Carl Beck

I'll never forget it - when I was about 9 or 10 my Dad gave me a little model of a 1954 Ferrari roadster... I loved the look of it - and I've been a sports car person ever since.

Thanks for Posting the pictures. I'm curious - where did you come across them? I only saw four or five people take pictures of the sign. FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Guys: Thanks for the kind comments. Parked on the other side of the Z's was one of my favorite newer cars, an Aston Martin DB-S... (window sticker is ONLY $265,000.00). So they had the "less expensive" cars parked together - . Behind and a couple rows over was another of my favorites - a BMW Z08 in Metallic Blue... I was certainly glad to see ZWOLF and Frank there. Another friend from Tampa was supposed to bring a Vintage Z and/or a 69 Production Year Z as well - but at the last minute a schedule conflict resulted in a no show. The organizer of the event really wanted to see more Classic Z's there this year, and most of the owners of the Ferrari's etc that I talked to - all had a great appreciation for and even knowledge about the 240-Z's. The Sign: ZWOLF is correct - the sign was completed, finally - and I picked it up at 8:00AM. The "sign" project was a first pass, and it was a totally screwed up process. What you see is NOTHING like the sign I had in mind... So I'll be taking another pass at that. I allowed a week to get the sign done... and it wound up being a rush job in spite of all efforts to coordinate. I will also tell you that standing off a bit watching the car and the people that looked it over - the sign has way too much information in words.. It was a huge show, and not too many people actually took the time to read all the words.. Lesson Learned.. Next one will have far more pictures and far fewer words... I've also now broke down and purchased my own copy of Adobe Illustrator - so I can do my own layouts, and not have to depend on other Graph Artists... (large prints require vector graphics file formats). kinfish ask: "Was the infamous, high speed, 200+mph, $1M+ purchase price also on display?" Only on the window stickers of a few of the new cars on display. I have to say that a very nice lady that owned one of the Bugatti Veyrons was very gracious showing us (my Wife, Daughter and I) her car, giving detailed technical and performance spec.'s and even offered to let my daughter sit in the car. The owner said she was a member of the Orlando Bugatti Club.... I remarked that they must have a very small membership list, and she said; "oh no - we have about 15 members now". 26th Z's last picture - was one of the most impressive cars there IMHO. A 1930 Bugatti that featured an engine with Dual Overhead Cam's, 4 valves per cylinder, and dual carb's. Amazing technology for 1930. FWIW, Carl B.

That's funny - I taught several young people to drive stick shift cars when I was selling Datsun's 71/73... usually started them out in a 1200, then moved them up to the 510. Only took an hour or so - and I sold more Datsun's that way! I have a 72 510 Station Wagon - it has 302,000 miles on it's original engine. Still runs like a top and is a blast to drive. Usually draws a crowd whereever I park it.. Pretty rare to see one here in Florida. The 610 wagon's were actually even better... but the "personality" of the 510 simply can't be beat. FWIW, Carl B.

It's more a case of the older gas pressure shocks vs the newer high pressure gas shocks. (not so much the specific Brand of the shock). If Bilstein still produced the exact same shock - it would not raise the rid height. The Bilsteins on my Blue Z were installed around 1975 (lifetime warranty but they are still fine). When the aftermarket manufacturers were building lower pressure gas fill shocks - they did not raise the ride height of the Z's. All the newer high pressure gas shocks seem to raise the ride height. We took an original set of springs off my son's 70 240-Z, properly measured on specialized equipment - they were within Factory Spec. - that is to say, that there was no "sag". It takes a lot of miles of harsh use to cause a coil spring to finally start to break down and sag. The Euro Spec. Springs installed in the North American Spec. 240Z's will raise the rid height, unless you cut a coil or two off. FWIW, Carl B.

With 70 series tires the Blue Z sits about 3/8" lower than the OEM spec.'s would indicate - 26" at the front wheel arch - and 25 1/4" at the rear wheel arch. FWIW, Carl B.

Stock Spring on the Blue 72. Larger front anti-sway bar, plus added the rear anti-sway bar (BRE). The car is very neutral and corners pretty flat... overall very nice for a street car that was used a few weekends for track events and auto-X's.. I sure wish Bilstein still produced the same shocks... they were expensive at the time, but well worth the 3x to 4x price over their competition. FWIW, Carl B.

Dear Pontiac: Please produce the Solstice Coupe that you originally presented at the Detroit Auto Show. The roadster is nice, but the market for a lighter weight, less expensive version would be 10x that of the roadster. You can easily trim 250 lbs off the roadsters 2860 lbs with a Hatch Back Coupe, thus bringing the weight down closer to 2600 lbs. Costs can also be brought down with a less expensive coupe, so we could see the GPX Coupe retail for something under $23,995.00, and the Solstice GT at $19,500.00. - - - - - - - - - - - - - 260HP in a 2600lbs car = 10lbs per HP 150HP in a 2350lbs car = 15.6 lbs per HP (240Z) $3526.00 in 1970 Dollars = aprox $18,500.00 in todays dollars. Then you have to add the costs of all Federal Requirements.. and your pretty close to $24K. Same money... A Solstice takes up about the exact space in the garage as a 240Z. If only they would mass produce the coupe... But that might eat into Corvette sales too deeply... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I had a 67 Porsche 911S and a 55 T-Bird when I bought my first 240-Z in March of 1970. Drove the Z for six months, then decided to sell the Porsche. Kept the T-Bird for a couple more years, then sold it too. The last "new" car that I bought for myself, is the 72 240-Z that I still have today. I've bought new cars for wives... but there really hasn't been anything that I could afford, produced that simply drove me wild... So what 911 do you have now Rob? FWIW, Carl

The number I keep coming up with is around 162,540. That is 152,767 Left Hand Drive (at the most) and 9773 Right Hand Drive 240Z's (at the most) (be they Datsun or Fairlady). So far we have VIN's recorded in the series, accounting for 148,957 HLS30's vs a total possible if all VIN's in the series were used of 152,767.(not likely but possible I guess). So I think 150K units would be close for a generic number for Left Hand Drive + 9773 for the Right Hand Drive.. Call it 160K units for "240-Z" of all kinds world wide. How many are left - Who Knows? It is no longer possible to ask the State DMV's for a records search - now that the Federal Government has declared these Public Records - Private... After 35 to 38 years - I'd be surprised if 3% of them were still around. One thing is for sure - it's fewer of them every years. FWIW, Carl B.

$4,500.00 to $6,500.00 based on your description. To be "near perfect" - the dash can't be cracked, the seats can't be torn, the car has to run and drive out very well. The small dent can't be bigger than 2", and in an easy place to fix. The repaint has to be the original color.. and the engine bay has to look pretty clean.. You can't tell if the car has rust issues unless you jack it up and inspect it underneath. You really need to Post some pictures that show the details of the car. FWIW, Carl B.

fixitman/FilipeA We've had a lot of discussion related to the effects of installing both the Euro Spec. Springs and the newer higher pressure gas shocks available today - on the ride height of the 240Z. 1. The North American Spec. 240-Z's actually had a relatively high rid height to begin with. Measured at the front frame rail - where it meets the fireall... they sat 6.5" off the ground. This puts the center of the headlight 24.5" off the ground. 2. Installing the Euro Spec. Springs - on the North American Spec. Struts - well raise the ride height between .75" and 1.25". If you want the car to set lower, you have to cut about 1 and 1/2 coils off the front - and 2 coils off the rear. (average reported by others over time - but it also depends on what shocks you install with them). 3. Installing most of the modern high pressure gas shocks will raise the ride height of the 240-Z. That is because there is only about 650lbs loaded on each spring to begin with.. A high pressure gas shock off-loading 50 to 100 lbs... will raise the rid height of the car. The stock front springs only compress an inch for each 83lbs of load... likewise the rears are 112 lbs/in... FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Derek: Most of the Nissan Competition Catalogs that I have, offer a couple options related to springs. 1) you could order the Euro Spec. Stage I or Stage II springs 2) you could order either the Factory Racing Suspension Package, or the Factory Rally Suspension Package. I do not find "competition springs" offered as stand alone sets - they all seem to come as part of the more inclusive "Suspension Packages". Note that I said above; "of the catalogs that I have".... there may have been something other offered in some other years catalogs. It is more likely that you ordered either the Stage I or Stage II Eupro Spec, Springs... Stage I Front = 101 lbs/in Rear = 112 lbs/in Stage II: Front = 122 lbs/in Rear = 140 lbs/in Spring in the Racing Suspension Package are listed as: Front = 218 lbs/in Rear = 271 lbs/in Springs in the Rally Suspension Package are listed as: Front = 149 lbs/in Rear = 174 lbs/in I agree with some of the earlier comments that it's the combination of Springs and Shocks that effect the ride quality - I'd also add that a new set of tires will usually result in an improve rid quality.. Tire inflation pressures also have an effect on ride quality - there is about 650 lbs being carried at each tire.. and as I recall (without going to look it up) .. the recommended tire pressure on a 240-Z with stock size tires was around 28psi under 100mph. Most people I've talked to routinely carry 32psi in their tires on these cars... the result is a somewhat harsher ride - and the center tread wearing out ahead of the outside treads... Then too there is the effect of all the suspension bushings... FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Rob: Sent you a Private Message...aka PM... great to hear from you... Carl

Cooling systems are closed systems, and pressurized only to raise the boiling point of the coolant. If the coolant isn't at it's boiling point - you won't have any pressure build up. How warm in New Jersey is it now? Are we talking 70 degree days or 85 degree days? The first thing to do - is pressure test the cooling system. If it holds 14 to 16 psi and the car isn't overheating - - I'd doubt you have a problem. If you don't have a cooling system pressure tester - find a shop that does and ask them to check it. FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Zup: Sorry to join in late... The seller states: "Bone stock restored over 10+ years to the level of the Nissan Program 240Z cars of the late 90s." As others have pointed out, several of the details that are not bone stock - I'll add that I seriously doubt this car was refreshed or remanufactured to anywhere near the level of the Vintage Z's. The seller shows no receipts for complete engine rebuild, transmission rebuild, rear-end rebuild. Nor any mention of completely rebuilding the suspension, doesn't even show the undercarriage.... If we assume that everything not shown, or not mentioned - has in fact been done and done right.. I'd call it a low #3 condition example, in the eyes of the Collector Community. The Canadian Dollar is about the same as the US Dollar at this point - so IF everything on the car is as it should be - it would most likely be well worth $18K today. However - because everything is NOT as it should be on the car you'd have to deduct value for major items that would need to be corrected - to bring it into the mid to upper #3 condition category. A #3 condition example need not be "perfect", nor even "near perfect" - but judged as a Collector Example it needs to at least be STOCK with all major components correct for the model and year. Major Glaring Things: 1. WRONG DASH - series I/II dashes are $1,000.00 to $1800 today - IF you can find one that isn't cracked. 2. The engine compartment is far from STOCK - and a #3 car need not be "perfect" but it has to be STOCK. The finish on the fuel lines, brake lines, clutch lines would need to be corrected - take them out and have them properly yellow cad plated. Put the correct cast aluminum finish on the valve cover and carb's., put the proper stickers in place. At least black spark plug wires!! 3. Refinish the tail light finisher in the correct lt. metallic gray finish & put the correct rivets in place 4. Rework the sloppy job on the vinyl on the rear shock towers 5. He has the hubcaps - get the correct wheels and put them on the car All and all - it would take some time, some work and some additional money to bring it solidly into the upper end of the #3 category. Pictures show a nice 240-Z, and if the paint and body were were documented and done right - $18K wouldn't be a bargain, but it wouldn't be overpriced either. Over $20K it would have to have most of the items above corrected. just my impressions from the pictures... FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Powerglide: Your opinions are most likely far more accurate than the "hype" of "fully restored" in the item description. Thanks for sharing.. We'll most likely see the car on a Dealers Lot in the following months - priced at $21,500.00..... FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Dan: Call Kim Blough at Idaho Z. He has a large collection of parts cars, and he can rebuild an R200 for you. Tell him I said hello. Kim Blough Idaho Z Car 2913 Garrity Blvd. Nampa, Idaho 83687-3629 (208) 466-0004 FWIW, Carl B.

Thanks Guys.... Carl B.

Hi Ron: It "seems" to be on-line now - at least from this sector.. Give it try and let me know if it comes up... thanks, Carl B.

When I tried to renew the domain name on-line - I received a message from the server that because a major VISA/MC data base was compromised - the transaction could not be processed. I was told to contact my VISA/MC provider to "unfreeze" the account. I did that, and it took a couple days for them to figure out what was going on. VISA told me that the transaction was held, because payment was being sent outside the USA, and that they would unfreeze the transaction... I'm not really sure now just what the problem was... but the domain's (both ZHome.com and Becksystems.com) were renewed. ZHome.com was renewed one day late - and that resulted in the domain name being automatically deleted from the DNS... I don't know how long it will take to get it reentered... then proporogate though the system - but usually it's at least 24 to 48 hours... If it ain't one thing - it's another.. FWIW, Carl B.

I'm sorry to hear that your PT is in such sad shape. Nonetheless, if we review all the Road Tests of both the PT and the 240-Z, you'll see that when compared "new car" to "new car"... they are in fact very close. We'll have to check farther - but I think the PT actually has a lower Cd than the Z as well. <pre> ----------------------240-Z------------------- PT 0-60 - - - - -- - - - 8.7 (R/T) - - - - - - - 8.5 (CD) 1/4 mile 17.1 (R/T) 16.6 (MT) 16.7(CD) Top Spd.. 115 (tested) 112(tested-CD) Engine 2.4L/150hp 2.4L/150 (MT) 60-0 brake 151ft. (SCG) 120ft. 70-0 185 ft (CD-Street Mod) 186(CD) Lat. G 0.73(RT) 0.78(CD) Ground Clearance 6.5" 6.5" Fuel Capacity 15.9 gal 15gal </pre> CD=Car & Driver RT=Road & Track SCG=Sports Car Graphic MT=Motor Trend Different Road Tests done by different mag.'s reported slightly different results - but that was true for both cars. The above are just typical examples of the reported spec.'s. The PT was heavier, had FAR more emissions and safety equipment - but the efficiency of the Front Wheel Drive helped off-set some of the weight and emissions/safety penalties. Actually the two cars separated by 31 years - were very close in terms of their target performance ranges.. The in-line six and lighter weight in the Z does give it an advantage in mid-range speed performance.. FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Mike: There is a difference between a starting battery that is "discharged" and one that is "dead". A battery that is discharged, can of course be recharged - after all, being rechargeable is one of the main functions of a starting battery. When any battery is "DEAD" - it usually won't take a charge. Most of the time with Lead/Acid Batteries this is caused by the lead plates be sulfated. Using some modern electronically controlled chargers - lead/acid batteries can be desulfated. So batteries that were formally considered "Dead", can in fact be brought back to at least partial useful life. NOT SO with the Optima Type...when they are actually DEAD...you throw them out and get a new one. The maximum recharging rate for the Optima type batteries is 10amp for 6 to 10 hours at about 13.6 to 15 volts - - but it takes voltage as high as 20 to 25 Volts to desulfate the lead plates in the older style Lead/Acid batteries. That's a BIG NO NO for the Optima's... Bottom line is Yes you can recharge a fully discharge Optima battery - Yes it's best done over a longer period of time at lower amp hour rates. But Yes when it's actually DEAD.... it can't be brought back to life. Just my personal opinion - but for my use the Optima is worth every penny (OK, it's worth every several extra $20.00 dollars bill that it takes to buy one for my Z) FWIW, Carl B.

Actually - That isn't correct. I dropped him an e-mail to ask about that. He only shows a picture of ONE Paint Code Sticker... he MIGHT actually have two or more different ones. One might not however get that impression as he only asks that you specify the Paint Code. The sticker that says "AMINO ALKYD" would NOT be correct for Paint Code 901 for example, as it was a Metallic Color painted with Acryl Enamel (Acrylic). So - 76Datsun280Z should assure the Sticker he orders - has the right type of paint printed on it. Pictured below is the original paint code sticker from an 11/69 production 240-Z. FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Mark: Yes- and it's a good thing too. I totally screwed up the calculations - I must have been falling asleep or having as Senior Moment.. Had time to go back through this - to see why such difference.... between my calculation and the Web Based Speadsheets... Holding the Deck Height at "0"... as there seems to be some disagreement to the actual data being gathered.... I should have written: L28 - Flat Top Pistons (79-83) & E31 Head Swept Volume of Cylinder = 458.9cc Combustion Chamber volume = 42.4cc Gasket Volume = 7.7cc Deck Height = 0 558.9 + 42.4 + 7.7 = 509 and 42.4 + 7.7 = 50.1 so 509 divided by 50.1 = 10.16 Thanks for catching that... Mark/Bo... FWIW, Carl B.

How did you get a picture that wide to upload or hotlink... yea gad... Carl B.