HS30-H

It's the 48400-E4675 Nissan Sports Option steering known in the vernacular as the 'Datsun Compe'. Made by Izumi - the same people who made the OEM pressed wood composite steering wheels that came on our cars - it is based on the Japanese market centre and spokes ( different angle of spokes to the Export models ) and is 350mm in diameter. The rim is made from urethane, with 'stitching' detail moulded in, and would originally have had a light leather-look texture to it. This wears smooth in use, leaving the shiny finish you see above. NISMO made a limited-edition repop of these in celebration of their ( 15th? can't remember off the top of my head ) anniversary some years ago, and they - as well as originals - can appear for sale from time to time. They are usually 'reassuringly expensive'..... They are nice to use. I have them on a couple of my cars. Alan T.

Reviving this thread to post a couple of photos of an 'interesting' ( ) engine I saw in Japan last week. I'll let the photos speak for themselves: Cheers, Alan T.

Glenn, Bear in mind the 'interview' / round table discussion took place in 1996. At that time, Matsuo san was not enjoying the attention of the English-speaking media that he is now. The truth is that -within a company as large as Nissan already was in the late 1960s - creating a complex industrial product like an automobile was never going to be something that could be credited to one single person. Matsuo san was nominated as the 'Chief Designer' - a designer amongst designers, tasked with coordinating the work of others and managing much of the project. It doesn't mean that every single line and curve on the car came from his pen or spatula any more than it means that every single nut and bolt was to his - or anyone else's - specifications. He was a team leader. Unfortunately, his years in the uncredited wilderness along with the vacuum left by the modesty of others ( and Nissan's head-in-sand attitude ) have seen him come back to take perhaps a little more credit than is wise, necessary or even deserved. Cause and effect. Katayama might well believe that he "created" the car, but this is far too simplistic and banal a statement for it to stand up to any scrutiny. For him to come up with the 'concept' of a sports car ( nevermind that Nissan already had one, and would have more coming ) is something akin to a Butcher coming up with the 'concept' of putting some beef in his shop window. It's a no-brainer. Unfortunately, people seem to just nod their heads and congratulate him for his 'vision' rather than pointing out that it was all somewhat obvious. But that's the 'Mr K. Effect' for you..... There's an interesting two page article in the new issue of 'Kyu Sha Jin', published just last week in Japan. It's an interview with Kumeo Tamura, who took over much of the final ( clay ) body styling on the S30 project after Akio Yoshida's transfer to a different department. Once you start taking into account the efforts of people such as Tamura san, and add them to the work of Yoshida san and his colleagues - as well as all the ( hundreds of! ) engineers and subcontractors involved - any claims from one person that they "created" the Z start to look a little bit daft. Alan T.

The talk about the racing is pretty jumbled up and out of sequence ( half the time it's not immediately clear if they are talking about SPs/SRs, S30s or S130s at any one time ), but one quote shone out for me, and it wasn't about racing: I've seen him say this several times, and it makes my heart sink every time. Alan T.

Have you considered the possibility that it might be an R190 ( called the 'R192' in Japan )? Same design as the R160 and R180, but bigger. Originally fitted as OEM equipment on the PGC10 and KPGC10 Skyline GT-Rs and the PS30 Fairlady Z432 and PS30-SB Fairlady Z432-Rs, and also as a 'Sports Option' in Japan and Datsun Competition part in the USA. The R190 / R192 will fit in place of the stock R180 without any other mods ( unlike the R200 ) and can easily trick you into thinking it was an R180.......

So, that would be a total of around 40-something HLS30s...? Hope someone will take on "#22". There has to be space for a little pragmatism when it comes to what is - and isn't - possible. HLS30-00022 doesn't have to be 100% concours perfect to be appreciated.

If this thread is a trade advertisement, then it should be paying its way to be here.

Carl, Your talents are wasted. You should have been working with the Mad Men in advertising...... If you know of any head-to-head Porsche 911 vs Datsun 240Z battles in the SCCA C-Production class, please tell us the details ( and the results ). And Yuletide Greetings to all. I'm off for a big glass of mulled wine and a couple of mince pies Cheers! Alan T.

Thanks Chris. That answers my rhetorical question nicely I think.

Thanks John, but results for IMSA, WSCC and FIA Sports Car and GT racing are all very well documented and relatively easily sourced. I've been a fan of endurance racing since Dad started taking me to sports car races in the 1960s, so I have a fair bit of reference material too. I was more interested in those SCCA races we were talking about above. My question is at least partly rhetorical ( I think I know at least part of the answer ) but still valid I believe. The best sports / GT models that Nissan ( 'Datsun' ) and Porsche offered their customers in the USA market did not run head-to-head in the SCCA-sanctioned races......... .....or did they? Alan T.

Whatever the result, it's a strange comparison for Styles to make. Circuit race car with unsuitable gearing for a 1/4 mile standing start, and a showroom stock (?) Carrera with a 300cc capacity difference. Apples and oranges. I'm interested in comparing cars with similar swept volumes, and/or in the same racing class. Anyone want to comment? Carl, That's all well and good, but it seems - looking at it from this side of the Atlantic at least - more than a little bit tweaked. It seems to me that things were a little fairer when there were 2-litre cars racing against 2-litre cars. A 2.4 litre 240Z beating a 2.0 914-6 or 911 is 'Dog Bites Man', whilst a 2.4 litre 240Z beating a 2.4 litre 911S would be 'Man Bites Dog'...... Quite simply, the highest specced Porsche models were not allowed to run head-to-head against the highest specced 'Datsun' models in SCCA racing after 1969, were they? Am I right? This could be very interesting to me ( and others too I hope! ). Are you talking about your 432, and what model 911 do you own? More please! Cheers, Alan T.

Yes, but they were of course limited by the rule book. The word 'Production' did actually imply something. My point being that anyone buying a new Datsun 240Z in 1970 and thinking he had a 'Porsche-beater' would have been, er, slightly misinformed..... I'm all ears! Dreadful book, full of mistakes. Quite a lot of the 'history' seems to have been simply made up. Just last month we had another instance of a UK-based magazine journalist - despite being forewarned - using crock data from the Style book in an article he was writing. Now it's been repeated and therefore reinforced, with no retraction / correction or - seemingly - any regret. Hopeless. But what do you make of the BSR 240 race car / stock Carrera 2.7 1/4 mile time comparison? Alan T.

Julio, I wouldn't worry about the bandwidth. It's discussion that makes a forum a forum. And I wouldn't say that you'd hit a raw nerve. More a case of piquing my interest.... I hope you don't think that I "worship" the Porsche marque ( or any other marque ). Far from it. However, I do have an enormous amount of respect for Porsche's history and their dedication to motorsport. I am ex Porsche owner too, of course. I am just as embarrassed to see blind 'fan boy' style brand worship of Porsche as I am to see Porsche bashing. I think you'll find that the 914 was called a Porsche in the USA market, but a VW-Porsche elsewhere - reflecting the source of its 1679cc engine. The 912 was 1582cc, and the 914-6 was 2 litre - yes? 1969 year 911T was 2 litre, with '70 and '71 year 911T being 2.2 litre. The 240Z had an engine capacity advantage over all of these, obviously. Was the 911T running in SCCA C Production, head-to-head with the Datsun 240Z? I'm certainly no expert on SCCA racing history, but I do recall a certain amount of controversy over the fact that the 240Z was able to race in the C Production class. I believe many competitors wanted to see it bumped up to B Production, where it might have had a bigger fight on its hands. Sorry to see that you won't post on the subject any more. Cheers, Alan T.

Yes, I can see your viewpoint, but I still think that - looking at the big picture - the S30-series Z will have had little impact on thinking at Porsche, apart from the aspect of 'Bang For Buck'. However, as the recommended selling price of the S30-series Z was set at an artificially low level in the north American market, I can't see how that affected Porsche's product planning too much. If anything, factors such as the 1973 Oil Crisis would have had more effect. Looks to me as though the goalposts are being moved around a little though.... In my opinion, high performance models like the 911S, 911R, Carrera RS and others are automatically brought into the equation when you come up with a phrase like "kicking Porsche's arse" in connection with the S30-series Z in SCCA racing. I think it would be more appropriate to say that the Z kicked the 914-6's "arse" rather than Porsche's. Price is only one factor, and I would definitely say that a 911 should be looked at as being in the same category as a 240Z in the showroom. Kats was asking about the phrase "poor man's Porsche" in his original post, and I don't think that phrase originally referred to the 914 or 914-6. It was the higher-level versions of the 911 that were the benchmarks. The 'Datsun 240Z' used in SCCA C Production racing was - theoretically at least - the best product that Nissan could offer in the USA market at the time ( although it might be worth remembering that the HLS30U wasn't the fastest or most dynamic showroom stock iteration of the S30-series Z..... ), whilst Porsche's best were forced into different racing categories. In the showroom Nissan had no answer to Porsche, and it's no disgrace to Nissan. They were quite different companies, with quite different philosophies. You could just as easily turn this on its head and ask where Porsche's pickups, four door econoboxes and luxury sedans were of course. The reason I react to anything I perceive as 'Porsche bashing' on this - and other - Z forums ( I've seen it before ) is that I think that there's a danger of us becoming inverted snobs. As I said before, I think I love 'our' cars just as much as anybody here, but a company such as Porsche - particularly during that period when the S30-series Z was being sold new in the showroom - has to be looked up to for its dedication to a particular market sector and its dedication to motorsport. It was wonderful to see a Z beating a Porsche in the few times that it has happened, but it really has - in the grand scheme of things - been only just a few times..... Cheers, Alan T.

How is that "kicking Porsche's arse" though? Porsche didn't ( weren't allowed to ) bring the very models that out-gunned the 240Z in the showroom. I'm just as much a fan of 'our' cars as anyone here, but please let's not kid ourselves that the early Z was any kind of match for Porsche's finest road cars of the same period. Beating a 914, 914-6 or 911T is like beating Muhammad Ali's kid sister in a boxing match. OK, you "beat Ali". But you beat the wrong Ali......

Sorry, but I can't imagine that the Z had any effect on planning at Porsche in relation to any "increase in performance", and I cannot think of more than a couple of times when Porsche's finest might have had its "arse kicked" by an S30-series Z ( and especially by an HLS30U..... ) Before, during and after the new car sales years of the S30-series Z, Porsche always had models of superior performance. With the 911S, 911T/R, 911R, Carrera RS and Carrera RS in their lineup, it's hard to imagine that they'd feel threatened by anything much performance-wise. Nissan could offer a cheaper alternative to the image ( especially in the North American market, where Nissan purposely cut their profit margin to pile 'em high and sell 'em cheap ), but had no real answer for showroom-stock high performance models. Let's keep it real here....

All C110-series Skyline body serial numbers are engraved on what the factory described as the 'cowl top' in the engine compartment, but might be better described as the firewall sheetmetal. The 'Car Identification Plate' - otherwise known as a 'VIN tag' or 'Data Plate' is alongside. These are the only two places on the car where the body serial number is recorded. We have discussed that particular car on this forum several times in the past, so I'm presuming you have seen those threads? Here are links to some of them: http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12221 http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12259 http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24937 http://www.classiczcars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29117 Alan T.

Cheers Ron. Seems likely that the E4100 number might be the number given to the earliest full 'production' version, as opposed to prototypes and/or anything not finally settled, as this booklet was dated February 1970 and must have been in preparation during late 1969 at least. However, I can't help thinking that some earlier versions with different mounting screw layouts might have made it onto production cars that were made in late 1969 / early 1970..... Alan T.

They grew into a forest, Kats...! OK, this subject has been bugging me more than a little - so I started to dig a bit deeper to see if I could come up with a different part number. I felt sure that somewhere I had seen an early part number reference for the covers, but I couldn't remember just where. After what seemed like an age of fruitless searching - with paperwork and reference material spread all over the floor and shelves ( what a mess ) - I sat back down again at my desk and looked straight at the front cover of the Nissan competition prep manual for the Fairlady Z 432-R. This is one of the first places I should have looked. I'd had it on the desk for the last couple of weeks, as I had needed some data for my 432-R replica project car. I couldn't see the forest for the trees.... Turn to pages 71 & 72 and there it is, a pair of new part numbers ( well, new to this thread at least I think ) and a reference to FOUR screws on each cover. The manual is dated February 1970. So, we now have: 63900-E4100 SET HEAD LAMP COVER RH 63901-E4100 SET HEAD LAMP COVER LH and also: 63920-E4100 PLATE NUT ( qty. 8 ) ...however, there's no firm reference to the pattern / positioning of the mounting screws in this manual. You win some, you lose some. My 'translation' is marked in red: Alan T.

Carl, Thanks for posting this, but I'm sorry to say that I found it slightly uncomfortable to watch..... It's good to see people like Matsuo san engaging with the English-speaking media, but in this instance I really feel it would have worked better with a skilled translator and some more thoroughly prepared scripting of the questions. Matsuo san's English is fine for one-to-one conversation, and if a pen and paper is on the table then all the better, but I fear it's not really up to the level needed in a 'live' video exchange. More than once I found myself feeling embarrassed for both sides as meaning and nuance whizzed over heads. Presenting Matsuo san as "the" Designer - as though there was only one - is a mistake. Matsuo san was the 'Chief Designer' on the project, a chief among designers and engineers, tasked with coordinating the work of all the different individuals, all the different departments and all the different suppliers. Yes, he takes the credit for certain details of the overall design ( the hatch hinges and gas ram to name two seen in the video ) but seeing him credited as though he almost single-handedly conceived, designed and produced the first Z is only one stage removed from that old Goertz problem. Matsuo san might also be advised to use the word 'we' instead of 'I' where more appropriate. It's no wonder that the other members of the team feel as though they have been crowded out of the story. When we talk about the styling of the car, we should give Yoshida - the man who really should be given credit for the overall styling of the car - and Tamura - the man who picked up where Yoshida left off - the credit that they deserve. To see Matsuo san being called an 'Engineer', and then a 'Test Driver' ( even in half jest ) no doubt makes the true Engineers on the project - Uemura, Benitani, Kamahara et al - wince. The design / styling of the dashboard - commented on in the driving scenes - was the responsibility of Chiba san, not Matsuo. I won't comment on Mr Randy Rodriguez ( he came across very well, and very modest ), except to point out - perhaps stating the obvious - that no one individual will have 'designed' the Z34. Nissan might want to attribute the styling theme to him - as they did to Ajay Panchal with the Z33 - but it's a little bit more involved than such credit can convey. Much like it was with the S30, indeed. And how come Goertz is still getting the credit for the Toyota 2000GT in shows like this? Sorry to rock the feelgood boat. Alan T.

A few more images of that '69 Tokyo Show 432:

Perhaps some more grist for the mill: These images are all dateable, as they are from known sources at known times. First two depict Nissan's first ever S30-series Z race car - specifically a Fairlady Z432-R - just before its first ( and last - as it was T-boned by another car... ) race in January 1970, and the third is a scan from part of the JAF homologation papers for the PS30 Fairlady Z432 - which was dated March 1970, and unusually shows the clear acrylic part attached to the car without the metal trim ring. I think the screw positions can be seen relatively clearly. Alan T.

Ron, You're confusing me.... So, you think the headlamp covers seen on the '69 Tokyo Show 432 are "prototypes" - but then you say: As all of the '69 Tokyo Show 432 pictures depict the same car , the headlamp covers seen on it cannot be both "prototypes" and E4126 ( or E8726 ).... Personally, I'm not entirely convinced that the '69 Tokyo Show 432 had only three fixing screws on its headlamp covers ( as depicted in Kats' drawing ). I know that Kats has looked into this quite closely, but I'd like to see more conclusive evidence. There were many pictures published of that car 'in period', and I believe I can count four fixing screws on each cover by cross-referencing the photos taken from different angles, even though I don't have one diamond bullet photo that shows them all clearly and indisputably..... I believe - and hope he'll correct me if I'm wrong - that Kats' sketch and notations were an effort to begin understanding all this. I don't think he meant them to be 'Gospel'. And I still have trouble believing that the E8726 suffixed covers could have existed - using that E8726 suffix - as long as one full year before the E8725 suffixed ZG type covers first appeared. Anyone care to speculate? Er, I'll have to remember where it went first! I've bought and sold quite a few of these things over the time I've been a Z owner. Let me look into it..... Alan T.

I think we are all in the same boat here, Ron. I wouldn't class you as being 'out of your league'. Quite the opposite, in fact. Points taken, but I still firmly believe I can see those distinctive mounting screw positions on the photos of the 432 at the '69 Tokyo show. Here's the front-on photo again, and this time I've circled those screws in red. Does anyone agree with me that these are indeed mounting screws, rather than reflections / distortions?

Mike, At least two different 'stock' wiper blades in the Japanese market models before the end of 1971 ( 26370-E4100 and 26370-E8700 ). I know the E4100 was the same as the one offered on the north American and European / UK export market cars. 'Winter Pack' wipers - more suited to cope with snow and ice - were also available in Japan ( as were electrically heated front 'screens, for example ) although I don't believe they ever showed up in the early Japanese parts lists. You can however see them in the R-Drive export parts lists [ B6365-89914 ASSY-BLADE WINDSHIELD ( SNOW ) L=400, and B6365-89915 ASSY-BLADE WINDSHIELD ( SNOW ) L=340 ). I would have thought some regions of north America, and especially Canada, would have some 'snow' wiper blades? But, like the headlamp covers, I don't think the part numbers tell us the whole story. Alan T.