HS30-H

I certainly don't know of any exceptions. All the Works LHD 240Z rally cars that I'm aware of had the transposed handbrake lever position and a bias valve. This was eventually paired with a 'Fly Off' function for fast Special Stage starts and - later - hydraulic actuation. There were even double servo cars. Strong and effective hand brakes are still one of the black arts of fast rally driving. On the S30 its not that simple, as the whole mechanism needs to be mirror-imaged as well as the tunnel sheetmetal for the mounts. It also required custom a console. I've been replicating all this on my LHD Works car 'evocation'/'tribute' (or whatever it is...) and it takes some doing. Perhaps this is a clue as to why Nissan didn't go to the trouble of having two different handbrake/E-brake lever positions for the production cars.

Bravo Ian. Beautiful job! However, I reckon Nissan got it right with the respective footrest finishes. The chrome version is perfectly suited to the CSP311s mid Sixties charm and style, coordinating with the other brightwork in the cabin and on the dash, whereas the S30 has an altogether more muted, darker and business-like cabin ambience. They fit.

Here is, perhaps, a reminder for us of the elasticity of the 'Series 1' term... I'm not a fan! Wasn't it only the very first (whatever that means...) few HLS30Us that were shipped without carpets and ended up getting the locally made versions? I have a 4/70 HLS30U and it certainly had factory-fitted carpet when new. The jute section in question looks like a factory piece to me (?). If it is, then I'd expect it to have - at least - the cut-outs for the possibility of a passenger foot rest bar in the same 'tits-on-a-bull' (pardon my French) way that the tar mat does on my 4/70 HLS30U. The cut-outs at the rear certainly look to be in the right place, and the right shape, to accommodate the Japanese market forward seat mounts. Plenty of other stuff on these cars is there only because they were designed with other variants in the mix, after all.

Yes, I noticed the carpet section was LHD format but I was specifically addressing your question about the jute section next to it. Do you agree with my thoughts on the cut-outs in the rear end of the jute being there to accommodate the Japanese market forward seat mounts (and hence 'universal' jute pattern)?

They look like they are to accommodate the Japanese market forward seat mounts. Below photo shows left (passenger) side floor of Japanese market RHD car:

I believe that jute section is wrongly positioned. It appears to be upside down and back-to-front, if that makes sense. That long oblong cutaway at the front is for the Japanese market seat mounts, whilst the more square cutouts at the rear are for the passenger footrest bar mounts.

To wit:

Some of the details seen on artist Hosokawa san's cutaway are almost exactly the same as seen on '8D-420' for the Auto Sport January 1971 colour feature and fold-out poster. Note in particular the identical positioning of the wheel brace and jack spindle on top of the spare wheels, which seems unlikely to be replicated on a different day/car. Clearly Hosokawa san had access to the car, but also ended up having to 'guess' some of the details that he could not see/sketch/photograph, or which he perhaps forgot to note at the time. Myself and a couple of others have long scratched our heads about details like the missing/invisible exhaust manifold, the strange and truncated shape of the transmission, the too-square 100 litre fuel tank and the bizarre shape of the moustache bar, as well as what you have already pointed out. '985', being Aaltonen's car (their lead and star driver in the rally program) and also placing highest of the Works team cars in the '71 Monte, was an obvious choice to mock up for the magazine's cutaway poster. So, I think the cutaway is a composite of more than one car, with a few mistakes and omissions. There's a long thread on the Auto Sport (UK) Nostalgia Forum which documents and discusses the work of cutaway artists like Hosokawa san, and there are always many mistakes/omissions/anomalies to be pointed out. I think it is a hugely difficult task to draw one of these things and I'm in awe of the cutaway artists' skill, so I don't want to nitpick too much...

Trolling? Remind yourself of the title you chose for this thread. "Fake Z..."? You seem to talk about race cars a lot, but I get the impression you don't know all that much about the world of motor racing. Yes, the cars taking part in Japan's Super GT series are nothing like what you can buy in the showroom. You seem dismayed, but also surprised? Bizarre.

Glovebox base chalkings have become one of my first calls when I see one of these cars in person. Getting down on your hands and knees with your head in the passenger side footwell often requires an explanation to the owner... Clearly Nissan Shatai didn't really need to put much information - if at all - on North American market variant dashes during assembly (although that letter 'A' seems to pop up as above, as well as 'H'), but other LHD market variants certainly got their destination market chalked up either in 'Romaji' or Kana. So did export RHD markets. For the domestic market, Nissan Shatai noted the sub-variant type there (probably indicating content difference) so your 1970 Fairlady Z would have a chalk mark indicating that it was a 'Standard'/'Z-S'/'S' model rather than a 'Deluxe'/'Z-D'/'D' model. I've seen several variations for the same thing, so I wonder if it was an informal - rather than standardized - notation by the assembly line workers? I see 'S' and then '30', plus something else on yours that I can't make out. Frustrating!

I'd be wary of using that particular car as any kind of textbook example. The vented quarters don't make sense in context with the rest of the bodyshell. In fact, the *opposite* scenario (ie, non-vented quarters on an otherwise 'airflow' type later bodyshell) would be less unusual in PZR terms. Many of the PZR-specific body pressings were made in batches and there were no vented type quarter pressings made for the PZR. There are examples of the early - solid/unvented - PZR quarters being cut to accept the vented quarter 'Z' emblems. Some of the work being carried out on that car has made me, and a few others, wince. I'd like to see such an important and rare car mounted on a Celette or equivalent type body jig fixture before he started unzipping any seams and spotwelds.

Nothing to do with Nissan. The wishbone braces are a personal, aftermarket, addition 40+ years after the car was made. A 'TOR CO' moment for you, I'm afraid. Go and sit in the corner until the school bell rings.

Something unique about PS30-SB rear suspension? It'll be news to Nissan too...

The hex bolts (technically screws) that go through the four tubes are quite unusual in the Nissan Engineering Standard. Hard to find. Bear in mind that the Nissan factory option/Sports Option/Race Option 'Safety Bar' was subtly different than the versions used by the Works team. Vertical drop base mounts in particular.

Still, it is only a hunch. The key point is that damage in testing was a distinct possibility, if not inevitable. We know '8D-420' was an early Works rally test car, and that it had been used fairly hard before and during the AUTO Sport magazine feature. After that it was clearly spruced up (and the black anti-dazzle paint added to the top front surfaces) before the DRIVER magazine feature. There might have been some haste involved.

My thinking - and it is just a possibility, I have no evidence - is that because it was an early lightweight '240ZR' (featuring all the PZR lightweight tricks) it would have been fitted with the PZR type lightweight front fenders. I believe these required the side marker/repeater holes to be stamped out in a separate process, and it just may not have been done. I remember there being one or two instances of factory race cars like this. Australian market cars didn't have the holes stamped either, which perhaps shows us that it was indeed a separate process in the front fender manufacturing. Just a theory. I've seen evidence of hand-cutting features on other Works cars too. Yes, I saw it twice during the long restoration process. Amazing work by Ando san, and a real University diploma course in PZR-specific details for me. I have a huge amount of reference photos too. Fascinating stuff. I don't want to spoil the fun, so I'll keep quiet...

Thanks Kats. I haven't got that issue (I will have to track it down now), but I have a small collection of DRIVER magazines from that period. The covers are always interesting and fun, and there was always an amazing amount of content in each issue. The journalists must have been working so hard. Nice balance of consumer-motorist (commuter), leisure motorist (trips, family, driving holidays) and sport motoring too. Their back-to-back group tests were very thorough. They always seemed to show 'back stage' and unusual shots in their motorsports coverage, which I love. 'Reportage' style:

Notice it has no emblem ('Datsun') on that left fender either. Possible damage repair? I do see the join line between the fender and headlamp cowl, but it is very faint. Possibly a lot of paint, and - as above - suggesting a repair? Largely due to that 1/71 Auto Sport article, '8D-420' has long been one of my dream cars. Big influence on the project I'm currently building.

In the 1/71 Auto Sport feature, '8D-420' does not have the satin/matt black anti-reflective paint on the upper surfaces of the front fenders, bonnet and cowl. I'm guessing your photos show it at a later date? That oil filter looks very red. Special type? At one point the Works team were using orange FRAM oil filters (certainly during the 1971 RAC Rally here in the UK) but this doesn't look like a FRAM. Is the article from a 1971 issue of MOTOR FAN Magazine Kats?

Yes! Kanri number '8D-420', as shown in the January 1971 issue of Auto Sport Japan. Wonderful car! This time on 'Trade'/Test temporary license plates no less. Issued in Yokohama? Factory test car.

Certainly the bigger battery was standard on Euro & UK models too, so that captive nut was used for the battery frame. I have the same on my '70 Fairlady Z-L, and have fitted the larger size battery, so use the captive nut accordingly for the battery frame. It just looked to me like it could have been a candidate for another cable clamp point when using the smaller (Japan size) battery, which stands away from the firewall. I think you've got it! Noted accordingly.

I agree that the PZ-specific stand-off bracket was designed to hold both battery cables at that point (in order to route them away from the accel linkage, as you say). I see many stand-off brackets that are bent up and misshapen (probably because owners/mechanics were seeking access to the accel linkage) and the bracket needs to be in its original shape to route the cable properly. I have also seen variation in the cable earthing point (again, probably due to actions of owners/mechanics) so that will also change the routing... About that mystery third clamping point: How about the captive nut on the firewall which is right over the battery? I feel like it is ideally positioned to hold ONE battery cable as it comes off the battery terminal - the one furthest to the outside of the car on the left - but seems rarely used. Possibly because of different batteries being retro-fitted?

Stock PS30 battery cable routing should be very similar to stock S30 and S30-S battery cable routing for cars made during the same period. The two cable run from the battery, along the firewall at the same level, over the top of the bonnet/hood catch bracket, and then turn down towards the bellhousing and starter motor - with their last holding point on the firewall being the dedicated stand-off clamp which is quite similar to the Mater Vac hose bracket. Small bolt-on clamps hold the cables to the firewall. I think people started routing the cables through the catch bracket because it acted as an extra guide, and perhaps looked a little neater. Strictly speaking, it is not correct.

at the "fake" hyperbole. You're a little late to be complaining about Super GT's regulations, as what we see now (a shared 2-litre turbocharged 4-cyl engine and tube frame chassis) has been the norm in the GT500 class since 2014. We've had at least seven years of Nissan 'GTRs' running that spec, which is even more poignant. That's just the way it is these days. Same for all the major manufacturers. Don't I remember you waxing lyrical and whimsically about the Z32-era IMSA GTO 300ZX Twin Turbo race cars? What did those tube-framed, plastic-bodied race cars "tell" you about the road going models? Nothing much, I'd say. "The Original Racing Z" was a Fairlady Z 432-R, a limited production homologation special with lightweight body pressings, plastic windows, 100 litre fuel tank, LSD and a 24 valve twin cam engine. So yes, basically 'stock'...

Not wishing to steal Kats' thunder here, but I have previously posted scanned pages from the aircon section of the 1969 'Z1' Nissan Service Shuho booklet and perhaps this is a good time to post them again. It seems to me that many early Z enthusiasts do not know that factory aircon was part of the original 270KK/'Maru Z'/S30-series design, even though the tell-tales are there for us to see on every early car - Export or Domestic. I'm surprised more people do not notice them... A true 'Fully Loaded' early Z with all the bells and whistles would have been quite something in late 1969. World Class.