frequent this forum - have purchased tanks (and other items) from S30.World and are very happy with them.

I would defer to Kats - of course - and you'll prefer that, but it's pretty simple stuff. Again, logistics. A driver drops off a car on part of its journey and this form is kept as proof of who drove it there and - by inference - that it made the journey safely. It is titled 'Sharyo Mochikomi Hyo' and I would translate that - if a little too literally - as 'Vehicle Bringing-In Form' ('Mochikomi' being the action of bringing something somewhere personally, like bringing your own bottle of wine to a restaurant that doesn't have an alcohol license). A better - simpler - translation might be 'Vehicle Delivery Form' or 'Vehicle Delivery Sheet'. We have discussed such documents on this forum in the past.

Way to miss the point, as is your usual habit. The title of the document itself tells us what it is. Written plain as day. It's not a matter of anyone "questioning" me. It's about whether you believe it is a "Build Sheet" or - as the document itself tells us - it is related to delivery logistics. It's not for me to turn it into something that it isn't. You're asking the person who is telling us it is a "Build Sheet" what the entries mean, right? You don't have to believe my translation of course, but you might like to try a little Japanese language detective work of your own perhaps? LOL. OK. You asked about the third line... YOUR SERVANT, SIR. But, of course, you might want to ask for a second opinion from someone you actually trust... The fact is - sadly, despite our hopes - that any 'Build Sheet' for each individual HLS30 in 1971 would not be very likely - at least in the sense that 'Build Sheet' is usually used to decipher content and options on something like a 1968 Plymouth Barracuda - because there really wasn't much variation to note on Export cars. Maybe transmission choice (4-speed or Auto). Final destination pre-determined presence of certain anti-emissions devices or not. It's not as though dealers were requesting build of specific cars per a customer order, despite what a salesman might have said... What we are looking at here is (part of) a movement order for a particular car. Details mentioned would merely be a means to identify it in terms of getting it through its journey to its ultimate destination, not specifically identifying its content in the terms we would want to see on a full Build Sheet. Japanese Domestic variants were a different matter. They had a choice of variants and a choice of options for each variant, and Japanese dealers could request cars be built to customer requirements within that framework. Logistics would have required the car be sent to the right place within Japan via the correct route. But what you'll see with the interpretation of such documents is that they are viewed through the prism of the North American market, despite the fact that the title of the page caters for both 'Domestic' and 'Export' cars.

@zspert I haven't quoted your post because I hope you might reconsider your response. I'm sticking by my guns though... Who has interpreted your document as a 'Build Sheet'? Was it somebody who reads Japanese? Was it somebody who has a sense of the simple day-to-day machinations in the auto manufacturing world? Because everything about it is concerned with post-production logisitics; The transportation/movements of a finished product to take it to its destination market. It isn't a before-the-fact plan of content for something yet to be built. In fact it it doesn't state any specific content over and above what has already been added (paint colour), installed (engine number) and after-the-fact trivialities (EG key number). After that it lists places, not pieces... The responses from @DatsunZGuy and @SpeedRoo are typical. They want to believe, despite clear evidence to the contrary. @SpeedRoo asks about "...the numbers along the right on the third line..." straight after adding a 'Confused' emoji after my post. The numbers he asks about are companies, places, facilities within the Nissan fold and within the logistical destinations for a finished car. 'G502' is Nissan Shatai itself... Nothing much changes, does it? I first became interested in these cars well over 35 years ago, but I immediately came up against a hard wall of misinformed comment, misconception and downright disinformation about them, telling me that they were "American Cars, Made in Japan". None of the people chanting this mantra seemed to consider that prime sources, Japanese sources for a Japanese product, might get us all a little closer to the truth. Something as simple as an accurate translation of a simple Japanese document - without thinking that the world might revolve on an axis placed firmly in the USA - still seems to elude us. And here we still are...

Too late now, but I think buying and shipping a "refurbished" crankshaft from Japan was not necessary. You - surely?- could have had your existing crankshaft ground and polished locally to suit factory undersize bearings. You're going to be buying new bearings anyway... As mentioned, the bores appear to be scored and will require either honing or reboring. Whoever is doing that work would - again, surely? - have had either the machinery or the contacts to grind the crankshaft. L24-specific parts are not that hard to get. Most major components are available, restorable (like your L24 crank) or share parts with the other L-gata engine family. No reason to be chucking out an L24 in my opinion. !!!! At this point I'm going to bow out due to fire risk. I don't know who is helping/advising you, but it might be a good idea to change them rather than random mechanical componentry. Good luck.

@zspert Don't want to ruin hopes and expectations here, but that's not a 'Build Sheet'. It's a 'Sharyo Shikyu Hyo Ikan Hyo' document, which I would translate (with a little bit of artistic license) as a 'Vehicle Supply Movement Sheet'. It has sections for Domestic Delivery, Factory Return and Export and it would direct the onward journey of an individual car through Nissan's new car logistics and supply system.

That's not so surprising really for the top-of-the-range 432 and the race-oriented 432-R. Both were specialised/limited market variants with lower expectation for sales volume. When you think about it, 72 cars would have been quite a lot for initial sales and for dealer requirements in late 1969 and very early 1970. I'm still not clear as to which particular 'problems' uncovered on the 'Kaku U' trips could have been serious enough to halt or slow down production specifically of the Export /HLS30 variants, but not the Domestic variants. I don't think it was the L24 crankshaft counterweight issue as that took well into 1970 production to remedy. Uemura san's 'snagging' list doesn't seem to mention anything I can see as serious enough to halt production. Most of the items in his list are fairly trivial and would apply to other variants too. If you remember Kats, I was present when Miyazaki san was telling us that. I think I pointed out that the indentations (they are location markers for brackets and other fixtures that will be added to the pressed panel at a later stage) would either be part of the press tooling for the whole panel (in which case they would be very difficult to change) or they would be pressed into the panel on another - separate - press tool (in which case they would be easier to change). I can imagine - having been involved in the manufacture of press and mould tooling in my youth - that changes to large press tooling is something that a factory will try to avoid if at all possible (not least due to down time) but if the location marker indentations were made on separate, second stage presses then the tooling would be easier to modify. Pressing the indentations from a different side of the panel must surely have required changes to press tooling and I wonder if the use of different press machinery (at Nissan Shatai rather than Nissan Honsha?) was the reason for the switch? I can imagine (yes, I'm doing quite a lot of imagining here...) that the guys running the press shop at Nissan Shatai might have had their own opinions and techniques and could see a way to improve/speed up the process. Just about every good engineer I've worked with has seen a way to improve on somebody else's work! Same goes for Barbers, Tailors and Builders...

Your L24 crankshaft can be reground to suit replacement bearings in a factory designated undersize. All details are in the factory service manuals (do you have one?). Forget about using an L28 crankshaft. It would lead to a domino effect of required parts (different connecting rods, pistons etc). Looks like you will (possibly) be needing a rebore of the cylinder block, due to cylinder bore scoring. That would require an oversize piston set. If your current pistons are still in good condition (although replacement piston rings are advised) the other option would be to fit cylinder liners. Again this is detailed in the factory service manuals. If yu are very lucky then a thorough honing of the cylinders might be acceptable. Surely there must be a competent engine reconditioning machine shop business in HK who can handle this? Looks like your camshaft is an aftermarket (higher performance) grind, judging by the stamps on the end of it. Was the car an original HK market version, or was it imported as a used car? The aftermarket camshaft makes me think the car has already been modified in the past.

I think you can already guess what I'm going to say about this, Nils. It's not good... There are so, so many misconceptions, examples of bad takes and plain old mistakes I find it amazing that it had any editing, proof-reading or fact checking at all. Who was looking over the author's shoulder in all this? Taking just the two pages 118 & 119 open above, I can count no less than twenty clear mistakes. Extraordinary. Even the photos are wrong! The photo of a "432R" bottom right actually shows an owner-modified 432. The photo caption and description for the car top left mixes up specs for an S130-series car (it calls it a "280Z-L", says it has "ventilated discs in the front and discs in the rear"). The photo actually shows a 1977 S31 Fairlady Z-T model. The photo comes from Nissan's press office and the car itself is part of Nissan's Heritage Collection at Zama. How can simple facts become so confused via official sources? It's one thing for a book like this to get written and published, but what I can't understand is how it has been endorsed by Nissan themselves. It's such a disappointment. In fact the foreword was written by Mr Hiroshi Tamura. A massive contrast with a generation of true engineers like Uemura san and his colleagues, and perhaps as good a symbol of Nissan's current situation as any. Meh.

Was very nice to see you again, Nils. I have some pretty good UK/Euro-spec front valances and corners in storage should you be in need of them.

From 1969 up, Japan. The basic design of the lamp unit incorporates the two bulb holders. Japanese market models used the second bulb holder for the parking lamp system and the designated sub harness hooked it up. . Slightly later, Australian market cars got a two bulb system with a divided half amber and half clear lens and an internal partition.

No, I don't think they are. Just as an example of personal experience, my 4/70 HLS30U has the plastic clips. I think they continued well into 1970, so not a factor in pinning down the production date of HS30-00004. I reckon many of the component parts of HS30-00004 will for sure have been manufactured in 1969 (especially the early HS30-specific stuff like the wiring harness sections) but they may not be enough to be conclusive about the date it got its 'OK' sticker... Key point for me was always that 'HS30-00001' was the seventh car in the factory program to be given a unique identity and the fourth of the 'Ichiji Seishi'/'Seisan Shisaku' production prototypes, as confirmed by Nissan Shatai's own records. For many years 'HS30-00004' was being used by nay-sayers as 'proof' that no HS30-prefixed cars had been made in 1969 and that - by extension - Nissan had not considered HS30-prefixed cars as part of their original plan. We know this to be totally false. 'HS30-00004' is in my opinion a very significant car in the S30-series Z story.

Japanese market got 48470-E4101 from the beginning of production, same part number as the initial Euro R-Drive got.

In my experience, they often have the part number moulded-in on the inside surface. Should at least tell you what samples you have.

Jay Leno continues to display his lack of knowledge about the S30-series Z and Japanese cars in general. Another airing for the Katayama/Fairlady naming story thrown in for good measure. Utter nonsense. And apparently an RB26DETT engine has a capacity of three litres. Tricky stuff this Metric business.

The original E41 design WAS a two-part system. Just look in the factory parts manuals. The spongey rubber part was the 'Weatherstrip' and the U-shaped 'Welt' clipped over one side of it, sandwiching it onto the body seam. Most people don't notice because they can weld themselves together fairly well over time. The two component parts are also on different pages in the factory literature. Many think that the 76801-E4100 RH and 76802-E4100 LH show a one-piece system, but they are missing that the 76920-E4101 Welt A and 76921-E4101 Welt B parts are shown in a separate diagram for the body side. With all of the proprietary off-the-shelf/universal seals the main problem in my experience is that the Weatherstrip part is the wrong shape and/or made from a material which does not compress anywhere near as easily as the original. In my experience this is worst at the front vertical edge of the door where the seal is being asked to compress more than anywhere else, and with nowhere to go. The original Weatherstrip is also a 'flap' cross-section rather than a 'bulb'. The new S30 World versions are the closest to the originals I have seen.

I saw production samples on a car at S30 World's museum/exhibition space/gallery in the Netherlands back in June, and was very impressed. They are the best reproductions of the OEM two-piece door seals that I have seen. Great attention to form and - especially - function. Looking forward to getting some for my own cars. Recommended.

In fact seats came in two specs from the beginning of production. We might call them 'Deluxe' and 'Standard'. 'Standard' seats had no quick recliner/flip forward lever, but 'Deluxe' seats did. North American market cars received the 'Standard' seats until they were superseded (12/71?).

Yes, I agree yours is an original. I have an original too, purchased many years ago. Mainly because it has Works rally car '988' on the front cover...

Great collection! Some of them are frighteningly valuable these days. The white-bordered 'Fairlady Z' booklet brochure was the first full Japanese market brochure (as opposed to a fold-out/flyer) and there was a reduced-size reprint in the 1990s. You appear to have the original yellow paper insert with Nissan Works racing team driver Tatsu Yokoyama's notes on driving the Fairlady Z intact. Good! The red bonnet/hood fronted 'Your Dreams Come True' campaign flyer with the fold-out poster was handed out at the 1969 Tokyo Motor Show. There's more than one version and the differences are in the rear cover (Fairlady Z432-R photo vs Fairlady Z432-R text box) and one of the interior photos. I believe you have the earlier version with the text box and that is the more sought-after version. Here's the other one:

S130 diff cooler:

Diplomatic and pragmatic. However I've got a hunch that a stickler like yourself would have a nice set of JIS screwdrivers in a secret compartment in his toolbox. Your secret's safe with me... I've known Len for something over 25 years at least. You'll be pleased to hear he's in fine form but still getting used to the peculiarities in character of his recently restored HLS30U, which he says were something of a shock to the senses after 40+ years of S30-series Zs with their steering wheel on the right side... 🙂

JIS, please.

Good! Glad to hear the retainer rings were present after all. You're on top of it now, but just for posterity I pulled out some old used calipers and parts to take some photos of the component parts. Hopefully they are fairly self-explanatory. Raw caliper casting (dirty!), showing the internal groove for the main fluid seal and the small counterbore which the dust seal retainer ring fits into: And here's a (typically rusty...) retainer ring roughly sitting in the counterbore in the caliper casting: And here is the rubber dust seal, roughly installed on the lip of the retainer ring and with the piston in situ: The four component parts: Piston, rubber dust seal, steel dust seal retaining ring and rubber fluid seal: Note that the inner lip of the rubber dust seal slots into the groove in the piston, so it is fixed to both the caliper casting (via the steel retainer ring) and the piston, making a firm seal which still allows the piston to move: Hope that helps somewhat...