HS30-H

Walter, you're confusing me. With respect, exactly who do you think should have decided what was best for Nissan if not, er, Nissan themselves? This is a large, multinational business concern we are talking about here. Do you think that - somehow - they were not in a position to plan their own strategies? I can't see how you and I, or anybody else on the 'outside' would have the right to any say in the matter. Nissan's size as a company - especially when you are comparing it to Toyota - depends on what parts of it you take into account. For much of its history, Nissan has been much more diversified than Toyota. In the period we are talking about here, the sum total of Nissan's operations were much larger than that of Toyota. So how exactly would you qualify your belief that Katsuji Kawamata should not have been treated with the same amount of respect as the president of Toyota? Can it be refined down to percentages? Would you give him only 70% of the respect that you'd give to Toyota's president, or maybe only 50%? How exactly would you express this? I don't see it. If I had been in a situation where I was introduced to Kawamata, I'd like to think I'd be just as respectful to him as I would if I had been introduced to Fukio Nakagawa or Eiji Toyoda of Toyota. I'd primarily be respecting the rank, rather than the man. That rank represented and signfied all the people working within the organisation that it headed, so - for me at least - that's good enough reason to be respectful. If you don't think that Kawamata deserved the same respect as other company presidents, then I wonder how much respect you think Yutaka Katayama should have commanded in the same period? More than the president of the company he was employed by, or less.......? Alan T.

Mike, I really enjoyed the short period when you were using part of that brochure as your avatar. Thanks for posting images of the brochure here. I guess the very fact that this brochure was published at all shows that there was some kind of 'issue' that needed to be addressed. What do you think? Alan T.

It's a bit rich to accuse Kawamata of having a "huge ego" and not mention the fairly large size of Yutaka Katayama's. And if you want to snipe at Kawamata's 'eyes of a Banker', it would be just as fair to point at Katayama's 'eyes of an advertising man'. Kawamata had grounds to accuse characters like Katayama of failing to salute the rank rather than the man. If Katayama had been a soldier he would have been put on a charge of insubordination. Why shouldn't Kawamata have been treated with the respect due to a man of his position? You won't find many people that are fans of Kawamata, but when all is said and done he was the company president. Katayama seemed to be running NMC USA as though he was a King Arthur in his own personal Camelot, and it should be no surprise that this ruffled feathers back in Japan. The view from Ginza was that he was getting a bit too big for his boots. They had a point. The mess that came out of all this still reverberates today. I think that the situation with 'Infiniti' is quite different than that with 'Datsun' and 'Nissan'. In export markets, Nissan found itself in the curious position where many of their customers believed - erroneously - that 'Datsun' was responsible for designing, engineering and manufacturing the cars. If Nissan want 'Infiniti' to be regarded - even erroneously - as being responsible for design, engineering and manufacturing, then it is part of the marketing plan for that marque. So 'Infiniti' in this respect is the opposite of 'Datsun' for Nissan. Alan T.

The cars are garaged in the N13 postcode, and I live just a few miles down the road now. Quite easy for you to get to I think. Take the M40 down to M25, go clockwise, off at Junction 24 and then south on A111, which takes you all the way there. Drop me a PM here if you want to set something up date / time wise. Cheers, Alan T.

Matt, Geoff and his team at Fourways Engineering are good friends of mine, and I'd certainly recommend their work - as long as you don't ask them to cut any corners due to costs. They know what they are doing, and have done the same repairs on many similar UK market cars. To repair it all properly, and with structural integrity as well as accuracy, is a really big job. They replaced the floors on my Fairlady Z-L project car some years ago, and did lots of other prep work on the body before they painted it. You'd be very welcome to come over to my garages and see the car in person if you have time. I've got a good bonnet and tailgate that you could buy if you really think you need them. No need to take them yet, as they are not going anywhere ( they are hanging on the garage wall ) and you will need to do lots of other work before you need them. They are there for when you need them. I'm still worried about the true condition of the air tubes / upper supports. Have you investigated them fully yet? Cheers, Alan T.

JT, Is your car road registered / road legal in USA? Does it have license plates? Reason I'm asking is I'm wondering if you are planning on driving the car to and from Gurston when you are in the UK? If it's not road legal you would need a trailer and a tow vehicle, of course. Could end up being quite expensive if you have to factor such things into the equation........ If you do have license plates, and you are happy to run the car on the road, then I guess it brings the question of road-use insurance into the equation too. I see USA licensed 'temporary import use' cars running around in the UK quite often, so it can't be that difficult. But it seems most of these high flying people have all their costs paid by their employers, or by the US government. I don't think you'll have that luxury! I'd be worried about Ro-Ro'ing a race car too. It will have lots of parts on it that light fingered people will think are attractive. I've imported cars from Japan and lost some parts off them that way. When I imported my KPGC10 I chose to use a container for this very reason, but it cost three times as much as the cheapest Ro-Ro...... If there's anything that you need here in UK, I'm sure that Ben S. or myself can help in some way. Don't be shy to ask. Cheers, Alan T.

"Beating"? Come now Will, that's a little bit too dramatic isn't it? I think - overall - he ( they? ) got a suitable welcome considering the sycophantic way he introduced himself. I don't think it was quite as innocent an arrival as you seem to believe, and the very first line he wrote was obviously pre-meditated to demonstrate allegiance to certain parties and disaffection of others. If you don't see that, then maybe you are a little bit too close to some of the parties concerned? I should imagine it is going to be difficult for you to be impartial when you actually socialise with the very person that was mentioned in the first line of this new member's first post. Callous and rude I don't see, sorry. You could arguably accuse some posts of being somewhat robust, but they were reactions to bad data and misconceptions in his posts rather than personal insults or provocations. The stuff he was writing sounded authoritative, which makes it all the more misleading for anyone who comes across the data in a search. His failure to re-engage after the questions and corrections does not inspire hope for any kind of conversation, let alone informed debate. And what's all this "inexperienced in computerease" about, too? It doesn't seem that he's all that incompetent to me. He's using the search function ( better than most! ) to dredge long-dormant threads, and using multiple quotes too. The cynic in me might even start to think that he's had a few private signposts shown to him 'off board'. Some comments seem to be aimed at provoking exactly the kind of reaction that you are telling some of us ( or at least one of us ) we are guilty of. I've seen lots of new members come and go here, sometimes treated indifferently or even appallingly. They didn't have any red carpets rolled out for them, but maybe you think the owner of "#13" ( ) deserves this honour as some kind of VIP treatment? If so, why? Isn't it the car that deserves any special treament - rather than the owner? Alan T.

Sorry Chris, do you mean the contradiction of both HLS30-00013 and HLS30-00006 being given as the 'starting from' in two different publications?

Mike, Thanks - that's fascinating. First time I've seen the word "series" linked to years/specs in an 'official' Nissan document, rather than the very common ( and quite logical ) use of the word 'series' as in "Model S30-series" - meaning the whole range of market & model variants at time of publication. Of course I notice that this is an NMC USA-published document, which is - in my opinion - one step away from Nissan Japan, which my question originally addressed. So we could say it's a piece of 'local' terminology, yes? I also notice that the 'Series' numbers quoted for 'years' ( do they mean 'Model Years'? ) line up with chassis numbers quoted in the C-0010U USA & Canada Parts Catalog: FROM C/# HLS30-00013 - FROM OCT-69 FROM C/# HLS30-21001 - FROM JAN-71 FROM C/# HLS30-46001 - FROM SEP-71 FROM C/# HLS30-120001 - FROM JUL-72 Somehow the application of "Series" in this USA/Canada market context does seem rather arbitrary. Cheers, Alan T.

Stephen, You've demonstrated many times on this forum that you have been able to 'read' people very well, often long before others - including me - have realised that you were 'spot on' with your initial judgement. In this particular case, I'm still hoping that you might be a little off in your reading - but hope is fading. It'll be a pity if we are being 'sent up', but not that much of a surprise I guess. I must say that the repetition of the "RLS-511" mistake looked rather deliberate, unless it's a particularly curious tick ( or a dodgy keyboard? ). Will, Your reading of 'courtesy' is not necessarily the same as mine, I'm afraid. 'Kathy & Rick' nailed his ( their? ) colours to the mast with his very first post on this forum, and I'm afraid my personal experiences with the CTZCC forum lead me to believe that he's maybe not quite as innocent as you might like to think he is. Reviving long-sleeping threads ( over four years old for heaven's sake! ) with posts chock-full of bad data and mis-remembered anecdotes - in some cases 'conversing' with the long-dead ( our old friend Bambikiller / Carl S. is no doubt laughing like a drain at our antics here ) - is guaranteed to ruffle feathers and provoke attempts at correction. Either he's not as clued-up as he thinks he is, or he's 'playing' some of us. I hope it's the former, as that at least would be honest, but I'm sure if you look a little more closely you'll see that there might well be a little twinkle of mischief in his eye...... Speak for yourself, not for me. I'm more interested in known FACTS being got RIGHT, and for any points of conjecture to be weighed up with as much evidence presented as is possible, in order for people to make up their own minds. Some people seem to be happy to swallow tall stories whole ( especially if they are from their favourite guru ) but I think it's healthier for us all if questions are asked. I see 'robust' comments from both sides of the trenches. Regarding "politeness" - I read things on this forum, and others, that I regard as impolite all the time. I guess it depends on your viewpoint and your local concepts of good manners, but we all know what we are really here for, don't we? We are the audience in a show where the cars are the stars. Sometimes things get a little bit too impassioned, emotional and personal, but surely that's the whole point? Chris, I can see that in my 'C-0010U' too, but is that the only documentation that exists? Of course, publication 'C-0010R' gives 'HS30-00003' as the first 'HS30' sold to the public ( "from Oct-69" ). Funny that one of our pet gurus denied this for so long ( you want me to roll out the well-worn "no RHD 240Z in '69" quotes again? ) and only relatively recently conceded that it "might" have existed ( ). The punchline is that 'C00010U' gives the engine number of 'HLS30-00013' as 'L24-002027', whilst 'C-0010R' gives the engine number of 'HS30-00003' as 'L24-002025'. I hope that gives you the same wry smile as it gives me. Ha ha. Yes, I still love you! You never make me feel that you are talking-up the value of certain early cars as some kind of retirement-funding strategy, which is very reassuring. I know that you are my kind of 'car guy' and you're into this whole thing for the same reasons as me. Unfortunately, the 'rediscovery' of HLS30-00013 including all the overexcited hyperbole - and nonsensical claims about 'HLS30-00016' - has often made me feel that some of the protagonists have a vested financial interest that is clouding their perspective. It sometimes seems that 'provenance' is being manufactured, and that the obvious holes in the stories ( not to mention holes in any cars ) are being glossed over with an eye on a better auction result some time in the future. Cynical, aren't I!? The cars themselves - as ever - are the innocent parties in all of this. Cheers, Alan T.

Really? Where exactly is it documented, and how? It has been claimed that HLS30-00016 was actually 'sold' in October 1969. I've never seen any evidence that backs this claim up, and I'd really like to see some. Until then, I think it is safer to believe that HLS30-00016 was still in Japan in October 1969, and that any normal retail sales 'transaction' for an HLS30-U that is claimed as having taken place in the USA in October 1969 could not have been for any specific car. Anybody seriously claiming to have "...the first Z sold..." would hopefully realise that Zs were on sale in Japan before anywhere else in the world, and that it would be rather silly to ignore that fact when making some pretty grand claims. As for "..the lowest SN of an L24 engine still running.", I wonder whether you realise ( or are in fact ignoring ) the fact that the L24 was not exclusive to the HLS30 and HS30 models, and that a couple of thousand of them were made before they started being installed in S30-series Zs. Again, it seems a tall claim with little or no evidence to corroborate it, and little or no acknowledgement of the worldwide perspective surrounding a Japanese commercial product. You're definitely mistaken about the Fulda tyres ( tires ) too. Japan wasn't short of domestic-based tyre manufacturers with plenty of capacity and up to date products in 1969 ( Bridgstone, Dunlop Japan, Goodyear Japan, Nitto, Ohtsu, Toyo, Yokohama & ABC for example ), so why would it be expedient to import Fulda tyres from Europe and fit them on Nissan cars going for export? Alan T.

Are you actually unaware of the fact that there were HLS30 models that were not north American market models? All of these non-north American market versions were fitted with 5-speed transmissions from the factory - apart from the slightly later released Auto trans versions, of course. As has been pointed out in this thread - as well as countless others - ALL markets other than USA/Canada had standard 5-speed equipped Z cars available to them from the beginning of production and sales. Quite a lot of the early content of this thread - started in March 2005 - discussed that topic. It seems from your posts that you have not really read through the whole thread, and ( as I've pointed out to you on another of your Lazarus-style thread revivals ) some of the people that you are quoting and responding to are not regular participants any more. Our old friend 'Bambikiller240' - whom you quoted today - passed away some years ago ( RIP ). It's still not clear to me exactly what transmission you retro-fitted to your car. You have described it as a "Competition Department 5-speed", but you mentioned that it has a "0.854:1" 5th - and that must surely be a typo? Is it an FS5C71-A, or an FS5C71-B/FS5W71-B? All three of those were standard equipment outside the USA & Canada markets. You mention that - at the same time - you installed an R200 diff in your car, but this does not add up with the date you describe ( the R200 diff was not produced until some time after the date you mentioned ). The whole thing is very confusing. I'm sure we are all interested to hear about your experiences with these cars, but almost everything you have posted so far seems to be somewhat inaccurate or mis-remembered. Please don't be surprised or indignant when these inaccuracies are questioned or corrected, as bad data lays traps for future researchers to fall into. Alan T

CTZCC? Oh I get it. But you're a little bit late aren't you? What is it, full moon in your locale tonight? Maybe you should make a thread about me on the CTZCC forum? Don't be too upset if it gets almost no attention, though. It might even get edited, or deleted....... I think you mean elitist? Let's just face it. Our relationship is doomed, isn't it? Personally, I'd prefer a biscuit. And a cup of English Breakfast tea to dunk it in, thanks. In all seriousness 'g9m3c', that's some really good advice from sblake01 you've been offered there. I'd take notice of it if I were you. You seem to have fallen, hook, line and sinker for the propaganda line, but there's still time and chance for you for you to see the big picture. This whole thing is not about us. We are just the audience watching the show. Alan T.

lubu, Working out what some of these graffitoes say is one thing ( and, as we know, many of these Kanji, Hiragana and Katakana characters can be read in several different ways even when they are legible.... ), but working out what they actually mean or signify is quite another. As I believe I have mentioned, I would feel much more comfortable if a native Japanese reader / speaker with knowledge of old cars could add their opinion to the discussion. I have looked at scribbles such as these with Japanese car friends present, and most often I have been advised to accept that many of them will only have meant something specific to the person whom originally wrote them. We are on the outside looking in, and perhaps we are expecting too much if we think that we can make sense of them....... There are scribbles / markings / stamps etc on the cars that do mean something specific, and can be understood. The under dash chalk marks on certain cars can identify market variations and sub models. There are steering column support bracket scribbles that can help to identify certain specs, but not all of them are seen on every car. Some of these things are apparently 'notes' or memos between workers and/or departments. It would be great to get into more discussion about these markings, and indeed to see more and more examples of them so we have more to go on, but I'd urge caution in taking their translated meanings too literally. For example, something that reads as 'chikara' does not seem to have any logical meaning in relation to the component that it appears on, and quite possibly it was never meant to. Alan T.

Shirley you should be able to determine whether it's a 4-speed or a 5-speed yourself? Guessing 'blind' is a bore. Take some photos of this thing, and put 'em up here. And if you really want to know what you have got, you'll need to take it apart and start counting the gear and counter gear teeth combos..........

Er, "yo" to you too ( ??? ). Indeed to both of you, "yo". It's OK, you don't actually need to own a passport. You can do some virtual 'travelling' on this very site...... It's good like that. By the way..... .....you just posted the above on another thread. Now you know what I'm going to say about that don't you.....? Alan T.

The posts on this thread are scaring me half to death. If 'coop' follows their recommendations he'll have no wheels left, and - quite possibly - no skin left either. Proper treatment of Magnesium castings is essential, and is nothing like that of Aluminium ( or 'Aluminum' / "Aloominum" ). I've had all my old Magnesium wheels X-Rayed, and after that it's best to get them chromated. Here's some good advice from professionals: http://www.mb-racingwheels.com/magnesium_protection.htm

Carl, What do you mean exactly when you write "supposed to be"? Are you referring to official specification documentation, or anecdotal evidence? It seems clear that the final spec details of the north American market cars were somewhat less than set in stone when the first cars were being produced. If you look at Publication No. SLE 0630-911027-U ( the 'DATSUN 240Z SPORTS' single-page flyer with the red car on the front ) you'd be under the impression that the cars were going to be fitted with triple side-draught Mikuni carbs and a 5-speed overdrive trans ( mated to a 3.364:1 ratio diff! ha ha ), but with vinyl floor covering, no clock and no radio. Many of the other specs and details on this document turned out to be less than accurate, didn't they? So where does the "supposed to" come from, and from what date does it apply? My impression is that there was something of a tug-o-war going on between Nissan Japan and NMC USA as to what would be supplied for the targetted low price that these cars would be sold for in the USA, and that the final specs were still being negotiated - let alone finalised - even while completed cars were being sold on north American showroom floors ( and I'm not talking about any fantasy 'purchases' that are alleged to have taken place in October 1969, before cars were physically there, either ). Alan T.

If you were a bit more specific, some kind person might volunteer to attempt to explain them to you. Which points are you having trouble with?

Well, I currently own three cars that wear a '240Z' badge and an 'HS30' body serial number prefix, but none of them have an externally-visible 'VIN' inside the corners of their windshields. I believe there were 'HLS30' models produced for certain markets which also did not have the dash-mounted 'VIN'. Your observations apply only to north American market models, I believe. In which case - for the sake of others who might come across the data by using the SEARCH function of the site - you might like to make this clear in your post. You might also be well advised to add the correct and appropriate prefix in front of those "#00965", "#20231" & "#22021" etc numbers, as without the applicable prefix they become almost meaningless. The term "240Z" too, on it's own, is so general as to be almost meaningless. Are you going to be reviving any more threads that are as old as this one? You might like to bear in mind that some of the participants in these threads are ( in some cases literally ) no longer with us........ Alan T.

You seem to have missed one of the points that was being made in this ( old ) thread. That blanking plate in the console was there because a heated rear window was standard equipment from the beginning of production on models that were not sold in the north American market. Since they shared the same console part number, the models without the heated rear screens had to have a blanking plate instead of a switch. You have - perhaps unwittingly - provided a perfect illustration of the kind of bear traps that are waiting for those who don't cross-reference details and specs across markets and contemporary models. Alan T.

Did they actually call Datsun an "automobile company"? Bad question phrasing if they did. The 'Datsun' emblem on the Zs did not signify a company any more. I agree. Good point.

Ooooh! That's a nice animated gif! Mind if I use that occasionally? When I saw the title of this thread, I thought the "Oldest Z" had been found. But then I realised that it was just another HLS30-00013 thread....... That's all well and good, but at some point he will have to take some advice from a Z expert It works!

Eric! I wish I'd known that you were going to be there, as it would have been good to meet you. I could - at the very least - have given you a more 'personal' look at the car. I was at the Revival on Friday and Saturday, and was on the Nissan stand for a couple of hours or so on both days. It's a pity I wasn't there when you were. Are you still in the UK? I'll PM you with my phone number just in case you are. I'll buy you a steak! I don't think the budget would stretch to a model for the GT-R, but there were other nice young ladies in Sixties-style costume on the stand too. Whole thing with the Hakosuka was very last minute, and it only really came together less than a week before the event. It was actually the UK 'launch' / debut for the Z34 '370Z' Roadster, too. Actually, that car belongs to NMGB ( Nissan Motors Great Britain ) and they commissioned its restoration with a UK specialist a few years back. It has done a huge amount of press activity in the UK, with many many journalists test driving it - so I'm surprised that it's still in such good condition, really. Spot the ( deliberate?! ) 'mistake' with the orientation of the front indicator repeaters on the sides of the front wings / fenders? They are mounted 180 degrees to the way that they should be, and this has been pointed out many times to them. Nobody seems to have a screwdriver in their hand at the right time, though....... Thanks for the nice comments about my car :classic: There are some really nice photos of the Goodwood Revival Meeting being put up on the 'net now. I took some shots myself, but nothing as good as these, for example: Stefan Marjoram: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stefanmarjoram/sets/72157622426011398/ 'richebets':http://www.flickr.com/photos/richebetspics/sets/72157622404890046/ Cheers, Alan T.

Matt, I'm sorry I could not answer you more promptly, as I was away for a few days and am now trying to catch up. I'm glad that you didn't buy the 260Z that was on ebay, as I think it would have been a mistake. Yes, the bonnet and tailgate from that late 260Z would have fitted your 240Z, but the doors would not. Cutting it up to use as a donor for chassis / bodyshell parts would have been a lot of work, and many of the sections are different anyway - even if they were sound enough to be used. Have you uncovered the 'air tubes' on your car yet? I'm afraid that if the rot is as bad as you describe ( you mentioned the radiator support panel is bad too ) then you might need to sit down and think about this car as too much of a moneypit to be worth continuing with. Even if you do find the chassis rails, air tubes, rad support and other sheetmetal that you need, it all still needs to be attached properly and you still end up with something made Frankenstein style. It will cost thousands, for sure, and then you need to paint and trim it..... My advice would be for you to consider sourcing a similar-year car with a sound bodyshell to put the RHD parts from the green car onto. If you source a complete LHD car, you will be able to 're-shell' your RHD and save a lot of time and money into the bargain. In the long run, you will be left with something that is better than the possibility of a patched-up mess or even an uncompleted project ( been there, done that! ). There's what I think is a good candidate on ebay in the UK at the moment: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250500841929&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT Although I don't know what that car will eventually sell for ( possibly around £3,000? ) I think it would not take long for you to spend the same amount on your car and for it still to be no better. A pair of good, sound and unrusty 240Z doors will easily change hands for £600 in the UK these days. Add in a sound bonnet and hatch lid and you'll have no change out of £1,000. Professional repair of your originals will likely cost just as much, if not more. I'm betting that most of the suspension components, brackets and pipes on your UK car will also be pretty much rotten. The USA car would likely be much better in that respect too. Don't underestimate what the whole thing can end up costing you if you go ahead with the rusty UK car. Sorry to sound like the messenger of doom, but I'd like to try to guide you away from taking on something that you might never be happy with. Cheers, Alan T.