HS30-H

You write things but don't have anything of substance to offer when asked about them. I asked specifically what cars you were referring to when you wrote "...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 come up with anything. Now you're talking about Dodge Vipers (a car which first hit the market in 1992) and the current running of the Targa Tasmania, which is a great event but can't rewrite history and I can't see what it has to do with the S30 through Z31 period you were referring to. Can I suggest you take a peep at some racing history records? Since you mentioned the S30-series Z let's start with the results of the 1970 World Sportscar Championship (note the word 'World' in there...) where the winners for the International Championship of makes was Porsche, and the the winners of the International Cup for GT Cars was also Porsche. Porsche won the Le Mans 24hrs outright for the first time in 1970 (I was there, and got to sit in the winning car after the race) as part of that year of success. I suggest you look at the results for the WSC for the full S30 through Z31 production years and see what you find. "Factory with the best pro drivers" IS real world. Those are the results that get engraved on the trophies and the ink in the record books.

I think Chris was referring to the well known Ronnie Spain GT40 tome "Individual History...", which in its original form is indeed outdated. Further information always comes to light, and - in the case of individual chassis histories - time reveals past cover-ups, mistakes and mystery. Cars thought long lost can appear from the shadows. Ronnie Spain himself has acknowledged and addressed this very point. So yes, they can so very easily prove to be "outdated"...

The GT40? It was conceived in response to Ferrari's success in endurance racing, not Porsche's. They were usually not in the same racing class as Porsche's road cars, and were not in the same price bracket or market sector in the showroom. Not that hard to design? The GT40's layout, componentry and basic design was cribbed from the Lola Mk.6 GT, so yes - easy! They just bought another manufacturer's car, designer and staff, set up a specialist manufacturing company (F.A.V. Ltd.) in the UK to build it and hire John Wyer and his team to race them. Easy! Apart perhaps from all three GT40s entered in the 1965 Le Mans 24hrs race - Ford's main target - not managing to finish... Period mag feature for reference: http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article/september-1965/24/ford-gt-40 What's that Viper in the Targa Tasmania got to do with anything? I'm still wondering what cars you were referring to with your "...the best and far superior to anything else in the world..." further up the thread? You seemed to be pinning it on "...the US development of the racing Z covering S30 to Z31", but I don't see any justification for the claim. Where's the substance? I just don't get the anti-Porsche sentiment I see so often coming from Nissan/Datsun enthusiasts. Porsche is a company that historically has had racing as its very lifeblood. Maybe we are now in a world where that isn't possible any more (and that goes for just about all the major manufacturers) but in matters historic they have nothing to prove to anybody. All the more ironic when Nissan themselves took such avid notice of what Porsche were doing.

These 'problems' seem fairly trivial for a 46-year old car and are easily rectified, in my opinion. Nothing particularly unusual there. I think it's probably more pertinent that you take these issues up with the seller (I presume - looking at your photos - that it is a classic car specialist based in Europe?) and either get him to fix them before selling to you, or use them as a bargaining chip to get some discount from the asking price and then fix them yourself. The car looks OK to me but it isn't a top of the market example and may have been somewhat neglected mechanically. The engine block has been painted to make it look a little fresher but the engine may well be a little tired as it is a little oily under there. The exhaust system will soon need replacing and I would guess that the brakes, steering and all suspension bushes/linkages will need servicing/replacement. The floor support channels are obviously dented from being used as jacking points (typical on these cars) but the body looks fairly honest and solid to me. Don't overpay!

(in bold) That's the point though. The drilling that leads to the bleed nipple is straight, but the other drillings are angled. You'd end up with the angled drilling that leads to the bleed nipple missing it by quite a margin when the halves were re-joined, and the O-ring counterbore not big enough to cover the difference. Feel free to give it a try though...

The script reads: "Sochaku Rei Sho", the first part of which might be translated as "Installation instructions...". It could easily be an in-joke that we - as outsiders looking in - don't 'get'. Original nuance lost. The Kanji actually looks like a Photoshop type digital addition to me. It seems to partially overlap - quite unnaturally - the flattened 'U' shape of the hinge doubler, and if you were going to write something on the inside of a fuel filler door, would you really choose to write it there, or on one of the flatter areas...? It also seems strangely offset to the right. Something a little odd about it. As is always the case, context is everything. An 'Internet Find' photo could keep us all guessing for an age, but its original setting could provide an instant explanation.

Apart from "why would you...?" (you'd be better off buying the cheaper non-vented type in the first place) there's a potential problem in that the fluid passage drillings in each half are at such an angle that they won't necessarily line up again if you start milling material off the mating surfaces.

That's not quite the point I was answering (concerning certain American-prepped Japanese cars being "...the best and far superior to anything else in the world...") but go ahead anyway, I'm all ears.

Sure, but the thread title you chose is "Vintage Racing or Sportscar Books".... I've just finished another of Charles Willeford's novels (been reading everything of his I can get hold of) and I'm halfway through re-reading Patrick Hamilton's 'Twenty Thousand Streets Under The Sky' triptych. I read a lot.

History shows us that Porsche dominated the decade (and more) in question if we are talking S30 thru Z31, as they took victory in the various classes of the World Sportscar Championship more often than not during that period. Point taken about North American dominance not necessarily equating to global dominance (it kind of makes my point for me...) but I was answering specifically the quote "...the best and far superior to anything else in the world...", which is just daft. Just last week I was playing Facebook tennis with somebody who was insisting that Porsche was playing catch-up to Nissan during the 1960s and 1970s (??!!), and that the 911 was some kind of *response* to the SP/SPL Fairlady roadsters (???!!!). FAKE NEWS right there... Addressing the thread topic: There's far too many books on the subject to give specific recommendations. I've got a fairly big collection but it's just scratching the surface really and if you want depth you have to refine your collecting to your primary area of interest. Personal faves include Mike Schoen's excellent 'The Cobra-Ferrari Wars' and Janos Wimpffen's epic 'Time And Two Seats' on the topic of endurance racing, but my interest in the Japanese racing scene of the 1960s, 70s and 80s leads me to collecting complete runs of Auto Sport Japan and Auto Technic for those decades, as well as modern titles such as Auto Sport Archive Japan's fabulously in-depth '100 Great Races' series (now up to volume 73) and the superb Racing On magazine's offshoot 'Racing On Archives', which also go in-depth, and deep in-depth at that...

"...the best and far superior to anything else in the world..."..? The products of a small company in Germany named Porsche may have slipped your memory, perhaps? A few other candidates making "production sports cars" in the same period might also be in with a shout.

Sorry, I don't get it. How could he have "...purchased the car new late 1969..." when it was built after July/August 1970?

There's no "mystery" here, unless we include the mystery as to why certain people won't listen to established fact and common sense. The car in question was built after one of my own cars, which was built in mid/late 1970. Nissan Shatai's own records - quoted by me in one of the previous posts on this thread - tell us what S30-prefixed chassis numbers were built on 1969 and 1970. This is a 1970 build-dated car and a mid to late 1970 build date at that. "Stone throwing"? Get a grip.

Congratulations on your new purchase. What was the chassis number of this car again? I don't recall it being a 1969 car from previous discussions elsewhere... I'm also interested in those rear arches. Not to pour scorn on the story, but what were Nissan Aomori doing installing custom (metal?) flared arches on a customer car (unusual...) and surely they could have fitted the 432-R Sports Option rear overfenders instead? I'm interested to hear more. For the record (you may not agree...) it makes my teeth itch to see an early Japanese market car being referred to as a "Series 1". I can understand why such terms have become vernacular in efforts to distinguish between major production date changes on Export market models, but they don't apply to the Japanese market models in the same way and in any case Nissan themselves certainly never used the 'Series 1/2/3' etc terms themselves. Sorry I can't help you with the valve cover, but watch this space for early Japanese market 'Z' quarter emblem repros in the pipeline. I might have some other RHD-specific parts you need, so don't hesitate to ask.

Above snipped, bolded and underlined for clarity. Sean, you have no way of knowing what the chain of supply involves. Having the best part of 30 years experience in import/export to and from Japan under my belt (it's what I do for a living) I would personally avoid making any assumptions about the links between Fujitsubo and the people who are retailing their products outside Japan. There could be any number of scenarios and chains of contact/trade involved, and if you are imagining some kind of ideal situation where Fujitsubo curates each individual product sale to the end user via the retailer then you are probably eating too much cheese before going to bed. It's simply not possible for a company of their size to do that. Once again you are pointing the finger of blame at Fujitsubo - even after saying that you are not - and yet Fujitsubo themselves never claim to anybody that their Legalis R fits the USA market HLS30 'Datsun 280Z' model. They don't even claim it fits a USA market HLS30 'Datsun 240Z' model, although it seems that it will fit that model as long as it is still fitted with an R180 differential and is not modified in a way that interferes with exhaust system fitment. Clearly Whitehead Performance's literature is wrong, and I'd not blame Fujitsubo for that. One last thing; your 'Z Story' Facebook page specifically mentions NISMO ("Collecteurs/echappement type NISMO") which NISMO themselves might take issue with (that's what I was referring to earlier). Copying/cribbing/replicating the shape of an exhaust manifold is not a problem but using the NISMO name in your description could be misleading and could also attract attention from NISMO themselves. As your business becomes bigger and more well known you might find yourself being put under the same scrutiny as you are putting Fujitsubo. I don't see how you would be able to vet every single end-user installation once you start getting into volume sales through multiple distributors, agents and re-sellers. I'm not telling you to "shut up", I'm just advising you to let your own 'Z Story' product speak for itself and to look after your own business. Taking vicarious exception to somebody else's problem and blaming it all on an unwitting and oblivious foreign manufacturer rather than the retailer and the end-user (who - clearly - bought the parts without realising they were not designed for his model) when you yourself are a competitor is most unseemly and I think it reflects badly. You seem to be keeping people happy with your product, so your attention would probably be best spent maintaining that and refraining from the temptation to throw stones at glass houses.

I don't know why Jason, but he just doesn't seem to read them.

You know Sean, you REALLY don't want your own products subjected to the same scrutiny as you are putting Fujitsubo's to. You might find some people in black suits knocking on your door and asking about your use of the 'NISMO' copyrighted brand name, and - for example - your claims to have a "JDM" system which is nothing of the sort (a single pipe into a rear box with two exits doesn't cut it as a 'twin pipe' system either). That spotlight you are standing behind could easily be switched back to shine on you... The story here is quite simple. You have a horse in the race as you are making and marketing your own brand of exhausts. I have no real horse in the race as I don't own a Fujitsubo system nor am I likely to, and I'm simply sticking up for common sense and fair play. Fujitsubo - I will say it AGAIN - do NOT market their Legalis R system for the S30-series Z outside Japan, do NOT claim that it fits the USA market HLS30 'Datsun 280Z' and clearly state in their (Japanese!) literature that the fitment ends with cars made before September 1975 for the Japanese market. If you have a modified car or a car that differs in any pertinent way to a Japanese market car then you would - clearly - be well advised to research the product a little more deeply before claiming it has "fitment issues". If the people you buy it from have misinformed or misled you, then the buck stops with them. Strangely I seem to be the only one who is pointing at them rather than Fujitsubo. Why is that? One last thing, Sean. I think you would be WELL advised to let your own product speak for itself, and to keep away from dissing the likes of Fujitsubo and any other actual manufacturers. You are - in simple terms - a one man village shop in comparison to them.

Sean, really. When your company is the size of Fujitsubo you can come back and make the same claim. Let's see how that pans out shall we?

Just you wait until you've got a few more cretinous customer claims under your belt for Z Story exhausts. Your caveat list will look like something dreamed up by the European Court of Human Justice.

What was "it's an important market for them" meant to mean then? If Fujitsubo are making any exhaust system it will be an important market to them. You frame it to make it sound like it's been revised to suit another market/model, when it's simply to package it tighter for lowered cars. As is the whole point of this discussion, FUJITSUBO DO NOT MAKE A SYSTEM THAT CATERS FOR CARS WITH R200 DIFFS. It seems to me that you are pointing the finger at Fujitsubo rather than dunderhead re-sellers and unwitting end users (who themselves would be advised to understand their own cars and the significance of '50-9' a little better...).

This is starting to feel like I'm pulling my own teeth out. This is classiczcars.com for Christ's sake. How many people here need to be reminded of the shape of their differential crossmember? THE WHOLE POINT is that the original car was designed and engineered to accept the factory twin pipe exhaust either as stock equipment or as an option. Late, single cut-out diff crossmembers and R200 diffs ARE THE WHOLE PROBLEM HERE.

What? Have you missed the point AGAIN? The whole point of the NEW Fujitsubo system - ie, the one that this thread started in order to discuss - is that it has been modified to give extra ground/road clearance for use on lowered cars. As Jason pointed out a few posts back, that means it is even MORE unlikely to fit a 280Z or any S30/S31 fitted with an R200 diff. This revision isn't aimed at the late model export market any more than the previous version was. I'm gobsmacked that anyone can not see that...

Missing the point (again). The above was posted in reply to the comment that the diff crossmember on a US market 240Z was not suitable for twin pipes, to wit: "Even on a bone stock US 240z differential support crossmember only has a small u shaped cut out to route the exhaust pipe... not twin pipes." It's not the case. Clearly.

Stock Nissan twin pipe system for reference:

Sean, in several of your posts on this thread you've been pointing the finger at Fujitsubo. This issue is clearly nothing to do with Fujitsubo, or their product. Far from saying the same thing, I've been trying to point your way to understanding the issue here. Has the penny finally dropped? Distributor schmistributor. As I said before, better to talk to the organ grinder than his monkey. The Whitehouse Performance sales literature is wrong, not Fujitsubo.