xs10shl

This point about Nissan's efforts in WRC and IMC is IMHO very much on topic, and I'm happy to contribute. In my research for my exhibit this past weekend, it was quite interesting to see exactly how large an effort Nissan put into competing at the EAS specifically. Barely a decade after the Mobilgas Trial, Nissan showed up to the EAS with a veritable fleet of P510s, and took 6 out of the top 13 spots. They then won it in 1970, 71, 73, 79, 80, 81, and 82, with the last few years arguably being Nissan's most successful rallying years ever. As is indicative from the enormous capital resources Nissan must have poured into the Works teams, they clearly coveted winning specific FIA rallies. Now, I myself am not in a position to say whether that was a smart or poor use of marketing Yen from an economic standpoint, but I'm very glad they made the effort! I made up some rudimentary overview slides for the exhibit, highlighting 8 rally cars and their achievements, which can be downloaded from my site for any who are interested in that sort of thing. Here's what the exhibit looked like, with pictures attached. I'll add at this point that I'm absolutely 100% certain, based on the receipts in my possession and the sleepless nights over the past few days, additionally factoring in the mental toll I endured and cash outlay I spent in getting this exhibit ready, including hotel and travel costs, opportunity costs at work, and family time at home- that producing this exhibit was a certifiably INSANELY POOR DECISION from an economic and mental health standpoint. But hey, I had an absolute blast at the show - it was probably a unique opportunity in my lifetime to do something like this - so the marginal utility was sky-high!

If I may be selfish for the moment and bring the topic away from crankshafts, I'd like to point out that this is actually #70 - if one looks closely, one can see the "6" in the carnet plate, where there should have been a "5" for car #62.

I've spoken to my long-time Nissan mechanic about this very question. His opinion is that the crankshafts were not at all faulty for road-going cars - they were perfectly acceptable when driven in normal, road-going use. But they were not correctly counter-balanced for high-RPM use. He did mention that he's rebuilt engines from low-vin cars with 6-figure mileage on them that contain the non-counterbalanced cranks. I'd venture to say there's confusion between "faulty" and "fitness for expected use"? I'll stop talking about this now - I'm not really helping things - but this conversation was fresh in my mind as I just had it yesterday, before I saw all these posts about it.

Some of the new content that was written for the show below. Thanks again to @HS30-H for editorial services and providing a few pictures.

We arrived at JCCS Long Beach yesterday to monsoon conditions (LA-style, meaning constant drizzle, 90 degree temperatures, and 15MPH winds - oh, the horror!). It was just a bit too windy to set up the booth, and we didn't want to take a chance that all of our newly-made display posters would end up scattered across the show field by morning. Since the car has a number of holes in it from prior uses, we shoved it under the tent for the time being, as the forecasters promised a few good downpours during the night.The weather should be relatively rain-free today, so we're arriving at 6AM to set up, and should be ready by showtime. If there are any fans of the Z at the show today, I hope you come by and say hello. Here's an overview piece written by Ben Hsu. https://japanesenostalgiccar.com/1971-datsun-240z-rallye-monte-carlo-a-history-lost-now-found/

@HS30-H Interesting to see the tubes. Did they run the studded tires with tubes? How about the regular tires? I also ask because tubes tend to give the tires that "rounded profile" look when mounted, and I've always felt that the XP44 tires appear to have a sidewall bulge in some period pictures, indicative of their use. Also, I must say that some of my Kobe Seikos (both the real and the replica mags) do not hold air for long. In 2-3 weeks time, at least one tire is low.

225/70R14's have a diameter of 26.4". Those tires would be ideally suited for lifted rally cars, and provide great ground clearance, but may be too large a tire for my application. The original Dunlop XP44 are NLA as far as I can tell, so I went with Goodyear Wrangler LT195/75R14s which have an outer circumference of 25.5". To my eye, even these Wranglers appear to be just slightly too tall, and may rub once I lower the car to it's Monte-Carlo spec ride height. There are also a few ATV off-road options in 14".

Engine bay.

With respect to the CDI - the car currently has a special points-based distributor on it, which is the same kind as found on another Works car, and is potentially the same as an early L24 distributor, AFAIK. I've mapped out the entire wiring harness as shown below - this harness is in 2 parts (split at the fuse boxes) and has 2 Works part numbers, and date codes of 9/70 and 8/70, respectively. On the assumption that the wiring harness gets installed first, I've used this information to date the Works build as likely being 9/70 to 10/70, which would give the team about 45 days to test and ship the cars off to Monte Carlo. This particular harness contains no additional wiring to accommodate a CDI, as would appear in a Z432 with CDI of the same era. That said, there has been some private discussion about whether a CDI was used via an alternate means, as there is evidence of it's use in similar period Works cars. In the case of my car, it's use would likely be facilitated via a separately wired harness, which is no longer with the car. As to an interface to the existing harness: there is a missing 6" sub harness at the steering column that has been replaced with a later-period custom harness. This could very easily have been the junction point where a CDI could have been connected, as much of the relevant wiring would be there. This is marked as "UNKNOWN" on the wiring diagram. It should be noted that this is just pure speculation at this point. FYI, the above is my most current information, based on what I've already mapped out. It's entirely possible we may find more wiring surprises buried under the dash when we start the restoration process. Barring any revelations re: CDI, I'll likely restore it as-acquired, without it.

@SpeedRoopreviously asked about the Kanri number on the dashboard at the spot where there would normally be a pen holder. It's surmised that this was most likely placed there by a previous owner, as it is not a factory inclusion that appears in any period photos. @HS30-H had clued me into the fact that these rally pen holders were actually still readily available, so I bought several of them with the thought that I'd have to retrofit one with some sort of mount, in order to properly affix it to the dashboard. In stock form, they appear to be designed as clip-ons for a clipboard, or other hard, thin surface. With some samples of the pen holder in-hand, I elected to take a chance and finally remove the Kanri badge, and hopefully re-fashion a new pen holder and custom mount to be placed in the same location. I had always suspected that the Kanri badge was simply a decoration that covered up some form of glue blemish or tear left by the original holder when the car was converted to street use. However, I was happy to be mistaken - after a little careful prying, the badge came off, revealing a precise 1/2" slit and groove that had been cut into the dashboard. The groove fit the new pen holder snugly, so after a little massaging, I managed to situate the new pen holder pretty much as it appeared in period photos. Job done!

Prior to a teardown and proper restoration, I thought it would be worthwhile to put one more event on my calendar - but this time, instead of showing up unannounced, we've scheduled a (very rudimentary, but hopefully informative!) Nissan Works mini-exhibit featuring the car at this year's JCCS at Long Beach in September. I hope to have the opportunity to meet other enthusiasts and rally fans there, and have a chance to share with attendees some of the features that I feel help make the Works cars special to me. JCCS is a great show - probably the best all-Japanese show outside of Japan that I know of, and thankfully it's close enough that we can get there in a day. The pressure is on now to get a exhibit ready, and configure a few remaining details to the car that I've yet to make right. More on that in a bit! https://japaneseclassiccarshow.com/1970-datsun-240-z-works-rally-lightweight-monte-carlo-spec-at-jccs/

Thanks for your inquiry, Marty. Here's an snip from my blog, which covers the basics: Today I'm pretty confident I know most of the big pieces of the car's story. That said, I'm guessing there are still many more pieces to discover. I'll post here what my existing body of research concludes, and if there are any questions, comments, additions (and even rebuttals), I'll take them as they come. TKS33-SA-986 Rally History ------------------------------------- 07/1970 Tub manufacture – 7/1970 to 8/1970 09/1970 Assembly and outfitting (based on wiring harness date codes) 10/1970 Registered with Carnet plate TKS33-SA-986 (approximate time-period) 01/1971 40th Rallye Monte-Carlo (#70 Fall/Wood): 10th Place overall 03/1971 Sold To Rob Janssen – Datsun Nederland (approximate time-period) 04/1971 Zandvoort Paas Races (#61 Janssen): 4th place overall 09/1971 Registered with plate 67-54-RU 11/1971 RAC Rally of Great Britain (#96 Janssen/Dik): DNF - retired Post-1971: I've got no data that it was ever rallied again. This makes some sense, due to the 1972 FIA rule changes which prohibited the use of lightweight body panels on rally cars.

The dash Kanri has a short story, and If I tell all the stories up front, there won't be anything left to discuss in the coming year 😄. I have so much material to get to and share, and I look forward to discussing it all. Thanks for your enthusiasm and interest, much more to come!

Hi @kats I'm glad you are joining the conversation! My Speedo looks exactly like the one you pictured - reading in km/h to 180- as does the 8K Works Tach. Some of the central gauges differed as development advanced. Thankfully, 986's gauges seem to match other 1970-build examples, most notably 8D-420, and it's sister car TKS33-SA-988, so I'm guessing the gauges that are installed are correct for this particular batch of cars.

Here's a close-up of the lower-right corner of the glass, showing the pattern and coverage. It's very fine, to the point where one does not notice it when seated in the cockpit, apart from the main vein going up the middle.

Thanks for the encouragement, @HS30-H! I'm familiar with Kevin's car, and its fascinating to consider that these cars rallied together (one from the front of the pack, and one waaaay in the back!) Although they are only one year apart in assembly, we can already begin to see some product development occurring. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Kevin's must be one of the last lightweight spec cars produced, prior to going to steel and glass?

Ohh, boy ... not 24 hours has gone by, and you unwittingly fire one right between the eyes, LOL. 😄 Let me start by saying this: we could devote an entire thread of many multiple pages of discussion to just this topic. And I'd venture to say that, in the end, we could only conclude that "No one knows for sure". I'll start off with some things that I understand to be true, and then I'll probably have to pass the baton for more input. In an attempt to provide a short summary: Some things that I believe to be true: Nissan made 40 +/- Works Rally cars utilizing, for a lack of a better description, a PZR chassis (Nissan parts-manual-speak for "Z432-R" chassis). My best understanding is that, although Nissan continued to make Works rally cars for the 1972 season and beyond using the same PZR chassis forms, none of these later Works cars were "Lightweight Spec", due to the FIA rules changes for the 1972 season which prohibited thin-gauge panel use, and other lightweight materials, in construction. Some things I just don't know for sure: Of those 40 +/- Works Rally cars, I GUESS is that at-most 20 were "Lightweight Spec". I get to this number by counting the known Works prototypes, known pre-1972 Rally cars, and adding one or two more phantom cars that perhaps no one (including me) knows about. I don't think there's a likelihood that there could be more than 20. If pressed, I'd say there's probably slightly fewer. This count of ~20 is IN ADDITION TO any Z432-Rs (which may or may not be lightweight- see below), which were production cars. But wait, it gets more complicated. What does "Lightweight Spec" really mean? I'm using it in this case to describe a car that was produced, at least in-part, with SOME lightweight panels, and also with some combination of acrylic glass, along with fiberglass doors, hood, and hatch. The reality is more difficult to parse, because it's my understanding that each batch of Works Rally cars were built to a purpose. Even though within each batch of 3 to 4 cars the construction was probably roughly identical, cars built for other races possibly used different panel thicknesses on different parts of the car. Other things I just don't know for sure: I just don't know exactly how many Z432-R's were "Lightweight-Spec" (using my definition above). Certainly several/many of them are. Were they ALL lightweight? This question is a grey area for me, as I've heard different stories. Did they continue making them lightweight after 1971? I'd venture to say they certainly could have, and would have reason to do so; adding to the "lightweight" complication is the fact that Nissan Works was also producing track cars at the time, which is a whole other tangent to the Works program that I know almost nothing about. Ergo, to potentially increase the running-total "Lightweight Spec" count, we'd have to consider the Works race cars in the mix. Certainly more information, corrections, and thoughts to come on this topic.

The left-side cut-out is part of the original rear stamping, but wasn't used. I have personally not seen any period Works pictures where this cut-out was deleted, so I'd venture to say that Nissan did not have a special panel template with it removed. The straight pipes were mounted right under the gas tank, affixed to the tank straps, with additional wire loops affixed to the rear panel. Some Works cars had rubber doughnuts to aid in support. As to my car: it came with only bits and pieces of an exhaust system: a rusty (but thankfully otherwise intact) Works exhaust header, and a few feet of rusted-out custom exhaust, that was not installed on the car. The right-side cut-out was done to the car at some point after the 1971 season by a privateer. I can only presume it was done to accommodate a custom dual exhaust system which went to either side of the fuel tank, instead of under it. There were some old rusty brackets in both side locations that corroborated that theory. They ware almost certainly non-Works, and have since been removed. At this point I should add that although I have photos of all of these features and many more, they are not always necessarily my photos to re-post. Apologies in advance. Shown here is a close-up from the 1972 Monte-Carlo car.

I'll let other folks keep finding the Works pieces (apart from Alan, who can rattle them all off before anyone else gets a turn, LOL!) There are several more items in the dash picture which are not stock, but are common to most/all Works rally cars. Hint: there's one going right down the center of the picture, which can even be seen from a distance.

After a long 4 months, the ZONC 50th Anniversary was upon us! The morning of June 5 brought unseasonably rainy weather, but there was still a great turnout of cars and Z car fans at the Blackhawk Museum. The drizzle was somehow fitting for the look of the rally Z, and provided a light touch of patina, especially when considering its past history of being driven in anger through snow and mud. Below are a few pictures from June 5. It was a wonderful experience to meet so many fellow Z enthusiasts, see so many great Datsuns, and discuss and share our love for our Z cars. We were only too happy with the great reception we received, and were pleased to be able to finally show-and-tell the car’s unique features with fellow rally fans. Thanks to Linda and the ZONC community for putting on a great show. Much more content to follow in the coming days, months, and (gulp) years!

I’m starting this restoration thread for enthusiasts of the early S30 Works rally cars, so they can follow along, and perhaps also provide comments and their own insights as to the very early days of the S30 Works rally program. I additionally hope that others can chime in with comments, questions, corrections, and feedback as we go along. A preamble: this is a thread about researching, documenting and restoring a genuine 1970 Works Rally car. I’ve owned it for many years, but the realities of real life were getting in the way of getting started on a proper restoration. Given the car's provenance, I knew it would be important to get the history and the details as right as I could, given what little is known publicly about the Works program, and the scarcity of remaining Works cars. So I’ve used this time to do as much research as I could on the car's history, collaborate with a few historians (most notably @HS30-H, who needs no introduction), source a few needed parts, and work to provide a more complete pre-restoration snapshot in it’s current unrestored condition, as well as provide a glimpse of what the restored car will resemble when it’s finished. In addition to documenting and research, I've been looking for an appropriate opportunity to show the car publicly under my stewardship for the first time. Given the car’s current condition, it would have to be trailered to a show, which limited my options to “Somewhere on the West Coast". The stars aligned when ZONC announced it’s 50th anniversary meet in Northern CA in February for June 5, 2022. With this as a target date, I set my sights on getting the car as presentable as I could manage, given the time I had available to me. Loose parts were screwed on, dirty pieces were dusted off, and period stickers were researched, ordered, and placed (note: this last step was insanely fun). In my experience, there’s nothing like having a show deadline to motivate owners into getting their cars finished! Enthusiasts, historians, well-wishers, even skeptics and haters (although hopefully not too many of the latter): I look forward sharing this journey with you, and to your comments! 😄

Great pictures, Alan. I'm wondering if it's cost effective to press out a few parts to make a few of these headers. The end result may look too modern, yet still potentially faithful to the original design.

Skip ahead to the noise: https://youtu.be/imsbLkTT9Ac?t=748

This one only goes to 7.5.

Here's my solution for replacing a PS30 Stock CDI with a Pertronix HP box, using the stock harness hookups. It fit neatly on the existing bracket, with the aid of a pair of "hold-down" fender washers. To get the Tach to work, I used an MSD Tach Adapter, as I could not get the Tach to respond to any alternate configurations using just the Pertronix setup alone. The Tach loses accuracy as the RPMs increase, with a 700 RPM difference at red line (reading 6800 at 7500 RPM actual) but for now, that deficiency will have to suffice. The other change I made is to remove the in-line coil resistor from the circuit, which is a simple matter of removing the electrical tape, removing the 8" wire connecting the resistor and the coil, and storing it for later use if needed. I'll probably just mock-up two dummy wires and re-tape it to the main harness to give a stock appearance. Of note, I think one can hookup the stock distributor trigger wires as well, but a prior owner had removed a good chunk of the wiring already, so I just used modern purple/green wires, bypassing the harness hookups. edit: in thinking a little about this tonight, I may consider adding a jumper to "Ign Start" to the +12v switched input of the Pertronix, and monitor the results. The car starts fine without this feature, but it's a little awkward, as some power is disabled during cranking (by the design of the ignition switch), which causes the Tach to jump twice.