HS30-H

That line on the tag reads "Ho-an kijun tekigo". You might be disappointed to hear that it simply identifies the safety ( 'anzen' ) standard legislation that the car complies with. The '0-12' number identifies the standard. It doesn't tell you anything specific about your particular car.

I'm trying to point out that the car needs to sit properly ( level side-to- side, and not too much rake end-to-end ) quite apart from the actual spring rates, but still taking them into account. Does that make sense? Probably not.....

Kats, Damper rates ( bump & rebound ) are different between north American market Export 240Z and Japanese market Fairlady Z & Fairlady Z-L. And 'European', UK, Australian & NZ market Export 240Z are different again. Spring seat heights are different too! Complicated subject...... I think it means neither. Key point is compressed length with car level and stationary. Aim was to level up the car. Spring rate ( 'hard' / 'soft' ) is a different issue.

I can assure you that there will be plenty of useful RHD-specific spare parts on the car. If it was local to me I'd have it in an instant. I wouldn't kick the wheels ( they look like early Minilites.... ), diff, trans, and dash out of bed either. And here's a challenge if anyone wants to take me up on it: I'll pay $300 US for that steering wheel and boss kit, if anyone buys the car.

Chassis number of 'S30-08589' indicates Jan/Feb 1972 production date. Looks like a 'Fairlady Z-L' model ( 'S30' factory code ), which would have been equipped with the L20A engine, FS5C71-A transmission and 3.9:1 ratio R180 diff from the factory. Some of the rarer components already gone or in bad condition, although as a 1973 build it would have had vented pillars and therefore the same 'vented' pillar emblems as the Export cars ( rather than the very hard to find non-vented Domestic pillar emblems ). Perhaps a little too far gone to bring back from the brink? Sad.....

Sorry, but it looks absolutely nothing like a genuine Nissan 'Monte Carlo' / 'Drop' bumper.... Obviously it doesn't have the two large chrome over-riders between the two horizontal levels, but the ends that would meet the missing over-riders would not be shaped in the way that these are anyway. Also the centre section is too short, and the genuine bumpers didn't have a rubber strip in the middle horizontal section either. Can't be off a works car either as it does not have the four mounts for the spotlamps on the centre section, or the holes that would be left over after they were removed. Looks 'home made' to me. And that may indeed be the very reason that Safari Motors or whoever at Zama didn't want it anymore.....

And to give some credit where it's due for the original artwork, it was drawn by artist Takeshi HOSOKAWA for Japanese AUTO SPORT magazine as part of a double-sided triple page pull-out, published in 1971. Alan T.

Seriously? Wow..... That's the stock, factory, design and location for the rear ARB. If you take a peek under your HLS30-00029, you will see that ( if it's still stock ) the early north American market cars had no rear ARB fitted and no chassis-mounted 'U' brackets to hold it. However, the rear transverse links ( wishbones ) still had the indentations and reinforced mounting holes for the vertical stabiliser connecting rods..... All markets other than north America got the rear ARB as stock equipment from the beginning of production. It was part of the core design of the chassis.

We will have to disagree then. I find it ironic. Are you saying that Nissan would have sold measurably less HLS30-U model 'Datsun 240Zs' in the north American market had the car been badged as a 'Fairlady Z' then? If so, then would you care to quantify that? I say that it would have made little difference. Key points were the bang-for-buck, the image / styling, and the letter 'Z'. Yes it was, but that was after the fact. Nissan's "number one focus" has always been - and certainly was in 1969/70 - it's biggest single market, Japan. Nissan's salesmen might very well have been focusing on the north American market as the single biggest export market for the S30-series Z ( just as had the salesmen at MG, Triumph, Jaguar, Porsche, ALFA Romeo, Ferrari et al ), but this was not the single focus of the designers and engineers. The proof of that is in the cars themselves. Alan T.

Ironic then that the "macho" north American market 240Z was given the softest, squishiest suspension, slowest steering rack ratio and decidedly non-sporty wide ratio gearing. I think you'll find that Nissan's "number one focus" has always been the Japanese home market.

No. Some of the works rally cars were fitted with wide and quite soft reclining seats from saloon models for the navigator, at the navigator's request:

Nissan Japan 'Sports Option' exhaust manifold c.1971:

Nissan 'Grand Prix Maroon' colour code was 116. It's a straight chestnut ( for "'Maroon" read Marron ) brown, and non-metallic. There's an old Opel colour that is very close, but I can't remember it off the top of my head. Sorry.

First of all, I'm most certainly not on a "constant quest" to discredit Carl. Don't be silly. It's only a part time quest...... And secondly, Carl does a pretty good job of it himself. Thirdly, I find it quite ironic that you are talking about Carl and the forgetting of Canada in the same sentence. Carl quite often needs to be reminded to tip his hat to our Canadian friends. For example, his zhome.com page which tells us about what the factory called the "Kaku U" / "North American Testing" program ( in which they travelled thousands of miles around the USA and Canada, travelling north from Seattle, through Vancouver, up as far as Dawson Creek, then dropping back down again to go through Banff and Calgary before passing back over the border and on into Great Falls ) is simply titled "Pre-production USA Road Testing". If that's not a subliminal punch in the kisser then I don't know what is. Fourthly ( I'm determined not to lose count here ), you may indeed have a point. But frankly, this event at the Pierre Hotel seems like a bit of a damp squib when you stand back and look at it doesn't it? The press didn't even use any photos of the actual car at the event, and I'm not entirely sure that we even know what was there. For an event with a pretty high falutin' title it sounds more like a bit of a cocktail party, some finger food and a press release. I'd like nothing better than to see another debut / launch for the S30-series Z outside the Japanese activities, but somehow this one's not really seeming to live up to its billing, is it? I think there's an interesting backstory to all this that we don't know anything much about yet, and I feel like I want to keep scratching around until we get somewhere with it. Regards, Alan T.

Carl, Thanks for taking the time to answer. I know you must be very busy, what with it being April 1st and all. Don't spread yourself too thin...... Not much bang for buck there, is there? Wouldn't even cover the cost of the vol-au-vents. Noted the small 'i' and small 'p' in the 'international preview' quote. "USA Preview" would have been more accurate, considering the model had already been previewed by the press ( unless Japan doesn't count for some reason.... ). So, is that a stock Nissan press release photo? Did anybody take a photo of what was on display in the Pierre Hotel? It's still very mysterious, isn't it?

Aren't most of these simply similar answers to the same problems, those answers influenced by the design 'zeitgeist' of the period, and with similar reference points? Both heavily influenced by the work of the big Italian styling houses / carrozzeria. No offence, but your "Basic shape", "Drivetrain layout" and "Forward opening hood" are a little too general to be taken seriously. They both had four wheels too....... But why would they need to look at "the other design", or indeed any one other design, whilst designing ( actually styling ) their own project? There was no necessity. Unless you believe that they could not start from a blank sheet of paper.....? Alan T

Looks like Carl's taken his ball home again......

It's very easy to pick both those articles to pieces. The first one is particularly bad, the second is a little better but still has some foot-in-mouth moments. Like the rest of zhome.com, they are not open to peer critique in-situ. The pages are there, as though written in stone, and are used as reference by other writers who repeat them - and thereby reinforce them. A forum-based discussion in far more enlightening, and much heathier.

What are the similarities and design cues that you see? I don't really see them, especially when you see the cars in the metal. We've touched on the concept of a design 'zeitgeist' here before, and both the MF10 and S30-series Z are *similar* to any number of cars designed in the 1960s. We draw connecting lines through some of these designs because we see other - circumstantial - evidence that links them, but the truth is somewhat more subjective. Scroll through the comments on that Jalopnik article and you start to see what kind of problems Japanese design and engineering comes up against. One of the very first fingers to point mentions the word "copy", and in this case it is the chassis and suspension design / layout. So, outside Japan you take 'reference', get 'influenced' and 'inspired', but if you are Japanese you just "copy". It's not really very far removed from the wartime propaganda that told us these people were half blind midgets who flew warplanes made from bamboo sticks and rice paper.....

Yes, that's the thing I find most puzzling. I don't know what system, what data would link a remanufactured engine number with a particular model. Plenty of other models used the L28 engine block in both front and rear sump applications. Has your block got a front sump dipstick boss that has been plugged?

Kudos to you for laying it on the line, Chris. That "International Preview" title is pretty grand, and you'd think there would be more evidence of what was on display there, how it was displayed, and who was actually there if it really was quite as grand as all that. The Competition Press & Autoweek article is interesting as - and tell me if I'm jumping to conclusions here - it was datelined October 27th ( mag published mid November, as you pointed out ), and yet the photos seem to be in-house 'stock' photos of - again, as you have pointed out - one of the two 'Kaku U' test cars. I noted the clock blanking plate and the recess cubby hole in the radio mount, and the lack of bonnet ( hood ) emblem, in contrast to the '2177' license plated car used in the January 1970 Road & Track magazine article - which had a clock, a radio and antenna, a bonnet emblem and white-band tyres. After all this time we are still somewhat in the dark as regards to what cars were in the USA and/or Canada before the end of 1969, apart from the two 'Kaku U' north American test cars. No firm evidence / photos of a car or cars at either a N.Y. or L.A. event before the end of 1969, and any reports of the events simply used stock press release photos of cars which could have been taken anywhere, but were quite clearly not taken at the events in question. I was surprised to see 'HLS30-00013' being put forward as a possible candidate for the N.Y. "International Preview" car in the ctzcc.com thread ( thanks for the link, Mike B ) as it seems to me that there's little real evidence that 'HLS30-00013' had even arrived on US soil that early. Indeed, it seems likely that it didn't arrive until January 1970 at the earliest, and quite possibly even later than that. Several big holes to be filled here, I think. Alan T.

Some more questions for you, Carl: Given the grand title attached to this event, it's a little surprising that so little seems to be known about what was on display at the Pierre Hotel. Seems that the memory of one man is one of the only references to such a basic detail as the colour of the car on display.... And about that "International Preview" title - can I ask where it comes from? Was this written on any official document of the time ( like the invitations to the event, or any MNC USA press release associated with it ), or is it in fact a title that you have decided to give it? Your zhome page reporting all this claims that "hundreds of reporters and guests" visited the Pierre Hotel event, and yet I don't recall having seen a single photograph of the car on display or a single report in the contemporary Japanese press. Very little in the English speaking automotive press, too ( almost nothing in fact ). That's quite surprising considering the rather grand title associated with it, isn't it? I'm also puzzled to see that you report the car "..... had been flown in from Tokyo arriving the week before and after clearing U.S. Customs it finally arrived at the Hotel the 16 of Oct., just in time to get it set up on display in the Pierre Hotel's Grand Ballroom." So it arrived at the hotel one full week before the doors opened? That must have been quite some display if it took them a full week to build the show around it, and it had arrived "just in time". Something not quite adding up there, I think. I notice that your zhome page completely ignores that Nissan held a 'Press Preview' event at its Ginza, Tokyo HQ on October 18th. Present was an Export model 'Datsun 240Z', as well as examples of Fairlady Z, Fairlady Z-L, Fairlady Z432 and Fairlady Z432-R models. If there was any "International Preview" of the 240Z then this event surely deserves the title? I've mentioned this before ( and have good reason to believe it ) but I'll mention it again: I believe the Pierre Hotel event was another example of Katayama reacting to events and schedules in Japan and trying to trump them. I don't think it is any coincidence that the Ginza Press Preview was held on the 18th October, and that the doors of the Tokyo Motor Show would open on 24th October. Katayama organised the Pierre Hotel event rather more on the fly than your claim for it to have been planned "months in advance" would have us believe. If it had been planned months in advance then why did they need to airfreight the car in at extra cost? The plain fact is that Katayama didn't have a major US show in which to debut the car in the US market until the following calendar year ( the NY Auto Show was in early 1970 ), and needed to do something about it in reaction to the date of the 1969 Tokyo Motor Show. It's the tail trying to wag the dog again. Alan T.

That explains it. We've been discussing the Nissan-manufactured trim-ringed type covers and reproductions thereof, not the type you have.

Thanks for taking the time to do that. Now that it's installed in your S30 body, it would of course have to have been converted to rear sump if it was originally front sump, so nothing conclusive there. I'd expect to see the original front sump dipstick hole plugged and the rear sump dipstick boss casting drilled to suit the rear sump position. I still don't see how it can have been linked to an R30 Skyline just by its engine number though..... Cheers, Alan T.

Frank, I'm still nonplussed. I don't see how there can be such a big difference between the OEM FRP and OEM steel panels. This thread is about the OEM ( 'factory' ) option / accessory headlamp covers with the plexiglass lenses and steel channel trims around the outside of them, and which fit on the outside of the fender extension / sugar scoop. You're not talking about the north American aftermarket / non OEM, perspex / acrylic covers that are designed to fit flush with the body by any chance....?