Carl Beck

Hi Guys: I've never seen any emblems on the left hand side of the North American spec. 240-Z's. No A/T badging either. Nor have I seen any accessory items that would require holes that close to the end of the deck lid. FWIW, Carl

Hi Marilyn: It's worth about five hundred bucks. Send me your address and I'll have a truck pick it up and drop off the cash;-) Seriously - 90% of the Value of a 240-Z in most cases is related to the condition of the body. The first thing you have to know for sure - is there any rust damage, if so, how much and where. You need to get it out of the garage and have some service shop put it up on a lift for you. Then YOU need to get under it and inspect every inch of the undercarriage yourself. Don't let some prospective buyer tell you what is or isn't there... Then you need to get clear, detailed, close up, digital photos of the undercarriage, the rear wheel arches, the rear deck lid underside lip, the threshold plate that the deck lid closes down on. You also need to get clear digital photo's of the area under the Battery tray (yep -remove the battery). All these area's any serious buyer will what to see clear digital photo's of before they travel hundreds of miles to inspect the car. This is the fastest way to get serious buyers to come see your car. How long has it been since you drove it last? Get the radiator cleaned and replenished with Antifreeze/summer coolant, get the oil changed, get the brakes checked (don't fix anything just know what condition they are in so you can give honest answers). If it runs now - take it out and drive it for at least 30 minutes at highway speed -then drive it around town for at least 30 minutes. Be sure that when a prospective buyer comes to look - it's really READY TO SELL. A clean, rust FREE 1970 240-Z with only 88K miles (documented by the way)..in the condition one would expect a low mileage car to be in - no major dents, shinny chrome, clear glass, good tires, shinny ORIGINAL paint (or a very high quality repaint in the original color) should easily bring $6,500.00 to $7,500.00. The price goes down rapidly - for cracked dash, trashed interior, major dings and scratches, dead paint/repaint of low quality, color changes where the engine compartment hasn't been redone or is blacked out etc. The price goes down rapidly if the car hasn't been started and driven in the past two years, runs poorly, won't shift, has rust and gum in the fuel system, has brake cylinders that hang up and won't release (the car won't roll on a very sight incline, or comes to a stop quickly when allowed to coast)... In these cases the car needs expensive work - and the value goes down to the $4,500.00 to $5,500.00 range. RUST - in the frame rails, in the rear wheel arches, under the battery tray (rust holes through the inner-fender wells, firewall) etc etc RUST in the floorboards, in the lower front fenders etc etc. - - SERIOUS RUST damaged, regardless of mileage will put it in the $2,500.00 to $3,500.00 range. (no sweat with very minor surface rust). As you can see - $2,500.00 to $7,500.00 is quite a range... so YOU need to know for sure exactly - the condition of all the details. On the other hand, with the value of a dollar today - a thousand dollars one way or the other isn't earth shaking. You don't want to give it away - but you do want to grab CASH BUYERS - they are getting hard to come by today. REMEMBER - you will have to find a CASH BUYER.. no bank financing on that car - so no dreamers, no tire kickers... Let me know what you find - I do hear from people that are looking for nice cars and who do have the cash to buy them if the price matches the condition of the car. (e-mail me at the address below) good luck, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA IZCC #260 http://ZHome.com beck@becksystems.com

Oh... yes... If your State requires Emissions Inspections for a 1973 Model Year - it won't pass with the triple's.. In most places that's no longer a problem... in some places it IS. regards, Carl

"Any Tips" First and Foremost - you have to know what you plan to do with the car once you purchase it. You don't want a fix'er upper to turn into a Show Car. You don't want to pay a premium for a near perfect car - if your just going to race it on the weekends. Decide before hand what you are really looking for - and don't buy a car that doesn't really meet your needs. keep looking, keep looking, keep looking - and you will wind up with a far better car at a far better price. 1. The value of a Datsun 240-Z is 90% based on the condition of the sheetmetal in the uni-body. RUST is the biggest killer of old 240-Z's.... GET UNDER THE CAR and inspect it closely. Rust damage is very expensive to repair - keep looking until you find a good solid body. Go to California or the South Western States if you must. 2. Triple Carb.'s of any kind are rarely set up correctly for street use. I think I've driven about three Z's with good running triple's on the street in the past 33 years. If they need to be re-jetted, emulsion tubes changed, acc. pumps changed etc - you can easily spend $600.00 by the time your done swapping parts... If you are in the Norther States - see how the chokes are hooked up too;-) See if the owner has the original SU's and intake manifold - always good to have. 3. If it's equipped with headers - look for leaks, rust etc...(another pain the neck) 4. The second weakest point on the 240-Z's is the wiring - inspect the wiring harnesses in the engine compartment and under the dash (behind the radio).. if it's been hacked to death - pass. 5. If you haven't inspected at least 10 240-Z's - in a methodical manor - take someone that has with you. 6. E-mail me at my address beck@becksystems.com and I'll send you a Word Formatted - check list to take with you. Closely inspect every item and record its condition. Don't stand around and chew the fat with owner - they will always try to distract you when you really get serious about inspecting every item on the car. 7. If you have a digital camera - take it with you and record clear images that you may want to look back at later... good luck, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA 69,70,71,72, 72 & 73 BRE Z

The Z is about as Safe as the Driver. There is no such thing as a "Safe" car, your safety is in your hands when you drive. Nonetheless - "Safety" was a consideration when the Z was designed.. See: http://ZHome.com/History/240ZSafety.htm FWIW, Carl B. Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Alan: Thank you for filling in the complete story. From your information then, would it be safe to say that the collectors of things automotive should, or should not be, willing to pay a premium for "original" Minilites for their collections - vs what they are willing to pay for "real", "genuine" or "authentic" Minilites? To collectors the term "original" is meaningful and valuable in most cases. Nonetheless it's an interesting story... Can you answer the questions- Did the original production facility produce only Magnesium wheels before the buyout, takeover or move. Do you know when production re-started... we could not buy Minilites here in the US after about 1973 for the longest time (three or four years). Hence the group buy of aluminum wheels for the 240-Z's was such a pleasent surprise in the 90's. thanks, Carl B.

Did you call your local Nissan Dealer's Parts Dept? They were available here and very inexpensive (as 240-Z parts go)... I can't believe they couldn't get one for you. (would save shipping costs if they could ). If you don't have it, you could order the original battery tray that helps keep acid off the frame rails also Just measure the top of a Group 24 Battery - that's what the original hold down's - held down. Carl B. send me an e-mail and I'll send you a picture.. beck@becksystems.com

Alan Wrote: A> The original MINILITE wheel was made by a A> company called "TECH-DEL LTD." just down the A> road from me here in west London. Hi Alan: Point of clarification My understanding was that "Tech-Del Ltd." produced licensed copies of the "original" - or that they had purchased the brand name from the original owners. As they say on their web site - the original Minilites were Mag.'s produced in the 60's and 70's. I think Tech-Del Ltd. are producing aluminum copies of the original design. About six or eight years ago - a group purchase order was filled by them for 14x6 aluminum wheels with the bolt pattern and offset for the 240-Z's. Like I said - Minilite went out of business years ago. FWIW, Carl B.

If it's 14x6 Minilite made of aluminum - it will weigh about 17 lbs. If it's a 14x6 Minilite made of magnesium - it will weigh about 12 lbs. If it's a real "MINILITE" - it will have "MINILITE ENGLAND" cast into it - on the outside of the wheel. If your's say "SM" - - - I'd guess it's a Minilite look-alike made by "Shelby Manufacturing". Weigh it and as I recall - it should weigh closer to 18 or 19 lbs. Minilite has been out of business for many many years - so no hope of contacting them. I do have a brand new set of Minilite Aluminum 14 x6's (never mounted). I also have a set of American Racing "Le Mans" (Magnesium wheels) they weigh 12 lbs. each. Any good wheel shop should be able to true up the wheel if it's slightly out of round and aluminum. FWIW, Carl B. Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA IZCC #260 http://ZHome.com

Kats Wrote: K>I have to mention one thing,Mr.Matsuo had already left K> NISSAN in summer 1973.Why?He did great great job did not K> he? I do not know and Mr.Matsuo does not say much about it. K> There must be some reason,and I guess NISSAN was not K> clever. Hi Kats (everyone) Mr. Matsuo wrote a couple of comments about that.. in the Book "Fairlady Story Datsun SP/SR & Z". Mr. Matsuo said; "After the Z, I was involved with the styling of the Laurel, the 230 Cedric and the hardtop version of the Gloria. The latter line of vehicles had almost disappeared, but I suggested basing it on a modified Cedric chassis. They were all well-received, but in the end, I still got into trouble as my boss said the Gloria now looked better than the company flagship Cedric. With my habit of disregarding company lines of command and constantly going straight to the top, my superiors decided to move me sideways to head the interior development section. My father died during this period and I couldn't help feeling I had let him down. Thinking about the future, I concluded the company didn't put enough emphasis on styling. They seemed to forget that no matter how strong the business is, if the vehicle isn't attractive, it simply won't sell. As I fought the system, my passion was fast starting to dwindle, but I decided I still wanted to make a difference regarding Japanese car design. In the summer of 1973 I left Nissan to set up my own consultancy." Mr. Matsuo adds in an Epilogue: "On reflection, I am sad to think of the way Nissan treated Mr. Katayama. Normally, the prepare a special job for their top executives to see them into their retirement, but nothing was done for him, even though the company's success in America was due entirely to his work. I was also disappointed when my boss - the very man who was initially against the Plan A theme (the Z car..cjb)..stepped up to receive the annual President's Prize (the highest award in Nissan) for the Z Car; I wasn't even invited to the ceremony." Mr. Matsuo concludes by saying; "I would like to take this opportunity to express my thanks to the thousands of owners in America (and other export markets) who bought the Z during a period when Japanese vehicles were still being looked down upon. May your enjoyment of the Z-car continue for many years to come." FWIW, Carl B.

TKR514 Wrote: TK> Get used to the looks, guys. TK> The days of non-wind tunnel design(1st Gen Z's) are over. TK> ...snipped..... Hi TK Nissan used the University of Tokyo's wind tunnel to do comparisons between several design concepts - before selecting the car that we know as the Datsun 240-Z. By the way what is the Cd. on both cars? Carrying an extra thousand pounds - I'd hope that 350Z is VERY SLIPPERY indeed. (actually the G35 Coupe is better I understand). TK> Sounds like a stellar car! That's great news for us with classic Z's. If it was a flop, less TK> folks would care about Nissan/Datsuns Z's and their lineage. Maybe the older Z's will TK> finally start to appreciate? I believe that Nissan put the 350Z together as a short term stop gap. They have said that they expect it to sell around 30K units the first year (that would be less than half the units sold in the first year of the 280ZX- and that would put it on a par with the 90+ 300ZX for first year sales. If I'm correct you will see second year sales drop below 20K units.. (just as the 90+ 300ZX did). The Infiniti G35 Sedan and Coupe will eat into the Nissan Dealers Z market also. Same car with better styling and utility. The 350Z is todays 1968 AMX. (take one AMC Javelin and chop the rear seat out). It's going to have lots of competition in that price range also..(Madza RX-8). I wouldn't say that the 350Z is a bad car - no indeed - I'd say it's just a bad modification to the really great Infiniti G35 Coupe. "older Z's will finally start to appreciate"?..... that started about four years ago. Mint examples are selling for $16K to $18K now. Nice rust free, stock daily drivers that were $2,500.00 four years ago here in Florida are now $6,500.00 to $7,500.00. Just my perspective... FWIW, Carl B Clearwater,Florida USA

Hi Alan (everyone): While that mounting point was certainly used for several things as we can see... My guess would be that it was originally included on every car - as an attachment point - for an assembly line fixture. Makes no sense to include it on every car so that 1/10 of 1% could mount options - does it? Do you have any pictures of the Z's coming down the assembly line - and being sat down on top of the completed drive-trains/suspensions? My guess would be that you would see an overhead fixture suspending the body shells (already painted) at that point... In a normal assembly line process (normal for Ford/GM at least) a "fixture" would have been bolted into both sides of the car - the two holes (not the bolt mounting points) in your picture - would be for male alignment studs - that would line the fixture up so the bolts would quickly be screwed in... If you look at the picture of the attachment of the roll bar - just picture a fixture like that - only turning out through the quarter window - where it would be grabbed by overhead lifts - to suspend the body in mid air. If you have a bare body shell - you'll see that you can balance the body shell on one cross brace at that location - it runs through (but not quite) the center of gravity for the bare body. Of course I could be completely wrong - but like I said, I can't see them welding nuts on every car (an expensive extra production step) - for an option so rarely found on any completed units. FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater, FLA USA http://ZHome.com

ALAN WROTE: AT>...lots snipped... AT> As for Mr Matsuo, I think you might like to take a little bit AT> more notice of what he REALLY thinks, and to read between AT> the lines a little. He too now speaks from the present, a present AT> where we can see what a success the HLS30 model and its successors AT> were in the US market. When I spoke to him, it was quite clear that AT> he STILL thinks of the car as a Japanese car. I can't imagine Matsuo san AT> hearing that "American Sports Car" quote without feeling somewhat offended. AT>...lots snipped... Hello Alan (everyone): I wanted to follow up on your comment - sorry for the delay. I've had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Matsuo and while his English was limited and my Japanese was all but non-existent I felt that we had enough common ground to provide basic communication. (I meet him at Mr. K's induction into the Automotive Hall of Fame in 98.) I believe I said in an earlier Post that there was no doubt Mr. Matsuo was rightly proud of the "Japanese Car" that Nissan produced. Mr. Matsuo is Japanese and Nissan is a Japanese Corporation. In the technical sense of the term - the Nissan/Datsun 240-Z is a "Japanese Car". But that completely misses the point.... The Point Is: Until the Datsun PL510 was designed and delivered - Nissan/Datsun were making the same mistake as their competition. They insisted on tying to sell "Japanese Cars" to Americans. With the design and build of the Datsun PL510 all that began to change. With the PL510 Mr. Katayama started to get the cars his American customers wanted. Cars with more room for Americans and more power to keep up on American streets and highways. Mr. Katayama's battle with the home offices is well documented in several books related to the history of Nissan and the Japanese auto industry. Mr. K forced a sea change in Corporate Japan as well as in the US. Now enter Mr. Matsuo. Taking over the newly established Sports Car Design Section... and having witnessed the total rejection by top management of the "Goertz A550X".. I believe he was quite wise to NOT DO what Goertz had done. Let's look at what Mr. Goertz did. In a nut shell Goertz designed a car he wanted too. Let's look at what Mr. Matsuo did. In a nut shell he Led a Design Team - that designed a car Americans Wanted. (Based on input and direction from US Marketing and Mr. K). Mr. Goertz makes the constant argument that the only way to design an outstanding automobile - is to have a single "Designer" do the entire job - as he did on the BMW 507. (documented in all too many interviews and articles over the past 50 years). Mr. Goerz also made the arugment to Nissan that if they wanted to succeed in the US market - they had to have a US Designer do the job. (Yes, Goertz is a US Citizen and his office was in New York - he was/is a US Designer.) Mr. Matsuo proved Mr. Goertz wrong on both counts. Mr. Matsuo didn't design the 240-Z - he Lead A DESIGN TEAM - and the output from that team effort was an outstanding automobile. Perhaps even more importantly - Mr. Matsuo proved that a Japanese Designer could design an "American Car". Mr. Matsuo also proved that when "Customer Requirements" are understood and then used to "DRIVE" the design - the outcome will most often be a smashing success. It is my firm belief that calling the Datsun 240-Z "An American Sports/GT Designed and Built In Japan" - is the highest complement a Designer could receive. Mr. Matsuo and his team should have receive the Deming Award For Design. (one of the most coveted awards in Japan). It is my firm belief that Mr. Matsuo put his cultural and personal biases aside and accepted the challenge of designing a "Sports/GT for America". Had he not been able to do that, he would have failed in the same manor that Goertz did. IMHO to say that Mr. Matsuo designed a "Japanese Sports/GT" that simply sold well in the US - is to greatly understate his accomplishment; and to lower him to the level of Mr. Goertz. (driven by his ego rather than being driven by the challenge of "Design"). FWIW, Carl Carl Beck beck@becksystems.com http://ZHome.com

Hi Alan: I believe the "Other" category - in the 280ZX book is other countries outside Japan. The chart is intended to show numbers and the countries cars were exported too. Datsun 240-Z's were sold "new" by authorized dealers in Central and South America. They were built to meet a common Central and South American standard. (which had far fewer emission control and safety requirements). I believe "Others" included: Colombia, Brazil, Argentina and Costa Rica. Looking at the VIN's and build dates of Z's we have gathered over the years we find blocks of numbers missing from the series of US cars. Usually we find these missing numbers on cars somewhere else in the world. All we can gather is a statistical sampling - however based on what we have, when we add up the numbers and subtract differences of units between the end of one series and the start of the next, the add the numbers outside the US... the total production of 240-Z's comes pretty close to the total in that chart. FWIW, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hello Alan (everyone): When I said I was enjoying the dialog I sincerely meant it. Wordy exchanges don't bother me ;-) and I enjoy a good exchange (this is a hobby after all;-) I'm sorry your first contact with me was not as pleasant as it should have been Alan. I am all to often bluntly honest at the expense of tact, but I never intend to be personally offensive in that regard. As I recall - you wrote me bitching about there not being enough information on ZHome about the Fairlady Z. Not your exact words - but that was my take on the situation and I most likely was more than a little defense;-). (feel free to correct me if my recall is incorrect -I'll go back and re-read your e-mail message.). I get about ten e-mails per month from people bitching about my not having done enough free work to satisfy their needs/desires - so over the past ten years I've gotten a little thick skinned and maybe too snippy. There is another old saying however - "no offense intended then none taken". I've taken our exchange here with good humor and tried to keep it that way. Heated exchanges don't bother me and they usually revel more information than less. If you've read the articles I've written on ZHome - you know that I believe most books written about the Z Cars to date - good as they are - have missed what I refer to as "The Real Story Of The Z Car". They have covered the available data and information about the car, some of the history of Nissan, some of the history of the previous Nissan Sports Cars... and that seems to have been their purpose. For the most part they meet their purpose and I'm not knocking them in that regard. On a much higher level however, I believe they all missed "the Real Story of the Z Car". They have missed the "Forest" for the "Trees". In a very brief summary - my contention is that the real story of the Z Car is about industrial development in Japan post WWII. It's about industrial competition at it's best and the consumer products that come out of that competition. The real story of the Z Car is about excellence in design and engineering in the "Deming Award" sense of the term. The Real Z Car Story is intertwined with corporate in fighting, outstanding Leadership, and yes - even very stupid decisions along the way. The real story of the Z Car is also intertwined with Japan moving from enemy of the US - to becoming a benefactor of arguably the best friend they have ever had. In that context - the main theme is about designing the Datsun 240-Z for the US market and it's American customers. Your position would argue that Nissan designed a "dual use" or "multiple use" automobile - one intended from the beginning for "world sales". You suggest that the success of the Datsun 240-Z in American, may have been just blind luck, good timing, cheap price... ie an unexpected benefit to Nissan. You infer that sales success in the marketplace does not mean it was a good product. (your Mac argument;-). You say the home market S30S and S30 were the main design and argue the LHD models weren't even laid out well nor properly equipped. Your position is clearly that "all the S30's" were originally intended to be produced and therefore they should all have equal time, equal written coverage. That they are therefore all equally as important as one another. (your horse before the cart) I argue soundly against that position - not because I feel the Fairlady is inferior but because your position is diametrically opposed to what I believe is the true story of the Z Car. You are telling people we should count and compare trees - when I'm trying to tell people the forest is what should be the focus today. There are already lots of books listing and describing the trees IMHO. It's the forest that will preserve long term - the history of the Z and the men who delivered it. The real story of the Z Car - is carried by the Datsun 240-Z - as specified, as designed, as built for the American market. Diverting the focus from that truth undermines building a public comprehension of the tremendous accomplishment of both Japan and Nissan; not to mention the individuals involved. If indeed the Japanese owners of Z Cars view their Fairlady's as "the original intent". If indeed the Japanese owners of Z Cars view their Fairlady Z as a "Japanese Icon" to the extent that a Samurai Sword is. If indeed the Japanese owners of Z Cars view America as simply a large market into which they sell products to the suckers (or devil). Then that would be a very sad commentary on them indeed. My hope is that the Japanese owners of Z Cars see the Z for what it truly represents; "The First American Sports/GT designed and built entirely in Japan". A car that changed the automotive world. If they are driving a Z - they are in effect driving a domestically produced "foreign car". If they are driving a Z they are driving a First Place trophy representing a WIN - in the automotive marketing competition. Kind regards and if you get to Clearwater - you'll be welcome in my home Alan. Carl B.

A l a n Wrote: AT> You call the Japanese domestic model S30S ( Fairlady Z ) AT> a "stripped out model" - but you seem to conveniently forget AT> about the Fairlady Z-L. Hi Alan: I call it like it is. The S30S was stripped of many otherwise standard features to lower its cost in the Japanese market. I most certainly did not forget the Fairlady Z-L. However now that you mention it I will point out that it too was a compromise of the original design which offered lower performance. I hardly see how that would be "an improvement". The S30 chassis was designed for the torque and hp of the 2.4L engine. Substituting the 2.0L was a compromise not driven by customer defined product quality - but rather to accommodate then current Japanese restrictions on the displacement of gas engines. What Sports/GT owner "wants" less power? The 2.4L engine was on the other hand - driven by Mr. Katayama insisting that the US market demanded larger more powerful engines. He got his wish first in the PL 510 with the L16 and then with the 240-Z's L24. If we must rate the to engines as either superior or inferior - then yes, we would have to conclude that the Fairlady Z got the inferior engine. It has less torque, less horsepower and it puts out significantly more greenhouse gases that pollute the atmosphere than the US spec. L24. (with no offsetting weight savings from using a smaller displacement). AT> This was - in all respects apart from its 2 litre engine - of EQUAL or SUPERIOR spec. AT> to the USA model HLS30. Come on Alan - the heart of any sports car is its engine! The 2.4L in-line six with 150HP (SAE) was one of the major factors that sat the Datsun 240-Z apart from it's competition. - It was the "240-Z" that Nissan won the East African Safari Rally with. - It was the "240-Z" that Nissan won the C-Production Championships with. AT> How on earth can you posit that the USA-market model HLS30 was AT> in any way superior to the RHD cars EXCEPT in its engine spec.? In the first place - I never said that the 240-Z was "superior" (although it was - more power and less pollution). Also which RHD car are you referring to in this case - S30, HS30, S30S, PS30....??? What I said was the 240-Z was specifically designed for the US market - and every other variation was simply a side benefit to Nissan of no where near the significance in the overall scheme of things. AT> You are ignoring the fact that these models were arguably better AT> at being "sports" cars than the USA models. I think your being silly now... Besides, the Z is a "Sports/GT". The "GT" part is as important, if not more so, in the US market than the "sports" part. Remember, the Z was designed based on US customer defined quality. AT> Nissan ( probably at Katayama's behest ) gave you a four-speed AT> and matching diff ratio, If you don't have enough torque - you have to add gears to the tranny and teeth to the ring and pinion. Additional moving parts reduces reliability and increases cost. Do you really think lower rear end ratio's and a five speed is "better"? It's not - its a compromise for loss of torque in the Fairlady and it was simply a local market preference in the HS30's. There was no customer demand for five speed transmissions here in the US in 1970. There is no question that Nissan gave the US customers what they wanted. If they wanted a five speed - it was easy to order it over the Parts Counter and simple to install. I'd guess that at least 90% of the 240-Z's sold in the US - stayed with the 4spd. until they were driven into the ground by their owners. No doubt when the new "B" style 5spd. came out in the 280Z here - and it was time to replace the worn out transmissions on the then old 240-Z's - many of us opted to install the over-drive 5spd. AT> softer springs and dampers and no rear anti-roll bar. This was a AT> car MADE for the USA? I don't think so. If you don't think so - you don't really know anything about this market. It was made to suit American Consumers - driving under normal American driving conditions. "Market specific" design and engineering at its best. We have excellent high speed freeways, excellent secondary roads and streets. We like a softer and more comfortable ride quality in our GT's. In 1970 if you wanted a harsh, jerky ride - you bought an MG:-) AT> The USA-market HLS30 was a spec. that was aimed at a certain market, AT> but you can't say that the layout of the car made any sense in LHD form. "the layout of the car" - what in the world are you talking about? Let me guess ;-) When you pull up to the gas pumps at your local petro station - do you like having to open the drivers door against the pump island and squeezing out between the car and pump island? (we have our gas filler on the right side of the car - where the gas pumps are - and we have plenty of room to get in and out of the car on the left. I suppose you could pull up with the pumps on the Left - but then you'd have to pull the gas hose across the car to reach the filler. I would think that if the car was designed as a RHD model - it would have been a better design to put the gas filler neck on the Left side of the car. In a more general sense - I like left hand drive cars. I like using my right hand to work all the controls that are normally centered in any car... radio, heater, AC, GPS, Cell Phone, shift lever.. I guess one can get used to using one's left hand for all that - but most people in the world are right handed and their left hand isn't as precise. Give any design Engineer a choice of where to put controls for good human factors considerations and you will find that they always put them on the "right". That's one reason that Command Pilots fly in the Left Seat no matter what country they are from. I really can't think of anything related to the "layout" of the 240-Z that I would change. AT> The layout of the engine and trans forced the controls of the driver's AT> side to avoid the induction and exhaust manifolds. Sorry - but that's a AT> fact that was forced on the designers because they had to work with AT> what was available to them. Completely irrelevant and an incorrect assumption. There is plenty of room for the steering mechanism (if that is what you mean). Even room for a Turbo set up!! AT> I posit that if the S30-series Z car was, as you quoted, AT> "An American Sports Car - made in Japan" - then they would AT> have made a better job of the LHD version. You can think about AT> that every time you go to use your E-brake. That's just too funny Alan;-) Think about that for a minute. In an "emergency" if you had to stop your Z with only a hand actuated mechanical brake - which hand would you rather grab that brake handle with? - Your stronger Right Hand - or your weaker Left Hand? If I was designing a RHD car - I'd put that e-brake handle on the right side of the drivers seat. In a non emergency - just sitting, and later releasing, the "parking brake" - do you really prefer to use your weak arm? Your cruising along in your GT - do you really like having that e-brake handle obstructing your reach for all the controls in the center of the car? - Do you really like having it rub your left leg as you drive hundreds or thousands of miles? In the LHD 240-Z's that e-brake handle is exactly where I would have put it - I most certainly would not want it on the right side of the center console either. Sorry Alan - your observations about the layout of the HLS30 are simply too far fetched to make any sense to me. Now lets get serious about the design criteria. 1. The design team on Project Z - used US spec, human factors. A human considerably larger than the Japanese spec. As an example -the Silvia was a complete FLOP in the US because the Goertz design - was based on the human factors of the typical Japanese and the car therefore provided too little leg and head room for Americans. 2. The 2.4L in-line six - Mr. Matsuo has stated that for the Japanese market he would have used a 2.0L four cylinder (from the Fairlady 2000). The Z is a six cylinder because it was designed to meet the needs the US market. 3. The 240-Z was engineered to meet the US Safety and Emissions Standards. They "drove" many design and engineering considerations. The Fairlady Z's are interesting and they allowed Nissan to sell a few more cars in their home market - but your assertion that they were "as important", "as significant" or evenly weighted in the design consideration of the Z - are simply - well - your opinion. However I would suggest that your opinion is not based on any real facts nor sound logic. Lets get real Alan. It's not about a US ("devil") vs the world. It's not about the Japanese putting the British Sports Cars out of business. It's not about the 240-Z being "superior" to the home market "Fairlady". It most certainly isn't about any Japanese owners thinking their "Fairlady Z" is the "original" or that it is "superior" to the product designed for the US. It was all about Nissan vs Toyota - Nissan vs GM - Nissan vs Ford etc. It was all about building and selling cars that the target customers wanted to buy. It was all about "customer driven quality definitions". I doubt that anyone over 25 years old in Japan really feels that by building and selling products aimed specifically at the US market - they are selling out to the US devil ;-) FWIW, Carl B.

Hi A l a n: I am sorry about the mistake on your name.. I usually try to be very careful about that. Alan Wrote: AT> Wow Carl, AT> The weather in Clearwater must be really bad. AT> You've written the first chapter of War & Peace....... As this is a private (members only) forum - I'll have to admit that we have now had rain for the past five days. (something that the Tampa Bay Tourists Bureau would not like to have too broadly published!!). It's so rare that if the Sun doesn't shine all day the Newspapers are FREE!! But don't let that keep you from planning a vacation in Florida ;-) AT> You seem to have missed your vocation, as you would AT> have been a very successful politician ( and that is not AT> necessarily a compliment these days ). That's a truly funny thought. The last politician we had that was an Engineer was President Jimmy Carter - a heck of a nice guy, but a true failure as President. The last State Governor I recall that was an Engineer was in Washington State (Dixie Lee...) again a true failure as a leader... The truth is, one of my undergraduate Majors was Industrial Organization and Management (aka Operations Research). One of my undergraduate Minors was Journalism. I should have gone on to Law School - I could have made more money as a politician ;-) AT> ....interesting comments snipped... (I may come back to some of them later..cjb) AT> There is a certain amount ( not inconsiderable, actually ) of AT> futility in my trying to get you to see the Japanese point of AT> view. Remember - its not just MY opinion that I am putting AT> forward here. It may not be your opinion alone. That is why I'm taking the time to to publicly disagree. I do not believe that is the Japanese point of view at all. AT> There will be a certain amount of flexibility, but AT> basically I think most Japanese people who are interested in AT> the history of this car and have studied it carefully, or who AT> were involved in its inception and manufacture, will be most AT> surprised that anyone could think the way that you do. My guess is that you greatly underestimate the industrial education and intellect of the "average" Japanese citizen. They recognize "competitive success" in the marketplace when they accomplish it. It is my believe that they take far greater pride in the success of their strategic management and marketing approach in the automotive field - than you might credit them with. I believe that most Japanese Z Car Fans - would quickly admit that the Z represents a huge product success as well as an original design and marketing approach - that scored a "WIN" in the competitive markets of the US... to a far greater extent than they think of the Z as a "Sports Car For Japan that happened to sell well in the US". I believe that most will tell you that the Z was not really well suited for use in Japan and that accounted for its limited sales there. (Remember that Japan has half the population of the US and in 1970 they were not a poor people, nor a poor country - they were an emerging industrial and economic giant) I'd suggest that anyone interested in this discussion - research/ study Dr. W. Edward Deming, then read a few books on Total Quality Management (read the Japanese authors like Masaaki Imai's "KIAZEN"). I'd also suggest reading "The Origins of Competitive Strength - Fifty Years of the Auto Industry in Japan and the US", written by Mr. Akira Kawahara, as well as David Halberstam's "The Reckoning". I think you are in grave error when you attribute "PR speak" to Mr. Katayama when he introduced the Datsun 240-Z to the Nissan Employees - I can only feel sorry that you don't know him. I do and I can assure you that if nothing else - he has always been a man of honest words (even when it didn't help his career at Nissan HQ). Mr. K said: "The 240Z represents the imaginative spirit of Nissan, and was designed to please a demanding taste that is strictly American. It meets all the requirements of sports-minded drivers, fulfilling their desire for superb styling, power and safety, and provides them with the most thrilling and enjoyable ride available in any car. Our new product reflects the rapid advancement of our company. We have studied the memorable artistry of the European coachmakers and engine builders and combined our knowledge with Japanese craftsmanship. The result is an exotic, high-performance car exclusively for America. It will be the beginning of a new romance for the true car lovers who believe that motoring is more than just a commute." I think you will find that the Datsun 240-Z sold in great numbers because it was a total quality design, carried through production with great design integrity - it was a success in the eyes of it's customers long before it sold in great numbers. Said in another way - it sold in great numbers because it was a customer driven quality success - it wasn't declared a "success" after it sold in great numbers. FWIW, Carl B.

HI Steve: Oops.. sorry I missed answering your second question. I'd have to say "yes". As the "H" stands for the L24 engine - The "HLS30" designation would cover all the left hand drive units exported. regards, Carl B. Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hi Carl: As the thread started with Kat's original post - it covered 1969 production. In that context "E" applied to the HLS30's - If we were talking about 1970 production then "E" would cover both HLS and HS models. Or said another way - as only the HLS30's were built for export in 1969 the numbers represented by "E" apply to the HLS30's only. regards, Carl

Continued from previous frame.. AT> I think you would have to admit that most English AT> language resources ( including your own website ) AT> concentrate on the North American / USA model HLS30 AT> to such an extent that it makes all other models look like AT> an afterthought. Its got to the stage where the "240Z" AT> ( in both LHD and RHD forms ) is seen as the daddy of AT> them all................ Yes, I freely admit that. The history of the design and development, production and sales of the LHD Z - shows clearly that the "240-Z" is the "Daddy". I don't believe that's a personal "bias" - just a presentation of the facts. (I don't know why that would bother you so much). There is no question that Mr. Matsuo and his design team wanted to sell their creation in their home market. Likewise the Management at Nissan HQ in Japan must have felt the same way.. Japanese Ego/Bias... sure we can allow that. In the grand scheme of things however - if Nissan never sold anything other than the Datsun 240-Z it would still have been a smash hit in the sales numbers, still a smash hit for profit... the extra 10% for nitch markets - for Japanese Ego - was just gravy to the profit line - but certainly not significant, nor critical to the success of the Z Car. BTW - it's not "my website". The Z Car Home Page is the Web Site of the Internet Z Car Club. I have lots and lots of researched history related to the LHD 240-Z's published there only because I've taken the time to write and publish it. It's a main interest of mine. I been driving them since March of 1970, worked for Datsun in 72/73 etc. I can assure you (ask you - encourage you) that if you want to spend the time we'll gladly accept contributions of data, information and articles etc. related to your main interest in the Fairlady Z's. With over 13,500 members world wide - and a very heavily used web site - I'm sure everyone would enjoy knowing more about the various models in the first generation of Z Cars. AT> The story of the HLS30 "240Z" is a PART of the story of AT> the S30-series Z. We should not and must not think of all AT> the other models being a PART of the story of the HLS30 AT> "240Z". That would be to put the cart before the AT> horse............... Here I would have to respectfully disagree Alan. The "horse" is and always was the HLS30 - the Datsun 240-Z. The "Story" of the Z Car would have to contain many chapters - one would be about how Nissan captured a strategic export market, another about how Nissan took over the "affordable" Sports/GT Market in the US. The story of the Z Car is about a single model changing the perceptions of millions of consumers related to the quality and value of "Japanese" Automobiles. That is why the "Datsun 240-Z" is recognized today by Automotive Historians as one of the 10 most important automobiles in US Automotive History. That "story" is why Mr. Katayama was inducted into the US Automotive Hall Of Fame in Dearborn, Michigan (the heart of FORD Country no less!!). I will agree with you that most of the Books written in English - also missed what I consider the "real story" of the Z Car - as they focused mostly on providing data and information about the specific models and model changes, supported by some limited background info/history about Nissan and the Fairlady line - while missing the fact that the real significance of the Z Car was the monumental change in the Automotive Industry that the 240-Z initiated in the US market. Yes, the total story of the Z would have to include a short chapter about all the various minor incarnations for nitch markets. However if you think they are "as important", "as significant" as the HLS30 - - then I have to believe you have missed the real "Story Of The Z Car". The vast majority of your interest in this subject may be in the various deviations of the design - I can fully respect that - but to make the argument that 10% is equal to 90% doesn't hold water in the first place - and it clouds the real story of the Z Car IMHO. BTW - if you would like to take this off-line - so we don't bore "halz" to death - feel free to e-mail me directly. kind regards, Carl B.

Hi Allen (everyone): I'm sure we will bore everyone to death with our differing perspectives - but I have to admit I'm enjoying this conversation. You are of course completely wrong and I know - of course - I won't change your bias;-) - -but what the heck, we might have some minor influence on one another {vbg :-}. Believe it or not it's a rainy day here in Clearwater... Allen Replied: AT> Carl, AT> As far as I am concerned, "The True History Of The Z Car" AT> includes ALL of the S30-series models, and should not AT> concentrate on the USA / North American market HLS30 AT>"240Z" model to the point where all other models are AT> treated as a sideshow. AT> I try as much as possible to align myself with the AT> philosophy of Japanese S30-series Z enthusiasts, and see AT> all of the first generation cars as a family. OK - I can see all the first generation Z's as a family. I'd also agree that a "complete" history of the Z Car would include all the first generation models. AT> The basic model type designation of "S30" really ought to AT> be used when discussing the family of cars that includes AT> the S30, S30-S, PS30, PS30-SB, HLS30, HS30 & HS30-H AT> etc. Terms again... the "S30" is not a "model type designation"... it's a chassis type. You get "model type" when you add the letter codes - ie. S30S, PS30, HS30 etc. and a chassis serial number... S30 xxxxx. I'll agree with that - if the discussion stays "general" enough that what is being said - equally applies to all of the models. However most discussions evolve around what is different between/among them - so in that case I think it's helpful to specify more clearly the model one is referring too. >I think its wrong to think of the history of the Z car as being >centred solely around the USA market cars. Interesting perspective but I have a hard time understanding how you arrive at that. Everything about the history of the Z Car seems to prove it was "centered" solely around the USA market. Yes, granted that by installing a smaller engine, and offering a stripped model for less money (S30S) they could sell a few in Japan (and why not do that it didn't cost much). AT> Unfortunately, just about every English-language resource AT> on the early Z cars seems to mention the "240Z" as AT> though it was a predecessor to all of the other models. It is a documented fact Allen - the design requirements were gathered from the US market, the design and development of the Z was driven by the US market. Do you not take Yutaka Katayama's word for it? (I'll supply the quotes if you like - but I'm sure you have his book and many others on the history of both the Z and Nissan). Allen - one of the most significant "facts" about the Datsun 240-Z - that made it so different from all the other "import" Sports/GT's in the world that proceeded it - was the "FACT" that it was the first "American Sports/GT - designed and built in Japan".. That was a completely different approach to marketing exported automobiles and capturing export markets. Completely different than any other company had ever taken. Taking that approach pushed Nissan to it's Number 1 Sales position in Import Car Sales in the US. (the Z wasn't the first "car" to take that approach - the PL510 was, but the Z was the first Sports/GT). Until the 240-Z was introduced - every other imported Sports/GT had been designed based mostly on it's home market - then a percentage of them were modified/ re-configured and "exported" to other countries. In the case of the Datsun 240-Z - the exact opposite approach was taken. The fact is, all the other models exist only because they are variations provided for much smaller nitch markets. AT> I can see you demonstrating this bias with your AT> statements and questions above. The way you write AT> about these cars seems to be completely biased towards AT> one particular model and specification. You might be right - but I don't think it's a bias - so much as the facts that Nissan and the people involved in the design, development and marketing of the Z presented. They are the one's that focused the Z on the US Market. They are the one's written about for their genius. (it's not my bias it's simply the facts of the matter). I'll readily admit that living in the US - most of the data/ information of interest to me personally is focused on the Z's we have here and most of the data/info we can find here deals with them. On the other hand - most of the books written about the Z were written by authors in the UK.. AT> You seem to misunderstand what I wrote with regard to AT> the LHD and RHD cars above in reply to the figures that AT> Kats supplied. When I mention RHD cars I am of course AT> talking about the Domestic market "Fairlady" models, as AT> they are RHD are they not? Yes - I was only trying to specify that you were talking about the Fairlady - and NOT including the RHD 240-Z's in your reference to the "RHD". For a long time, and still today there is the undying myth that there are 1969 HS30 Z's in Australia. They are still advertised every once in a while for sale - and written about (AutoSpeed was the last example). I've tried hard to kill that myth;-) AT> ...snipped... AT> I'm certainly NOT trying to prove that a RHD AT> "240Z" HS30 model was in existence before or at AT> the same time as any of the others. Oops..sorry - that is exactly what I thought you were trying to prove. (that myth again) AT> What I've been trying to get across to people is AT> that the LHD models did NOT exist before the RHD AT> models - and that they were planned and protoyped AT AT> THE SAME TIME AS each other. OK - I think most people interested know that (yes/no?). AT> I'm not talking about just HS30 and HLS30 models. I'm AT> talking about LHD and RHD models. Yes - and I was pointing out that it might helpful to be more specific when you refer to the "RHD models" - as it's an indirect reference - could be Fairlady's, could be RHD 240-Z's or it could be both. You have now clarified that - by saying that you intended the reference to not be both, but rather the RHD's your were referring to was the Fairlady. (that was important to me because of the "myth" cited above;-) Discussion continued in next frame - due to size limit...cjb

Allen T Wrote: AT> I'm afraid the figures from that "Datsun 280ZX" book are just nonsense, AT> and cause more confusion than anything else. Its a real shame that AT> Nissan ( USA? ) could publish something like that without making a better AT> job of it. Hi Allen (everyone) I'd be interested to know why or what you believe is "nonsense". There is an old saying that might apply here - "all things taken within context". Looking at the intent/purposes of the 280ZX book I thought it was pretty well done. Taken within the context of the published data - I find the figures line up pretty well with what we are finding in the real world. They may/may not be "exact" but seem to be pretty close when looking at Production vs Sales. AT> One of the main problems is that it is totally ignoring all the non-"240Z" AT> models. I can't get my head around this. Why do people always talk about AT> the "240Z" without including all the other models of S30-series Z? AT> The HS30 and HLS30 were only TWO types of S30-series Z. I believe there are lots of reasons. One may disagree with them - but they are there and they are reasonable IMHO. 1. First and foremost - the Datsun 240-Z was specified, designed and intended to be a Sports/GT for the US Market. No doubt Mr. Matsuo always thought of it as a Japanese Car (he lived in Japan;-), - but even he admits the US requirements drove the design and the US was the market it was intended for. The fact that a few were produced for the Domestic Market and a few more were shipped to other Countries doesn't change that fact. 2. We can argue about the exact numbers - but the fact is something close to 90% of the S30's chassis were built for, and sold to, the US market. AT> I think its a big mistake to think of the 240Z model as being anything AT> other than a PART of the S30-series Z range. Well that's one way to look at it. I'd suggest that conceptually, it should be thought of the other way - ie. the 10% of production of the "S30" chassis - that accounted for "all other models" was a small part, a side track, a variance of, a side note to - the production and sales history of the Datsun 240-Z. Looked at by the numbers... on average for 48 months (1970,71,72,73) the HLS30 production averaged 3,319 units per month - while the entire production of the HS30 models totaled 4,039. Rounding the numbers for discussion - that's 160,000 vs 4,000 or you can see that the HS30's accounted for a mere 2.5%. AT> I also think the American "model year" system tends to cloud the issue of actual AT> manufacturing date. I don't understand why you would think that. The US is the only country that required the Date of Manufacture be fixed to the car. At least our system gives us the month and year our cars were actually produced. For the HS30's it's pretty easy to compare known production dates with the original engines installed and arrive at a pretty close "production date". The Fairlady's are harder to pin down - and at present we don't have a large enough statistical sample to derive much information from either. However Nissan's Technical Service Bulletins do offer some clues. AT> I'm personally more interested in the actual date that the AT> car went through the Factory than the "Model Year" that the AT> US-market assigned to it I agree that production dates are important and interesting - but here we get back to the context - they are important and interesting only when associated with some production or design change for example (yes/no). A production date by itself doesn't tell you much does it? - unless you associate it with some other useful data/facts. AT> ( although I do understand WHY this system was created ). Lots of AT> production and sales figures mix these up, and it makes things even AT> harder to understand. You can see this confusion from the amount AT> of questions that arise over the actual dates of these cars. I understand what your saying and that is indeed somewhat true - I think the core problem is all to often people are too loose with terms - they use them incorrectly or they don't pay specific enough attention to them. People mix/intermix/confuse "Production Numbers" with "Sales Numbers"... Nissan kept them pretty well defined, even if a lot of the data they published were not 100% accurate. That is one reason we started documenting VIN's, Production Dates and Original Engine Serial Numbers years ago. For example that Nissan 280ZX Book - clearly states that it is giving "Production Volume" numbers by year - not Sales Numbers - and it's showing a graphic example of the number of "Exports" vs "Total Production"... While it isn't 100% accurate - it does give one a pretty good picture of the over-all story. AT> I'm sorry to say that I have still not seen any DEFINITIVE production AT> figures that include ALL the iterations of the S30 model range. AT> I have several different sets of figures for the Japanese market, AT> let alone any other markets and models . Yes - it is too bad for those of us interested in the history of the Z Car. On the other hand Nissan and their Dealers were/are in business to sell cars and make profit. I think it's too bad no one outside Nissan was interested in the history of the Z - at the time it was being produced - so records could be verified at the time and kept. Nissan's Policy is to not keep records past the point of meeting legal requirements for record keeping. Saves them money and records are only used to prosecute law suits;-). On the other hand, if all that factual data were readily and easily available -this subject would not hold our curiosity nor drive our interest to search for the trivia ;-) FWIW, Carl B. Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA http://ZHome.com

Hello everyone: I stated in a prior Post the following: CB> Nissan put a "Data Tag" in the engine compartment of the Z. CB> It had both the VIN of the car and the original engine serial CB> number stamped on it. That Data Tag is the only way to know CB> what engine serial number was originally installed in the car. CB> The engine serial numbers of the L24's begin with "L24-" then CB> that is followed by the serial number and it is unrelated to the CB> VIN/Chassis number. (it's a Datsun not a Chevy). I must have been falling asleep... that's not technically correct. I should have said: "The Model Number Plate in the engine compartment is one way to know what engine serial number was originally installed in the car. The original engine serial number was also printed on the Monroney Sticker (Window Sticker) and the Dealer was supposed to transfer the engine number to the owners Warranty Booklet here in the US. I'm sure most of you know this already but just wanted to make the terms/situation clear for anyone that didn't. So: A "VIN" (Vehicle Identification Number) is the Model Info + the Chassis Serial Number. The S30S/S30/PS30 ect. Domestic Fairlady Z's, the (HS30) RHD 240-Z's and the (HLS30) LHD 240-Z's all had separate Chassis Serial Number series. So S30 00016, HS30 00016 and HLS30 00016 would have all been produced at one time or another - so you need a complete VIN to tell them apart. VIN Tag = VIN stamped in a metal strip, riveted to the dash and visible through the windshield. (required in the US - not in Japan) Model Number Plate = aka "the engine compartment data tag" in the engine compartment has the Model info printed on it. The VIN and the original engine serial number stamped into it. FWIW, Carl B.

Z Kid Wrote: ZK> ....sniped..."The engine is the L24 2.4 liter with the E31 head. ZK> The engine is original but the numbers do not match, this is ZK> because Datsun (nissan) took about a year and a half to get ZK> things together due to how their factory was set up. If anywhere ZK> on the assembley line something didn't pass quality check the ZK> vehicle was sidelined and then the next car went through and ZK> got that vehicles engine. This made sure that none of the ZK> early 240z's had correct engine and frame matching numbers." ZK> Is this really true?? Hi Z Kid (everyone) Nope - complete nonsense as far as original engine serial numbers or "matching" numbers goes. Cars with quality problems were in fact pulled off the assembly line - the problems corrected off line - then they were put back into the line for completion (usually at a later date). So chassis serial numbers on the Z's do not track one for one with their Date Of Manufacture.. Nissan did not use the Chassis nor VIN number to identify the engine. The L24's were produced on one production line and they were numbered serially. L24-001, L24-002, L24-003 ect. The L24's were used in the Datsun 240-Z's as well as a couple of other Nissan/Datsun sedans. Nissan put a "Data Tag" in the engine compartment of the Z. It had both the VIN of the car and the original engine serial number stamped on it. That Data Tag is the only way to know what engine serial number was originally installed in the car. The engine serial numbers of the L24's begin with "L24-" then that is followed by the serial number and it is unrelated to the VIN/Chassis number. (it's a Datsun not a Chevy). Even though the engines were numbered serially as they were produced - lots (groupings) of them got shuffled around as they were delivered to the assembly line... so they were not put into the cars in perfect serial number order either. So we have the VIN Tag - that is visible through the windshield. It has only the complete VIN on it. Then we have the Data Tag in the engine compartment. It has both the VIN and original engine serial number stamped into it. For the US and North American 240-Z's we also have a Data Tag on the drivers door jam - that lists the "Date Of Manufacture". All US models have to comply with Emissions and Safety regulation - based on their Date Of Manufacture (so the data tag is required here) That door jam data tag was not installed on the RHD Datsun 240-Z's, nor the Fairlady Z's. Sorry to re-cover something that's already been discussed - but the discussion left me a little confused as terms were swapped around... Hope that clears this up a bit. regards, Carl B.