HS30-H

No, I think he just doesn't know anything much about motor sport.

If we're playing, here's a couple of shots to prove Takata - like most Japanese companies - were working on Christmas Day 1969. Nissan part number was 86800-E7201, and I think it should be fairly easy to guess on what variant of S30-series Z this was stock equipment:

Sato took the 2002 Jordan Honda to fifth at Suzuka in 2002 (in a season where the car broke more often than not), following it up with a sixth at his one-off run in the 2003 BAR Honda at Suzuka the following year. In 2004 he scored 34 world championship points in the BAR Honda when teamed up with Jenson Button. in 2001 Sato won the British Formula Three championship, the Macau Grand Prix and the prestigious annual World F3 Masters event at Zandvoort in Holland. I don't think he needed anybody to teach him how to drive before he took his career to the IndyCar series. Maybe you're confusing him with Alex Rossi?

Interesting, but a more than slightly non-sequitur post considering what went before it. What series, what races, what years even? I've been trying to elicit an answer regarding some cars that were - allegedly - "...just the best and far superior to anything else in the world concerning production sports cars at that time." So far no specifics... Meanwhile, as I have already pointed out, what manufacturer totally dominated the FIA International Cup for GT Cars during the period when the S30-series Z was being sold? Answer: Porsche. I have mucho respect for the likes of BRE and BSR, but they largely concentrated on national series races. However much we admire the engineering of their cars we can't compare them like-for-like with Porsche's best. Sure they punched above their weight some of the time, but they were not comparable to the might of a full fat factory effort that was sending cars all over the world to race and had a fleet of specialised homologation models to sell in their showrooms.

I'd say more like 1971, if not even early 1972. Most of those drivers were assembled for a similar shoot with the photos published in 'Auto Sport Young' (a special edition of Auto Sport magazine) in early March 1971, and the difference in hairstyle/length is noticeable. They were pretty much all following a trend for longer hair at the time and I reckon your photo was taken later than that shoot.

"...no Euro designed production car could match it." In what terms? You state "superior design", but what does that mean? What exactly was superior? I'm honestly wondering if you have come into close contact with any of Porsche's premium models of the period? I'm thinking 911S, 911T/R, 911R, 911S/T, 911RS 2.7 Carrera, 911 RSR 2.8 (how about the IROC RSRs?), 911 RS 3.0, 911 RSR 3.0 Carrera? That list takes us up to the end of 1974, when the S30-series Zs being sold in North America were still being offered with a choice of 4 speed manual or Automatic transmissions (FFS!). Porsche's stock-in-trade was making and selling sports cars, racing them and winning. They out-engineered, out-homologated and out-raced their opposition because they focused pretty much solely on doing so. You might well believe the S30-series Z is "a superior car to Porsche's offerings at the time", but I don't see any evidence whatsoever to support the belief. I guess a world that has space for Creationists has to have space for other kinds of fantasy too. By the way, I'm still nonplussed by the following statement: "...the US development of the racing Z covering S30 to Z31. .....those race cars were just the best and far superior to anything else in the world concerning production sports cars at that time." ...as you don't appear to have answered my repeated questions as to what specific cars it refers to. Considering you have now refined your claim to refer specifically to the S30-series Z I reckon it should now be easier to answer, no? So, a racing Z "production sports car" developed in the US that was "the best and far superior to anything else in the world" at the time. What specific car, please? You won't find many more loyal advocates for the S30-series Z than me, but I'm a realist who has been watching Porsches race from the late 1960s (yes, before the S30-series Z existed). To acknowledge Porsche's historic success in their chosen field - specialising in sports/GT cars - is not to diminish Nissan's excellent achievement in creating the S30-series Z. Two very different companies with quite different product ranges and philosophies. Being loyal to one should not make you blind to the merits of the other.

Correct the spelling for Yasunori TOSHIMORI and it will be correct, I believe.

"Yusuke Toshimori" = Yasunori TOSHIMORI "Tsujimoto Seiichiro" = Seiichiro TSUJIMOTO "Masahiro Hasegi" = Masahiro HASEMI "Yoshikazu Sunagi" = Yoshikazu SUNAKO "Kitano Yu" = Moto KITANO "Kenji Tsubairi" = Kenji TOHIRA Family names are in capitals, and in the Western format of given name first, family name second (whereas Japanese format is family name first, given name second). The "240Z' is actually a Works (Nissan Racing School) 432-R in drag.

The Kameari Engine Works HQ/store in Yashio City is an easy train (then taxi) ride from Tokyo, but it's a good idea to have the address (in Japanese) and a map printed out for the taxi driver at the local station, who may well be an 80+ year old who has never heard of the place... I'd advise you to give Kameari fair warning of your intention to pay them a visit, and also give them an idea of what you are planning to buy. They can send bulky items to your hotel by Takkyubin (you won't be wanting to struggle home on the train with big boxes under your arms), but don't leave it to the last couple of days of your trip in case there's any delay. Don't expect something the size of Walmart. K.E.W. are a compact operation. Small but perfectly formed.

Moving the goalposts on the pitch is one thing, but you appear to be moving them to another continent entirely. I asked you exactly what you were referring to when you stated "...the US development of the racing Z covering S30 to Z31. .....those race cars were just the best and far superior to anything else in the world concerning production sports cars at that time." and you don't seem to be able to specify which particular cars you are referring to. You now say that the World Sportscar Championship somehow doesn't count in all of this and "...anything else in the world..." doesn't actually mean what it says on the tin. So it's like the 'World Series' of Baseball's link to a newspaper rather than the 'World' implied by planet earth, right? Gotcha. There's no point in starting any kind of debate about S30-series Z cars circuit racing in Europe ("pathetic" or not) as Nissan simply were not ready - as a company - to embark on a serious Works campaign of that sort. They did however commit themselves to a rally campaign for the Z with the main focus on three 'halo' events - the RAC Rally of Great Britain, the Monte Carlo Rally and the East African Safari Rally - winning the Safari outright in 1971 and 1973 and placing a fine fifth on the Monte in 1971 (a result which astonished the rallying world) and followed that up with a third in the 1972 Monte. Nissan did take Works Zs to some selected events outside Japan to test the waters and gather data (including Brazil, Malaysia and South Africa) but circumstances - the 'Oil Shock' being the biggest - conspired against them expanding on that. From then on the focus would be mainly on four cylinder machines. My point still stands. If you want to talk about "World Excellence" in terms of sports cars and GT class racing during the period when the S30-series (and S130-series) was current, then Porsche were the reference point. No contest. There's no shame for us as Z fans to admit that, but it makes us look stupid to deny it.

OK, as I suspected, it's an example of custom/privateer fabrication making use of the factory-installed captives in the rear header rail. I guess it proves what they *could* be used for, and may well have been planned by the factory to be used for, but (as far as I'm aware) they didn't. As mentioned - I think - way back, there were at least two different positionings for the two vertical drops in the factory roll over bar/'safety bar'. There was the 'normal' gap width (as seen on the circuit race cars and the Sports/Race Option parts sold to the general public) and the factory Works rally cars, which had a wider gap between the vertical drops, to allow them to carry two spare wheels/tyres. I think the gap between the two sets of captives corresponds to one of the above, but I'd have to go to the garage to check....

That photo needs some explanation. It looks like a privateer/custom bracket fabrication to me? Despite the four captive nuts being in the rear header rail, I've never seen a factory or Works installation that actually used them. Certainly none of the Nissan Sports/Race Option four-point roll-over bars had them. I still think it's something that was mooted (hence those four captive nuts in that location) but never used for factory/Works parts.

Tee hee...

Like many road-going 432-R users, they probably found that it was a nuisance when night driving. In just the same way, quite a few road-driven 432-Rs ended up with gloveboxes, heat/demist controls and centre consoles etc within a few years of being sold.

96321-E4100 was the '69-up interior mirror for the S30-S Fairlady Z 'Std' model and the PS30-SB Fairlady Z432-R model, with no Day/Night adjustment. Many other Nissan models (especially in Japanese market) had similar style mirrors. What makes them Z specific is the curve of the stalk and the mounting.

Make sure you understand that - contrary to what Zed Head appears to believe - I wasn't directly accusing you of anything. The fact is that images are being posted on platforms like Pinterest and the like and nobody can tell where they originally appeared on the 'net. That's the 'context' I'm talking about. It's the stripping of the conversation around them that seems such a waste to me. I can't do anything about the wider issue and I know it's a ship that's already sailed, but the image you posted was clearly one that I had posted elsewhere with context and some explanation (I own a copy of the somewhat rare magazine issue that it was first published in, I took the time to scan that image and I posted it as part of a conversation where it was relevant) so forgive me for any bittersweet tone you may have detected. I feel a little paternal about it, that's all. The irony is that I think classiczcars is THE place where you would get a comprehensive and correct answer to such a question. By the way, whilst we are on the topic, nice avatar you have there. Recognise this?

Hooray! Tonto showed up! I think you should leave the rude comments about Zed Head out of this. The term 'Prima Donna' has unfortunate connotations in the Z world.

Quoted for Zed Head's attention, even if he chooses to ignore it.

I think this might say as much about you as it does about me.

Tip o' the hat to you, too.

You seem to be trying to do a switcheroo here. As was pointed out in post #4 of this thread, I first posted a scan of the same image on this forum back in 2003 but - as far as I am aware - I have not claimed that I was "first" to post it, even if I was. That's in your (Zed) head, I believe. The image that's in the first post of this thread has my initials - ART - and a date code on it, and I believe I first posted it on the Japanese Nostalgic Cars forum thread that the 'Kyusha Kai' blog post (as linked by siteunseen in post #5 of this thread), and was part of a discussion which hopefully debunked a silly theory - as alluded to in the Kyusha Kai blog post. The initialling and date coding is something that I do occasionally with the intention of giving some traceability for an image I have posted, as I am concerned that images get taken out of context by being right-clicked-and-saved and then posted elsewhere. The context in question being the reason that they were posted in the first place, and it's often to illustrate a point or detail that is relevant to the topic of discussion. We do it all the time on classiczcars.com. Lifting an image from one of those threads/discussions and pasting it elsewhere - and in the process dropping all the information that went with it - seems like a backward step to me. I don't know the solution, but a bit of common sense would not go amiss. This is the reason for my hackles being raised somewhat when member 'Blue' here on classiczcars started a process of "vacuuming" images from archived classiczcars threads and posting them elsewhere on classiczcars devoid of any link to their original context. I just don't get it. Yes, the image came originally from the 70-2 issue of Car Graphic magazine (as 26th-Z pointed out in post #8 of this thread...) but it is actually a copyright-free Nissan Press Department photo, which is where Car Graphic magazine got it from. If you want an example of 'Fair Use' of such photos I invite you to take a peek at zhome.com, which uses many photos from the same Nissan Press Dept. sequence as used in that 70-2 Car Graphic article. We still have not been told where the original poster sourced the image he was asking about, but the fact that it carries my watermark narrows things down a little I think? I don't think you're going to get very far with your finger-pointing regarding me "lifting words" from the Car Graphic article. The original is - of course - in Japanese.

You really aren't getting it, are you? You're telling me I've broken the context chain but then link to a thread containing the image where I gave the context by explaining what was depicted in the photo I had posted... If you don't see the difference between that and the first post in this thread then I don't know how to help you.

Look at the post above yours. You are - of course - missing the whole point. It's the lifting of images LOSING ORIGINAL CONTEXT that's the problem. If they stay with their explanations, or at least a link to the source, then it's all fine and dandy.

No.