HS30-H

Mike ( Zedrally ), I remain unconvinced that a Factory-built G-Nose was ever made in metal. I've spent a long time looking into the history and details of the HS30-H and all the Factory Homologated race body parts that were used, as well as some of the privateer team and semi-Works team efforts in Japan. I've never even heard a sniff of a metal G-Nose. Some race body parts were made in aluminium ( especially for the PGC10 and KPGC10 Works race cars ), but hardly anything. It was a very skilled job to make them in small quantities ( as opposed to making press tools and stamping them out - which would have taken huge investment ). Nissan inherited some good connections from Prince, and one of them was a very good network of FRP specialists who were capable of limited-volume manufacture of the Sports Option FRP body parts for all the Nissan race cars and homologation specials. Nissan also had a fair bit of history with FRP of their own - dating from the late Fifties. It was quite logical for them to make stuff like the G-Nose panels from FRP - rather than metal ( either Aluminium or Steel ). They also had the connections to make Urethane and ABS body mouldings. Your friend seems to think that the Factory G-Nose was metal ( he doesn't say what type of metal in his quote ) but he also seems to be talking about something that was not actually attached to a car when he was considering buying it. I have no idea what this was or where it came from - but it sounds as though it was in Australia. Now that its been mentioned it will plant a seed of doubt in some people's minds that it might be true, and that all the FRP G-Noses attached to the REAL ZG were somehow non-original or some kind of second generation. He also states that many copies were made in FRP / GRP - and this is of course true. However, the discussion started out in relation to genuine Factory parts - so they are just a sidebar to the story. Maybe somebody made a G-Nose replica in metal ( that would have been quite a job ) but I don't think it was Nissan sanctioned. Lots of cars tend to get labelled as "ZG" when they are in fact nothing of the sort. There's a big failing in the Z enthusiast community outside of Japan that this kind of thing is not more strictly policed. Simply bolting a replica G-Nose onto a Z does not make it a ZG, and come to that taking the genuine ZG nose and Overfenders off of a genuine ZG does not make it an "ordinary" Z again. Even attaching the genuine panels from a REAL ZG to a non ZG will not make it a real ZG. This has got to be quite clear. Only the Factory could create a GENUINE HS30-H ZG. This is always quite clear in Japan - and if anyone tries to sell a car as a genuine ZG they have to make sure that it is indeed a real one. Most vendors that are selling a replica ZG or a Z with a G-Nose in Japan are very careful to make the point that it is not a real one. I can't imagine that in the Porsche enthusiast community a replica 911RS would be sold as a genuine car when it was quite clearly a replica; somebody would blow the whistle. Of course, fakes exist. However, passing something off as something it is not - and knowing this to be the case - is fraudulent. I'm building a replica 432R at the moment, but simply installing an S20 engine and all the other detail parts ( and there are literally hundreds of differences ) will NOT make it a 432R. It was, and always will be, an S30 Z-L. I have to be very careful to try to make everyone understand that I am building a replica and not a fake, and try to make it quite clear every time the car is discussed. Even so, I have still heard third-hand gossip here in the UK that I am building a "fake" - as though I am trying to fool anyone that it is a real one. Its even been put into a magazine article without my prior knowledge ( it was photographed at the paint shop ) and captioned as the real thing. This is all very dangerous. So if I seem overly pedantic about making the distinction between genuine Factory-built / sanctioned parts and the myriad aftermarket and 'replica' parts out there - then its true. I probably am. I can't see any other way to defend the real thing from the replicas and fakes. What you believe is up to you, but I feel honour-bound to tell you what I know and hope that you will at least take his claim with a pinch of salt. Anecdotal evidence will not be enough to convince me - I would need to see documentary evidence that this existed and that it was made either by or for the Factory. If it wasn't, then it could be anything. Alan T.

Sorry, but Goertz did not design the S30-series Z. I also don't see very much similarity between the BMW 507 and the S30-series Z. If Goertz can claim input on the A550X prototype, and it was shown to Toyota by Yamaha ( not Nissan ) after Nissan blew it out in '64 - then how come Goertz does not claim the design of the MF10 Toyota 2000GT? Goertz does not want to be connected with something that was seen to be a failure ( even though the Toyota was a great car ). Kazuo Kimura had just as much input on the A550X prototype as Goertz did. Actually, the A680X prototype looked more like an E-Type than the A550X - and the A680X had more similarities with the S30-series Z than the A550X did. Yoshihiko Matsuo and his team would have been influenced by the E-Type, amongst other references ( and he has name-checked the E-Type ) and it is they who designed the S30-series Z car. They also designed the A680X prototype. I think the Goertz myth is going to go on forever now. Nissan should have nipped it in the bud before he brought that court case and the Nissan legal department settled out of court with an ambiguous statement ( which Goertz was happy with - but was a lot more than he deserved ). I am no Goertz fan, as you can tell. Alan T.

Gav, I feel like I'm under "Friendly Fire"................ When did I "hold back" about the two different models of G-Nose? This is just something that I happen to know and I did not know anybody else was asking about it specifically. Mike ( Zedrally ) posted that his mate had told him about it and I mentioned back that I was surprised that somebody else knew about it. What's the problem? You never asked me a direct question about it did you? Did I miss a question or something? I could wax lyrical for ages about the differences between the genuine ZG and other models - but it'd have to be in response to a direct question, otherwise how would I know who wanted to know?????? If you perceive me as being a smug sod who likes to lord it over knowing stuff that other people might not know, then so be it. You may well be right. However - in my defence I might say that I've been partially pushed into a kind of seige mentality in an ( albeit hopeless ) stand against people who think they know everything and don't want to learn any more. I'm particularly talking about the Z scene here in the UK now. I've been somewhat marginalised by inverted snobbery and I've even had the indignity of having my car vandalised at a Z car show. That might show the kind of mentality that I've been up against over here. I've had some of these people trying to poke holes in my car and spread rumours that its not even a "real" ZG ( like they would know how to tell....... ). To arm myself against this kind of thing, I've made a big effort to try to find out all I can. This was hard work. It took a great effort on my part and I had to do a lot of research. I didn't have it handed to me on a plate. If that tends to make me a bit precious with the info then I can't help my personality. But if anyone shows any REAL interest or thirst for knowledge about the things I'm interested in, then I will honestly do my very best to help out. I've seen posts on other boards where people claim to have real ZGs - but its quite clear that they do not once you look at photos of them. I'm not going to go and burst their bubbles unless they ask me specifically about it. I have a good few reference points now on how to identify a real one, and the two different types of G-nose moulding is part of that information. I've had somebody here in the UK showing me a picture of the later type and telling me that my car cannot be a "real" ZG because it does not have the ducting in the picture. Seems like some people really would like to twist the knife. I suppose its ultimately up to you what you think about me, but I'd prefer that you knew a bit more about what makes me tick before you had a go at me about something like that. Taking criticism from someone who you respect is pretty hard, I must say. Alan T.:disappoin Christ, I even used a Smilie.............

Hi Enrique, Hmmmm, that's a good point - but your picture was of a really late E-Type ( Series 3 or later? ) and that was styled a fair time after Matsuo and his team would have been doing the S30. Matsuo has name-checked the E-Type as a reference-point in the design process ( in fact Nissan bought or otherwise borrowed one for the design team to have a look over didn't they? ) - but that would have been either a Series 1 or 2. I always thought the Series 1 coupe was the best ( I always choose coupes over open cars ), and the rest were pretty ugly............... especially the 2+2 version. I like the ( partially obscured ) caption on the photo, by the way! I think the Ferraris ( 275 / 365 et al ) look closer to the S30 design in the end. Good point by 2ManyZs too. I have no idea what they are putting in the tea at the Nissan Design HQ canteen - but its sure making things come out looking a bit less exciting than they used to..... Alan T.

Geoff, I really like posts like yours. That's what made me take the bait! I too have permanently got my tongue planted firmly in my cheek. My dry and boring style of writing probably doesn't quite get this across. Maybe I should use more Smilies. Keep 'em coming.................. Alan T.

The 365 Daytona debuted at the Paris Motor Show in late 1968 - so Pininfarina would have had to have had a man on the 'inside' at Nissan if they had copied the S30-series Z............. Yoshihiko Matsuo has mentioned in interviews that he was a big fan of many products of the big Italian styling houses ( aren't we all?! ) during the Sixties. If you look at the Ferrari 275 you can see a lot of cues for cars such as the S30-series Z and indeed lots of other stuff, and its clear that Matsuo and his team would have been influenced by cars such as these. In fact I think Matsuo has namechecked the 275 as an influence on his taste, and he only got the chance to go further with this when the ZG debuted in late '71. I think its probably fair to say that almost ALL automotive designers and stylists would have been looking towards Italy during this period, and would have been influenced by what they saw. I don't know how far the Italian houses were influenced by what they themselves saw in other designs from other countries - but I'd have to say it was probably pretty peripheral ( try saying that while you are eating............... ). Japanese manufacturers were naturally looking to Italy, as the acknowledged masters of automotive styling cool, right from the mid-Fifties. Indeed, by the late-Fifties Prince had already paid for design consultants from Italian styling houses to help them with the Skyline range. I doubt if Matsuo and his team would have seen what the 365 looked like until at least early to mid '68 - and by that time the S30-series Z was already looking pretty much as it was going to look at launch. More a case of great minds thinking alike than copying I would have thought........... Alan T.

ps I seem to remember we had a thread going a few months back ( last year? ) discussing kerb weight / dry weight etc. for the different models in different markets and the differences between them all. No idea where it was exactly, but you might try the search function on "weight" or something similar to find it. Government departments are notoriously crap at entering the correct details for vehicles into their records. My 1970 Fairlady project car was privately imported to the UK back in the mid Eighties. The DVLA here decided that they knew exactly what it was, despite what evidence was presented to them. According to them, I am now the proud owner of a "1970 Fairlady Turbo". The dumwits. Alan T.

Be careful here, as the normal definition of "Tare" weight for a VEHICLE is its 'dry' weight with no passengers. So just the car without anybody ( even the driver ) and with no fuel in the tank. I use these kinds of terms at work, and despite the fact that we use them all the time there is still sometimes some confusion over what they mean. In some countries, they interpret them differently - even though the whole idea is that they are an internationally recognised standard............... When 'Tare' is used in the freight business it usually means the weight of the packaging or the container - without the goods / contents. I think the word is originally from the French language, and derives from an Arabic term. Useless information dept. Alan T.

As a Englishman I feel duty bound to inform you Sir that Sidney Allard was one of my countrymen. God save the Queen. Alan T. ( and yes, I know Sidney used American V8 engines in some of his cars! ).

Alfa, The guy is a friend of Mike's who astounded me by actually knowing that there were two different models of G-nose type ( early and late - just detail differences but very important to us penile extension experts ). As I said, I thought I was the only person outside Japan who had a handle on that. Nobody else I've ever conferred with outside Japan seems to know bugger all about them. A kindred spirit. Hooray! You lot are fresh as daisies, but I'm fit to kip. Time to climb the wooden hill to Bedfordshire again. 'Night all. Alan T.

Mike, that car is going to be loooooong. Have you got garages that long in Australia? Alan T.

I tell you what, nothing would surprise me about these bloody cars any more. Anyone who tells you he knows all about them is delusional ( and yeah, that includes me ). I just hope your mate wasn't referring to something that he can't back up with evidence. If that's the case, then we won't get anywhere with it. As the owner of a genuine HS30-H ( had to get that in at some point didn't you Mr T.? ) I have made it my business to find out as much about them as possible. That includes lots of research about Nissan's interesting subcontracting for their FRP parts and the factories that made them. I have to say a sheetmetal G-nose would be a piece of art, and even just the lower panel would have to be made in several pieces and then butt-welded together. That I would like to see. Not impossible, but in the scheme of things, not very likely. I went on a work-related visit to the Morgan factory last year. We were covering the Aero 8 for the magazine, and I was very interested to see and hear that they are forming many of the aluminium sheetmetal components using a subcontractor who vacuum-forms them. This is aerospace technology applied to cars. They said that they can form accurate double-curvature aluminium panels at low cost, and save much time over some poor old bugger slaving over an English Wheel for a whole day just knocking up one part. That's the 21st Century for you; Vacuum-formed aluminium Morgans. I hope this turns out to be an ear blunder on your part, Mike. If this guy is the same guy who actually knew that there were two different models of G-nose, then I don't know what we'll do. He was the first non-Japanese bloke that I have ever heard about who knew that little chestnut. Hats off to him. I thought I had that one sewn up and was dead smug about it............. Alan T.

Sod the Bex, I just cracked open another big can of Kronenbourg 1664 - "La Premiere Biere Francaise". Please God make me right about the sheetmetal G-nose story...... Alan T ( hic.... )

OK Mike, you can have the new VIN prefix if you like - but PLEASE, no more sheetmetal G-nose stories. I'm already on happy pills as it is. Alan T. ( don't suppose your mate can back up that sheetmetal G-nose story can he? That might cheer me up a little ).

Mike, please ask your friend what on earth he has been drinking. If he thinks that the genuine G-noses, or any prototype or race-version thereof was sheetmetal then I'm not sure what I can do or say to convince him otherwise. The poor man must have been seriously misinformed, or eats far too much cheese before he goes to sleep. Sorry, but this will not wash. There's a danger with these cars and their history ( and the large holes therein ) that anybody can say anything and it might get taken for the truth, or at least not proved to be untrue. You can ignore what I say if you like, but I want to state most forcefully that this story is NOT true. Blimey, I nearly had a heart attack when I saw that. I'm going to have to have a little lie down now. Alan T.

Opel GT?

Amen to that Mr C. Mike, you have almost certainly got a "B" type 5-speed donor rather than the ( shall we say, less common in the USA ) "A" type 5-speed. To make sure, have a look at the sticks and the bellhousings; the "A" type has a straight stick and removeable bellhousing. The "B" type has a "bent" stick and the one-piece bellhousing-primary gearhousing casting. You're doing things slightly differently to the normal scenario here. Usually its the case that people with earlier cars are asking if the later tranny will fit. On the shells that originally came with "A" type 4-speeds ( and cars with "A" type 5-speeds which were not officially imported to the USA market ) the issue is with the positioning of the shift lever in relation to the surrounding sheetmetal. Usually a little cutting is required. However, your 280Z will have originally come with a "B" type transmission - so there should be no fitment issues there. In fact, the transmission that you are putting into the car is probably younger than the car itself. Make sure that you use the correct throwout arm, bearing and collar. The best way to do this is to keep the clutch unit and all the throwout bearing pieces together as a unit, and not mix and match. Good luck, Alan T.

I don't know what that badge / emblem on the '74 Tokyo show car was, but I suspect it might have been something to do with the Fuel Injection spec. of the engine. Nissan were ( understandably ) quite proud of this, and the car on the stand at the show was probably the 'highest' spec. version ( and hence the most expensive ) Z available up to that point. In this case, it might have actually been fitted with the Auto trans too - so there's a possibility that the emblem was a type of Nissan Matic badge that never made it into production, as Mike suggested. The G-Nose was dropped after '73 - so that never made it through to production either. Therefore the car at the show was something of a concept car, and would not have had a special production code or 'new' type VIN prefix. There was no such thing as a "ZGRS-30" VIN - so we better be careful that Mike's dream car doesn't get written into the history books as something that was ever officially produced! As far as I am aware, that car was never shown outside Japan and does not exist any longer. The Japanese-market 2/2 badges ( they always call this model the "2 by 2" in Japan, rather than the "2 plus 2" ) were - as Alfadog suggested - placed on the front ( mesh ) grille. I've also seen them on the rear spoilers of Japanese-market cars, but as the rear spoiler was an Option part, these would have been put on by the owner or the dealer. This explains the different mounting positions of rear spoiler emblems that you sometimes see on Japanese-market cars. There were a few Japanese-market 2/2 models privately imported to the UK in the mid Seventies - so somebody here must have thought that they were worth having too. If they were bought at a bargain price in Japan ( and in many cases brought back from Japan - transported for free - by US servicemen ) it would have seemed a good deal I would have thought. I've recently seen a picture of a prototype / pre-prod 2/2 undergoing road testing in Japan. The photo was taken in 1971. We know that the 2/2 was designed alongside the 2-seaters in the late Sixties, but held back while sales and production concentrated on the 2-seaters ( see previous posts on the 2+2 threads ). Seems that they were evaluating and testing some cars way before they actually started full production. Years not months. So Mike, do you think your car is a proper "Export" model or a Japanese-market model? Maybe I haven't been following the thread properly, as I'm still confused! Alan T.

I think Steve's estimate of roughly 700 cars over a two month period could well be quite a good ballpark figure - BUT, only for ( RHD ) HS30 prefixed VINS, which would include Japanese-market models that became available from late '71. After that period, production of HS30 models started to really ramp up. As far as its possible to tell, HS30 models never got into the sausage-factory mode of production that the HLS30 models did. The markets for the HS30 models were a lot greener than the USA market, and suffered from a fairly slow retail take-up in comparison to the LHD models ( a fairly complicated combination of factors was at work - including high retail cost due to Import taxation, a bad economic outlook, and possibly some brand prejudice too ). The Factory had its work cut out producing enough cars for the USA / North American market too, so the right-hookers tended to get put through the lines in a rather hap-hazard fashion linked to demand and convenience. I think we can imagine what it must have been like. I'm becoming more and more wary of quoting ANY production figures for these cars, and I think the figures for the RHD models are particularly dodgy. Lots of people seem to think they have some kind of handle on them, but I reckon they are quoting figures that have been guesstimated or plain made up. Nissan themselves have always been some of the worst culprits for mis-information in this department. I think I have about six different sets of year-on-year and model-by-model prod. figures from different Nissan-published or Nissan-provided sources, and I think ALL of them are inaccurate. To be honest, its probably only the USA / North American market cars that can have fairly reliable production figures / dates quoted for them. The cars that arrived in the USA / North American market were fairly well documented from the beginning, and had a proper branch of Nissan controlling the Import operation. Contrast this with other markets, where franchises and licensed importers were the norm, and its not surprising that the situation for the RHD cars is quite different. Add to this the oft-muted but hard to pin down rumours in Japanese enthusiast circles that RHD production figures were fudged and tweaked slightly, and you start to get more inkling that all is not as it might seem to be. Local and national clubs sometimes seem to have a fairly good handle on what, when and how many cars were sold into their market from new - but these are not always gospel either. I'm always puzzled by the American auto industry tradition of giving cars 'model' years. I think this confuses the issue when talking about Z cars in particular. I used to own a few American cars, so I'm familiar with the system and its logic. But as far as I am concerned, the only thing that matters when dating a car is the month and year it was made. If I could get the day and the time as well I'd be even happier! Anything else is just a local perception that came about because salesmen want to sell cars, and making them sound more modern or younger is to their advantage. That quote from Keith above is a good example: "My 71 has a production date of 11/70". I understand how this way of thinking came about, and that it isn't going to stop - but I DO think it can lead to some confusion when dating and pinning down the spec. on certain cars. Reading that kind of statement from outside the USA, it can appear quite illogical. I don't trust the production dates stamped onto the car's tags either ( I know that figures were tweaked slightly at the Factory to make some cars appear younger than they really were ) and in fact the Japanese-market and the UK-market cars had no official manufacturing date marked on them at all. Many of the Japanese Z specialists and enthusiasts that I have contact with are much more phlegmatic about the actual production dates of their cars. They don't like to try to attempt to be too accurate about the actual month of production, but tend to allow a combination of certain dating features and the VIN number speak for themselves. If this still leaves the actual month of production unclear, then so be it. I know it might sound rather un-Japanese - but they seem to accept that pinning down the absolute truth about RHD production dates and quantities is a fairly hopeless task. Quotes of RHD production figures can be wildly inaccurate. Try www.cybersanford.net for an amusing stab at these ( hello Bob - if you're tuning in, and no offence intended - as I'm sure that you got them from somewhere in good faith, and got that "An American car - made in Japan" quote thrown in for free ). I own a Japanese-market Fairlady S30 ( VIN number "S30-03761" ) which was sold in Tokyo in mid-1970 ( I have the original bill of sale ). According to the figures quoted on the cybersanford homepage, my car is very rare indeed! All in all, I just don't think its possible to be as accurate with the RHD figures as it is with the LHD figures. At some point we have to accept that fact and just do the best job we can based on the evidence that can be put together. I thought I was starting to get a handle on all this over the last few years, but its been dawning on me recently that if the Japanese enthusiasts and specialists think I'm on a hiding to nothing, then there must be something in what they say................ All part of the attraction and mystery of these cars, I think. I'm sitting here writing this as a kind of personal antidote to the wall-to-wall war coverage. My hobby is a refuge that I do not want the troubles of the world to invade. Peace and love everyone, Alan T.

Steady on George, that might be taking it a bit too far......... I'm sure that the people at Haynes knew very well what they were doing - but you might need to keep in mind that some workshop manuals can tend to offer information on a "need to know" basis. ie - if they think you don't really need to know, then they might not put it in the manual.......... I can assure you that all of the UK-market cars came with the 5-speed ( and the Auto option was a VERY rare choice ), and the first of these had the "A" type. Your car ( which we think is a '73 don't we? ) would have had the "B" type 5-speed. I'm not sure if your car got an even later transmission along with its L28 engine transplant ( the gear ratios on UK-market 280ZX models were different from those in the earlier "B" boxes ) - so only a bit of research will uncover that. Rest assured that you would indeed not have noticed much useful improvement with the 4.1 ratio diff in comparison with the 3.9 ratio. All the best, Alan T.

Lachlan, There's a very good chance that you will be better at maths than I am ( I'm an old git now, you know............. ). I was trying to give a figure in US Gallons ( not Imperial Gallons ) - so that it would be easier to understand for the majority. Is that right - 3.79 Litres = 1 US Gallon? I know that 4.546 Litres = 1 Imperial Gallon..................... If you want to work it out for yourself and check up on my maths, I usually pay around 97-98p per Litre of 98 Ron "Super Unleaded" ( that's £0.97 to £0.98 ) here in the central London area. The £STG to $US exchange rate is roughly $1.60 = £1 at the moment. It's so expensive that I don't even want to think about it too much. Alan T.

The price I'm paying for 98 ron here in central London works out at roughly $3.75 ( USD ) per Gallon ( US Gallon, that is ). As Fred said, over here in Europe we know that a very large proportion of that is Excise Duty. Modern Governments use the motorist as a cash cow, and very little of the revenue that they raise from motoring-related taxation goes back into the road system or its upkeep. Its all being used to prop up other areas of the fiscal budget. The Government ( on a local and national level ) cannot actually afford the reality of a decrease in the use of the automobile, despite their propaganda telling us that we should all be getting on public transport. If we all did that the country would fall apart. Alan T.

George, Your particular car would have come from the Factory with the FS5C71B ( sometimes nicknamed the "bent stick" ) transmission. The "A" type ( "straight stick" ) was standard on the earlier UK-market HS30 models - but not on yours. Is your Mum's car an S12 or an S13 Silvia? Be careful, as the diffs are not always a straight swap for the R180 that I presume is still in your car. And if the diff currently in your car is the 3.9 ratio ( as it should be for a UK-market car ) then you will really not notice a huge difference if you fit a 4.1................ Alan T.