Carl Beck

Just make sure she isn't one of the ABC Crew... we don't want to see your friend on T.V. Carl B.

Hi Guys: The man said the fill plug is - horribly STRIPPED. To me that means that he can turn the plug (it's not frozen in place) - but it simply turns in the hole without moving in or out. It's not a matter of getting ahold of the plug, nor turning it to begin with. Since the case is aluminum and plug is steel... it's a good bet the threads are stripped in the case... in which situation, the hole would have to be drilled out and re-tapped to a larger diameter.. Not something easily done in the car. ZTEC - time to start looking for another tranny. If you hear a standard tranny screeching .. changing nor adding oil is not going to make much difference... At any rate - to extract a stripped fill plug, you have to apply an outward force while turning counter-clockwise. Lock a pair of vice-grips on the fill plug, then put a prybar (old screwdriver) between the vice-grips and the tranny case..pry outward with the pry bar while you turn the plug. If your real lucky, once you move the plug outward a couple of turns, it may pick-up some good threads and unscrew the rest of the way.. FWIW, Carl B.

Are you saying that the fuel gauge was fine - but you really couldn't fill the tank more than half full?

The problem with the recovered dashes is that they can't seem to get the correct grain pattern to match the original. I've seen two of them now and thought they were cheaper dash covers. The full dash covers, properly installed look better in my opinion - because they don't stand out with the wrong grain pattern - and you have to look closely to realize they are the covers.. Just my opinion Carl

Hi Bo: I guess it depends on what part of the Country you are in, or how close to a major population center you are - around here (Clearwater, FL) we don't see too many First or Second Generation Z's in the junk yards and a Turbo L28 turns up maybe a couple times a year. If you want a Tubo L28 in this area - you watch the used car ad.s - and you can usually pick up a whole car, with very rusty body for between $850.00 and $1,200.00. So: Engine with all accessories = $650.00 T-5 Trany = $350.00 to $450.00 (depending on the mileage) R200 Rear End = $225.00 C/V half shafts = $125.00 to $150 a pair Then if your lucky - you can sell a few other parts off the 280ZX T and haul it off to the crusher or junk yard. I have a whole, good running 83 280ZX sitting in the back yard, waiting to be disassembled now.. but with all the other projects I have ahead of it... I don't know if I'll ever get to it. FWIW, Carl B. Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Larry: I've not researched the Pick-up's to any serious extent, but looking at the 58 Pick-up sure looks like they used the same sheetmetal for the cab, as they used for their Austin based sedans. The only one I've ever seen was at Les Cannaday's shop (Classic Datsun Motorsports). From the very earliest days, Datson, Nissan were successful with their little pick-up's. I believe that somewhere I read that only 10 were imported in 58 - so you have a very rare piece there. Likewise there can't be many from 62 left around either. According to Rae's History of Nissan /Datsun in USA 1960-1980... Quoting Wards Automotive in Appendix B: 58... 0 pick-up's and 83 cars 59... 179 pick-up's and 1131 cars 60....346 pick-ups and 1294 cars 61...279 pick-up's and 1157 cars 62...736 pick-up's and 1812 cars FWIW, Carl B.

Give me the engine serial number, and I'll give you an apox. build date. FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Larry: Demographics: My Dad owned a Shell Service Station/Truck Stop.. so I grew up with the sweet smell of leaded gasoline, asbestos brake linings and at the tracks of the time "bean oil". Been a car nut since I can remember!... Worked my way through college working in Bar's and Selling Cars. I was 25 when I bought my first 240-Z... today I'm...ah...what?...61...yea gad! When I bought my first 240-Z in March of 1970 - I was on active duty with the USAF.. I was driving a Porsche 911 and had a 55 T-Brid parked in the garage most of the time (and had several sports cars prior to that.. ) I have a M.S. (Systems) and worked in Aerospace Systems Engineering, Project Management and Engineering Management for 25 years here in Clearwater, Florida. Honeywell Space Systems. Thus my interest in the Design/Development of the Z Car...as well as most other designs of anything. The Z Car: Since May of 1970 (had to wait to take my car off the showroom floor until May)... there has not been a day that I haven't had at least one DATSUN 240-Z. Over the years I've had just about any car I've ever wanted...as the boys were growing up we went though Muscle Cars (a couple of mine are featured in many Ford and Chevy Books/Magazines)... I've had V-12 Jag's and Ferraris... from AM-X's to Z's ... just about anything.. They all came and went.... but the Datsun 240-Z always stayed. I still have the Metallic Blue 72 240-Z that I bought new in 72 (among others). I can honestly say that the Datsun 240-Z is the best Sports/GT if not the best car I've ever owned. (without regard to price). It's visual beauty first attracted me... it's build quality drew me in farther.. and it's drive train and suspension simply demanded that I at least drive it. My first test drive is a long story in and of itself... suffice to say from the first drive I was hooked. Here was a great looking Sports/GT that actually had the headroom, leg room that the average American needed... plus more than adequate power and handing for a great GT. I didn't realize it at the time I bought it - but the huge cargo area with a full hatchback made living with the 240-Z a real pleasure and most likely one factor that made me keep it so long - "UTILITY" in addition to Sport... Over the years the Z also proved itself to be all but bullet-proof mechanically and very easy to maintain. KISS....applies to the fullest here. We took it auto-crossing, we took it camping.. we took it up/down the West Coast and Across America...I can say that you will find even today no finer Grand Touring Car... none as much sheer fun to drive. You become part of the 240-Z, and it becomes part of the road... you feel and hear everything the car does... You feel alive and participating when driving a 240-Z - not just a passenger along for the ride, insulated from the world... Bottom line - Beauty, Reliability, Simplicity, Utility, light weight and tossable.. simply FUN... in a package that fits you like a glove. Why did I not want a Nissan 350-Z? It is all but the exact opposite of the DATSUN 240-Z. - Styled like all too many other lumps on the road today - Too heavy and overloaded with options and too expensive - A hatchback that is really a joke... a rear strut brace you can't take out (give me a break!) - A side window sill height - that leaves your left arm above your shoulder if you like to have your window open and your arm resting on the door... - Can't fully recline the seat and you can't sleep in the rear hatch area...(nor do other things we could do in the 240-Z ;-) - Nothing really "break though" about the design ... nothing really notable.. just another car... it stirs no real passion... What more modern car would I like to have today in addition to the 240-Z (if I hit the Lotto..) A BMW Z08 A 1997/8 Aston Martin DB-7 (in-line six) FWIW, Carl B. Carl Beck Clearwater, Fl USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Bill: Actually it was Enrique's comment about it being a Series II car.. that got me looking more carefully at the pictures.. then things didn't add up. Series II cars entered production in Jan. of 71... and there were still a few Series I cars produced that month as well. So there were some crossover parts on the Jan. production cars... But not in 12/70 and not in the 17,000 VIN series that we had ever found... So thanks really go to Enrique... If you go back out to check the VIN stamped in the firewall - it's actually above and to the left of the brake booster on most Series I cars (but dzrt1st's picture is most helpful) .. and sometimes you have to pull the vacuum line aside... and clean the area to find it. If it looks like it's been cut/pasted into the car (metal not matching up correctly or weld lines hidden around it etc) ... or it it's a different VIN - you'll know that something is out of wack... stolen maybe and VIN swapped... FWIW Carl B.

Hi Larry (everyone): The Datsun 240-Z is recognized by many automotive authorities and historians as one of the ten most important automobiles in US Auto History. In one series of articles by AUTOMOBILE Magazine.. devoted to selecting the top Sports/GT's of the Decade.. the Datsun 240-Z came in right below the Ferrari 365GTB-4 Daytona...(and actually the Daytona should have been in the Decade of the 60's IMHO). The Father of the Z Car was inducted into the American Automobile Hall Of Fame in 1998... one of the very few people still living to receive that high honor. To call it a "break through design" is an understatement in my opinion. The Datsun 240-Z not only shattered the traditional sports car market in America (the worlds largest, most open and competitive market), it pushed the Reset Button in peoples minds, related to how the Quality of not only Japanese automobiles, but all Japanese Products were perceived. In marketing and sales, perception is 90% of reality. The huge success of the design, was in no small part due to Mr. Matsuo and his team being able to retain "design integrity" throughout the entire process from concept to production. What was designed, was built as designed, what was built was tested, what was tested was corrected. Then what was designed, built, tested and corrected was produced. This seems to happen only rarely in the automotive field. As you pointed out, most original designs are badly compromised by the time they make it through the production phase. (if they make it at all). The next question that comes to mind then is; " why did the introduction of the Datsun 240-Z send such a shockwave through the American Market." Followed by; "why did so many automotive writers feel that they had to attribute the design to someone outside of Nissan Motors Ltd.?". The Datsun 240-Z hit the American Car Loving Public and the Auto Executives at the Big Three like a splash of cold water in the face. It was a wake-up call that could not be ignored. WOW, the Japanese are getting serious about building and selling cars that are not only competitive - but world beating!! You could literally see that shockwave move across American as the Datsun 240-Z's were delivered to the Dealers in most major cities .... Likewise you could follow it in the Automotive Press of the time. Why did no one attribute the design to the correct source in the first place? 1. Nissans past history of buying production rights to other manufacturers cars had lot to do with it I believe. Purchasing Gorham's patents to produce the first Datson, Graham-Page's Crusader along with all tooling and technology to produce it and the Model 73 engine in Japan as the full size Nissan Model 70 and Graham-Page's Truck Designs prior to the war. Then the licensing of the production rights to the Austin in the 50's... and hiring outside design consultants like Pininfarina for the 411 in the 60's .. and re-badging the Prince line of cars as Nissan's etc. etc.. As you pointed out - the first insight that Nissan Motors Ltd. was actually developing a solid in-house design department appeared in the early 60's... first with the roadster... that people then thought was a copy of the MG-B (although it pre-dated the introduction of the ... then with the PL510... aimed squarely at the American Market with it's 1600cc OHC engine.. which most people thought was just a copy of the BMW 1600 sedan....(neither of which did Nissan do anything to refute in a PR sense). So when the Z was introduced in Oct. of 69.... most of the automotive press was already pre-conditioned to believe it had to come from somewhere other than Nissan's Design Dept. 2. This unfortunately was compounded by the "Company" culture of the Japanese Automobile Manufacturers. Nissan simply said it was a "Nissan Design".... when the Automotive Press wanted to know what Individual was responsible, or what individual should be credited. Nissan failing to supply the Press with information they wanted ... that left only a void to be filled by speculation. Helped along by Mr. Goertz's self-promoting BS.. the Press put 1 and 1 together and came up with 5.... hence the Goertz Myth was firmly attached to the Datsun 240-Z. The pathway to the Myth was I believe helped along and in the wrong direction - because the Automotive Press and sadly the authors of most of the books written about the Z Car... followed the series of Cars from Nissan: Datson, Datsun DC-3, SP 211 and the first "Fair Lady SPL 212. then the Fairlady 310 Roadsters etc. ...... leading right up to the Goertz CSP311 Silvia Coupe. and arriving then at the Z Car.... I believe that the pathway to the truth - is based on following the growth and development of Nissan Motors itself, rather than the cars it produced - most specifically as it was reformed after WW-II. First re-organized to repair WW-II US Military Vehicles left in the Pacific Theater, then allowed to restart production of trucks for Japan's rebuilding, followed by permission to resume production of automobiles. After which Nissan was given contracts by the US Government to build Jeeps for the war in Korea.... Infused by US Capital - Nissan started to rebuild their production and manufacturing facilities first... as they had always been primarily a production and manufacturing oriented concern. After Nissan had reestablished their foundation of production and manufacturing through the 50's, they turned their focus to develop an in-house design capability in the early 60's... If you follow the growth and development of that in-house design capability... it is easy to see how the 510 and Z Car came about.... They were completely different than anything Nissan had been offering in the past... because they came from a completely different origin. There is no roadster DNA in the Z.... but I believe it is the second child of Nissan's newly formed and focused design capabilities. FWIW, Carl B.

HI E (everyone). Yes it does appear to be a Series II body... but it has the Series I steering wheel.. can't see the seats.. Did you check the VIN on the Firewall Bill? Maybe there is a reason it's missing it's engine data tag. With that VIN an Build Date... it really should be a Series I car... FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Bill: It's certainly worth a grand.. but you'd have to grab it, strip it down to a bare shell and STOP all that rust that is about to destroy it... FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Larry: Again, thanks for the input. Interesting stuff.. Ah... Tom Semple. I'll have file that somewhere, where I can find it again. It was a good example of maintaining the DNA of the 240-Z, without it being a "retro" design. The idea that toecutter started the Thread with.. Ajay - "Panchal"... ring a bell? Yes that is my favorite picture of Mr. Nakamura.. and believe me, at that Introduction of the 350-Z he was a deer in the headlights. He did recover... and later expressed some surprise at the media frenzy... Goshen left him standing there to fend off the Press....while he took his leave.... It was a somewhat awkward... but later funny situation. ;-) To each his own, but currently nothing in Nissan's line up does much for me in terms of style. I like their full size pick-up's because they are made in the USA and they do contain some good design and engineering (design in terms of user interface, utility as well as form, fit and function). Yes - "Flagship". Both Mr. Hanawa and later Mr Goshen stated to the Press that the Z Car was Nissan's Flagship product and must be returned to the USA, and it would lead a series of new designs from Nissan. That started the "We Will Build It" ad campaign... Our input (the IZCC Members) to Nissan (via Mr. Kitahora) was to use the existing 240SX chassis (to keep costs down), beef it up to handle 275-300HP and give us the RB25/26. Nissan's reply was that because the Z was Nissan's Flagship it would get an entirely new chassis unique to the Z Car..... Of course that didn't happen in the end. FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Larry: Thanks for sharing your insights with us. Not too often that we actually get to discuss design with people that have actually worked in the automotive industry, let alone within Nissan. As "toecutter" started the thread more or less to discuss new and old designs.. or what could have been or should have been... Maybe you can provide some insights.... In 1998 when Mr. K was inducted into the Automobile Hall of Fame, Mr. Hirshberg brought an Artists Concept Drawing - of a possible shape for the Next Generation Z...(see picture below). Do you know who did that rendition? It was GREAT!.... Most of the people present told Mr. Hirshberg that they really liked the overall concept, but that it needed just a little more work in the rear end treatment. Nonetheless, it certainly had the "look" of a Z Car again. and carried forward the Z's DNA.... The new Concept for a new Z - of course make all the automotive press at the time.. and Hirshberg and company were under great pressure to have a prototype done by the 1999 Auto Show... With that short a time, as you mentioned they had to use an existing chassis, to get a prototype done for show.. and in that rush the design integrity of the original concept got all but lost. (we'll come back to Design Integrity next Post). That rushed effort was indeed sad for everyone... The Z Car people hated the "ugly golden toad".. and the Dealers Associate told Nissan they didn't like it either... as a matter of fact the reaction was so overwhelmingly negative - that the following year at the 2000 New York International Auto Show - Mr. Hanawa announced that "We Hear You"... and we will return to the drawing boards with a clean slate design for the next generation Z... After that - all the Nissan Design Centers submitted various concepts... and everything got very hush hush at Nissan about the new Z over the following year. When Mr. Goshen finally got full control - the idea of designing and building an entirely new car, with it's own unique chassis... simply would not fly. Cost cutting was the theme of the day to stop the financial bleeding at Nissan Motors Ltd.... At the 2001 Detroit International Auto Show - Carlos sprung the "350-Z" on the public. At first, when only the Concept Drawing was displayed on stage - I thought "WOW"... then they rolled out the metal prototype and I though..."what the heck happened?"... (see second picture below). Do you know who did the Concept Drawings?.... After the introduction of the 350-Z we were all standing around talking to the people from Nissan... and I ask why the car's body lines had grown so "thick" compared to the sleek lines of the concept drawings... and that is when the lead designer pointed to the firewall and said - "we could not reduce the height of the firewall"..... I ask him why not... he replied that they had to use the G35 chassis... At that point I understood what happened... We Classic Z Car Fan's didn't get the car we wanted, nor the car that Mr. Hanawa had promised - we got the best that Carlos could afford to deliver at the time... You mention earlier how "history" is created in the studio's - and the various stories you read related to the history of how things came about doesn't often match reality - and I have to admit that I laugh out loud when I read some of the stuff Nissan put out about the design and development of the 350-Z.... what a complete joke.... I was glad to see Nissan bring the Z Back... and I'll be pulling for them to again design a Z Car rather than Badge Engineer one.... Only time will tell.... IMHO from a "design" perspective the G35 is a much cleaner and better proportioned car. FWIW, Carl B.

Well that was the Mitty 06 Poster until Nissan pulled out... then a new "Official" poster had to be rushed out... One would have thought that with Nissan moving their HQ to the Heart of Dixie, they would have taken that opportunity to visit some of their new neighbors... just my thoughs... Carl B.

That didn't stop me - I just took another car... If we all waited until our cars were done, there wouldn't be many people at the events ;-) Carl B.

Hi Larry: Which "history" have you read a number of times? I believe that since 1995 at least, there has been a great effort to change or refute the early reports related to the design and development of the Datsun 240-Z. So I'll hope that early reported history doesn't stay the same... I hope that the article I pointed you too - does attempt to give credit to the other people in the Studio. As I recall, the B210 didn't come out until four years after the Z... circa 1974? That would have put it in the design cycle closer to 1970 when the final design of the Z had been done for a couple years. Also, according to several different reports - Nissan kept the various Design Studio's separate from one another. (Sports Cars vs Sedans). As you and I both know - the personnel assigned to any design team - determine to the largest extent, the success of failure of the project. Having Mr. Matsuo and his team in place, at the right time and gaining the right backing - was a one in a million shot for any automotive manufacturer. Chance or Destiny.. who knows.. but it happens only once in a while. Hummm.... it's still a little bit to early to tell. The 90 300ZX Twin Turbo was most certainly a Milestone Car - and it more or less set the stage for the Japanese Super Cars in the Sports Car market. The styling also appears to me at least to be close to timeess. (if you had never seen one before - it would look perfectly modern today.. some 16 years later. How strikingly different the Datsun 240-Z was from the Nissan 300ZX TT. Where the Datsun 240-Z was designed and built with a specific Market and Customer in mind, and the design requirements were derived from that Market and Customer... The Nissan 300ZX TT was intended to be a showcase for Nissan Motors Ltd. advancements in automotive design and technology. (as stated by Nissan Motors with the introduction of the 90 300ZX). In a few more years, we'll know if the 90+ 300ZX makes it to the "Classic" status or not. Right now however they can be a bargain.. FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Larry: It is a shame that Mr. Matsuo left Nissan about 13 years before that. If you read the article I pointed you to - do you recognize any of the rest of the team? Humm..."but".... that sounds like you really don't think the books have done a good job of covering this. If so, I couldn't agree more. I too have an interest in the process of Design, be it applied to Styling or Engineering. I too have over 25 years experience working in a Design Engineering environment, and I too always found the story as laid out in the many books about the Z Car ... not really adding up... they all seemed to be missing important facts, dates, documentation etc. All seemed to require a leap of faith to get from the roadsters to the Z Car in any rational fashion. That is until I read the book that Mr. K and Mr. Matsuo co-authored. That finally answered a lot questions, contained a lot of missing documentation and laid out the process in a time line that was understandable. Who is "our", what company would that be? Are you referring to one of the Nissan Design Centers? As far as I can find - Teruo Uchino was the lead designer for the PL510/Bluebird. Mr. Teruo Uchino studied Industrial Design at Tokyo University then worked under Shiozo Sato (designed the Toyota S600 and Nissan Fairlady) and gained entrance to Nissan. Agree - prior to Nissan really establishing a strong in-house design capability, they did for the most part either produce the designs of other companies and/or hire outside designers. Nissan really started to build a solid in-house design department around 62/63... then they picked up some very talented people with the merger of Prince Motors into Nissan in 1966. Looking at the history of Nissan - you really see Mr. Ayukawa and a small group of his friends as being "Capitalists" and/or "Industrialists". Their main goal seems to have been to build a modern industrial base in Japan between 1910 and 1938. Ayukawa's foundation was the Foundry he built and his connections with Japan's leading bankers and businessmen. For that reason, Ayukawa seemed more interested in building production and manufacturing capabilities - than he was interested in designing a unique automobile. In his words, "why re-invent the wheel?". That is certainly true.. but if you find enough in print, from a variety of different sources, it can help to give you a better over-all understanding of what most likely happened. I'd love to hear more about your years with Nissan Design - would that have been here in the US? FWIW, Carl B. Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Mike: We had an IZCC club member in California that had about 100 or so hard copies printed about 10 or 12 years ago.. He sold them to the other members and on-line for about $25.00 originally. (it was Roger ???) FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Kats: The Blue Air Cleaner seems to have been on the Euro Spec. Left Hand Drive Series I Datsun 240-Z's. Your brochure shows and Automatic Transmission.. so that could be for cars produced after 06/70... The Belgium Brochure (marked Jan. 71) shows the Blue Air Cleaner as well - with a Red Series I car. FWIW, Carl B. Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com

Gee... looks a lot like the original 1970 C-Production Championship Poster... FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Larry: Please see: <a href=http://zhome.com/History/DesignEvolution/DesignEvolutionZ.htm TARGET=NEW> Design Evolution of the Z</a>

Some of my thoughts... 1. The 350-Z is styled, or more correctly "shaped" the way it is - because it is a shortened Infiniti G35. Just as AMC chopped 8 inches out of the Javelin - to create the AM-X. The Nissan 350-Z came about as a cost containment... not the "Clean Slate" design that Mr. Hanawa promised at the New York Out Show in 2000. Nissan simply could not, or was not willing, to develop a new chassis unique to the Z Car - once Carlos took over the helm at Nissan. 2. Prior to the 350-Z, although all previous generations of Z's shared many common components with the sedans in the line - the Z's all had their own unique chassis/floorpans. That is not the case with the 350-Z. 3. Let's keep a distinct difference in our minds between "Retro Styling" which is one art form of it's own and "Classic Sports Car Lines". Retro doesn't mean Classic and Classic doesn't meant Retro. 4. I agree that Austin, Jag and even Ferrari have returned in recent years to more "Classic" body lines. Typically longer hoods, smoothly flowing feminine body lines and tight rounded rear ends. 5. To the traditional Porsche fans - a Porsche was an air cooled, boxer type, rear engine car. The 928, 124, 944 failed in the market because they were not the cars that people, that wanted a Porsche, wanted in the first place. The 914 failed because it was market in Europe as a VW...and the PCA refused to recognize it as a Porsche, until the Factory threatened to withdraw support of the PCA... The Boxter made it big because it was the modern 550... Most manufacturers have tried "badge engineering" and it might work to a limited extent for a limited time... Likewise some retro designs sell well for a period.... But in the long run it is logical and visual evolution that keeps a Marque alive. The Prosche, the Corvette, the big Ferrari's... IMHO the new Mustang is not so much "retro" as it is a return to what should have evolved if Ford didn't get off track in the first place... I think most of us Classic Z Car Fans were hoping that Nissan would do the same... give us a modern 240-Z.... one with the Classic Lines we all love... The Lexas at Post #2 looks a lot like the Caddy Sports Car.. to me... (X-LR) That was a bold new design but still falling within the Classic Lines... even if maybe a little edgy... The Chrysler Cross Fire was also a Bold Design.. but needed about twice the HP offered. The Solstice and Saturn Sky .. could have been hits, if only GM had set up to mass produce them, and given them the HP advantage over their competition... Nissan needs to get Peter Brock to design the next generation Z for US.... FWIW, Carl B.

Hi Bo: Amen... I was driving a 67 911S when I bought my first 240-Z in 1970. After you quit shaking and looking back on it - it was kind of funny the first time it happened to you... I'm pretty sure that the phrase; "keep the pedal to the metal" - originated with Porsche... Just too funny.... regards, Carl B.

Here is a thought... All you guys with Tie Down Hooks on your 240-Z's know one thing for sure... The Selling Dealer's service department didn't do it's job. They were supposed to be removed by the Dealers prior to Deliver of the car to it's first owner. Not really a part of the car - they were packing fixtures, much like the plastic wrap on the door panels or around the seatbelts... The Tow Hook on the other hand, was actually part of the car.. and was to be left in place for delivery to the end consumer. So if your 240-Z came from the Dealer without it's rear Tie Down Hooks... it was delivered as intended by the Factory. So.. for Pure Stock Class... if you leave the rear Tie Down Hooks in place for show - then IMHO you should also leave the plastic covers on the door panels, the seat belts wrapped/bagged, and the hubcaps boxed in the rear... along with the Pre-Delivery Inspect Report (not filled out of course)... FWIW, Carl B. Carl Beck Clearwater, FL USA http://ZHome.com