HS30-H

Indeed. I've been on a steady decline in quality since 2002... The E8700 Console-mounted Fog Lamp Switch was a rarely-specced showroom option part in Japan, and only available for a relatively short period (roughly early October 1971 through late August 1973) after which the design changed completely. I see the part number quoted also on the relevant R-DRIVE Export factory parts list, but the only illustration is the (equally rare) earlier type dash-mounted E4100 NILES two pin 'flip' type fog switch. There is not even a drawing of the E8700 type. The March 1974 update of the R-DRIVE Export factory parts list gives the following part numbers: *25370-E4100 COMP-SWITCH FOG LAMP - up to 08-71 (Note: this is the dash-mounted NILES two pin 'flip' switch). *25370-E8700 COMP-SWITCH FOG LAMP - from 09-71 (Note: This is the console-mounted Droid you are looking for...). *25370-E8701 COMP-SWITCH FOG LAMP - from 07-73 up to 08-73 (Note: The fog lamp switch that burns twice as bright burns out a month later...). *25370-N3400 COMP-SWITCH FOG LAMP - from 08-73 (Note: This is not the Droid you are looking for...). To be honest I've never really sought out an E8700 type switch as I never needed one, but it seems that they are rather elusive. I've got several of the equally elusive E4100 type but I don't recall even seeing a photo of the E8700 type in Japanese market factory literature. The only pictorial reference I have is the factory parts list drawing I posted in the 2002 thread. So, can't help, not won't help.

You probably already have this data (?), but the March 1976 dated Nissan Sports Option list for the RS30 and GS30 models includes the E4622 suspension kit. It shows that they still used the previous E4621 springs with the kit, giving free lengths for the springs as 171.5mm Front and 205.5mm Rear. The same March 1976 Sports Option list gives a part number of 55037-E4620 for a "Spacer Rear Strut MTG", stating that it is made from Aluminium and with a thickness of 20mm. Seems to fit the bill. I've seen these used on the front as well to give a little extra lift. I have some that are made from steel, but don't know if they are (later?) factory items or if somebody copied the factory items. Yes, they are the original 'Wet Leg' type dampers. If they match up with the strut tube length then I reckon they could be re-used effectively without the gas-filling (it was only there to help mitigate aeration/foaming of the oil under hard use) and indeed the early standard struts used the same system without the gas-fill (and - years ago - the 'hot tip' to upgrading these was to replace the factory type Nisseki A-1 oil with a heavier grade oil) as long as you are not planning on heavy track use...! They are actually very nice to use and I reckon the thicker piston rods are a boon. A friend of mine in Japan made up a system to re-fill the gas charge (he added a valve on the lower body) but it's a real hassle. On the other hand it is easy to convert these struts to use cartridge type dampers as long as you choose the correct length of cartridge (and Bilstein would be nice!). I've had Nissan Sports Option (and even some Works rally version) struts through my hands in the past which - when opened up - revealed aftermarket cartridge units inside. Obviously replaced some time in the past. Yes, those springs are not correct for the Sports Option adjustable platforms. They should have a flat lower section to sit on the platform. You can get springs made to suit the adjustables. There are certainly companies here in the UK who can make to spec. Let me know if you can't find a supplier.

Hi Nils. You've had some happy hunting again I see...! Your ATSUGI Sports Option front struts look just like a pair of E4621s that I've got. They are oil-filled but gas-charged to help stop the oil from foaming. Don't let the gas out! Those red-painted rear legs also look like Nissan Sports Option items to me. The welded-on (steel) threaded sections are very characteristic. The strut tubes themselves look very long so I'm wondering if they might be the late Nissan Sports 'Rally Option' with the adjustable lower platform which superseded the fixed-platform E7220s? The part number should be engraved on the tubes same as the Atsugis.

It's an R-Factory airbox originally designed for the S20 twin cam engine. I flipped it over and used it upside down on my L24. It has integral air horns welded to the base plate. Short/medium height Mikuni-Solex/Weber type standard air horns would fit if you modified the base plate to accept them.

Hi Ian. Sorry, missed your post first time round. It looks very similar to the diff cooler kit fitted to some of the later UK & 'Euro' market cars (for expected Autobahn speeds I guess). I've got a couple of the same pumps as NOS parts and I believe they continued well on into Z31 period. Used on other models too. Factory Works rally cars used a similar pump in '73, hidden/safe in one of the tool compartments:

"Luggage Belts". You'll have a matching set of threaded holes on the floor just below the rear interior cover trim.

Would be rude not to.

By the way, fitting the Nissan S30 Alfin rear drums has been a popular modification for certain Triumph models. The Spitfire in particular. Hence the specialists such as Moss and Rimmer Brothers used to filch supplies from the UK's Nissan dealers. Now they have their own pattern supply: https://rimmerbros.com/Item--i-201246UR "Reassuringly expensive", as the saying goes...

Several other contemporary Nissan models had the all-ferrous brake drums as standard equipment, notably the C10-series Skyline. It has always been seen as an 'upgrade' (lighter weight, better cooling) to fit the Alfin drums from an S30 onto the more sporty of the C10-series Skyline variants. They are a like-for-like fit. Suitable replacement - 'pattern' - Alfin drums were still available from BREMBO last time I looked.

You did well then. Good!

Take a closer - much closer - look at the stitching detail on the "leather". I think you'll find that - just like the originals - the 1995 NISMO 20th Anniversary reissue wheels were cleverly made by Izumi to look like they were hand-stitched leather, but in fact were molded vinyl over urethane sponge, with faux stitch detail.

Door 'skins' do not - can not - carry any of the captive nuts and fixtures for door hinges, latches, locks, window frame/sash and window winder mechanism that Derek describes having difficulty with. Here's a photo of the rear side ('inside' if you like) of a reproduction replacement door 'skin' sold by Z Car Depot. It has some structure at the top which the window trim and window roller guide attach to, but just holes in the pressing for the outer door handle and lock barrel. That's it. It's simply the outer surface of the door when it is on the car. It is not a complete door: Derek and Resurrected Classics are talking about complete door shells, not just skins. Here are a couple more photos of my NOS N3400 door. If you look closely you can see where the outer 'skin' flange wraps around the door shell pressing:

You keep using the term "skin". In common usage, the term "skin" refers to just the outer layer of sheetmetal which is stretched over the door frame pressing. Nissan used to supply replacement door 'skins' (which they called Door Out"/outer, and also whole door units. They are two different things. What's being discussed here are not just door 'skins', but complete replacement door units.

EG:

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.