Carl Beck

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.

Allen T wrote: AT> At the very least, these figures show that the LHD cars were not AT> produced "first", and that there were indeed RHD cars being AT> pre-productionised at the same time. Hi Allen: I fail to see how you arrive at that conclusion. Kats numbers show 1 Domestic and 1 Export built in May (factory prototype). It also shows 2 Domestic and 2 Export in July - when Kats says the "pre-production" cars were started. That is no proof of which was "first". Also important to note that the "RHD" cars were Fairlady Z's. The Z Cars for Export were Left Hand Drive models - No production Right Hand Drive 240-Z's were "produced" until very late Jan or Feb of 1970. There are no 1969 RHD 240-Z's. AT> In fact, up to November 1969 AT> more RHD prototypes had been made than LHD prototypes. That's AT> nice to see, as it might help to get the message across with regard AT> to the LHD cars NOT being the "First" as is sometimes claimed. "Pre-productionized", "prototyped"... we'll never know for sure - what matters is "Production" as in "sold to the public". Given that the Fairlady Z was a RHD model - I don't believe that there was ever a question that they were both prototyped and produced at the same time as the LHD 240-Z. (who questioned that?). Both the Fairlady and Left Hand Drive Datsun 240-Z's were on display at the Tokyo Motor Show in 69. (NO RIGHT HAND DRIVE 240-Z's were there however - not in any coverage I've been able to find to date). As I said in an earlier reply - if you or anyone have photographs of "prototype" RHD "240-Z's" I'd sure love to see them. All the images of any "prototypes" of a 240-Z that I have found are LHD models. The "claim" of being "First" I believe applies correctly to the statements that follow: 1. The first 500 Datsun 240-Z's were produced in 1969 (might be a few more than 500 in fact;-). 2. No Right Hand Drive Datsun 240-Z's were "produced" in 1969. 3. The first Right Hand Drive (HS30) 240-Z was produced in late Jan or Feb of 1970. (HS30 00004 was the first one sold to the public as far as we know so far). Given that it's original engine was not produced until Jan of 1970 - the car could not have been built in 69. (the owner's research agrees with mine by the way - it was sent to Australia). Allen also provided some interesting photo's - thanks. Can you tell us any more about "when" they were taken? Interesting that they seem to have snow tires on all four wheels - and the guys are dressed in winter coats in the one picture... were both pictures taken in Phoenix? (maybe they took them to the mountains?). I have been told by a 25 year Datsun Parts Manager (1968 when he started to work for Datsun) - that the early 240-Z Parts Catalog stated that the rubber strips were added to the HLS30 Z's at HLS30 00013 - cars prior to that were fitted with the domestic front bumper (no rubber strips). So far no one has found a copy of the first few revisions of the 240-Z Parts Catalogs for me... Ron Johnson at Nissan Motorsports said he remembered that being the case - but couldn't find any documentation for me. There is also a rumor/story that a few pre-production Z's were sent to Nissan Canada for winter testing - As HLS30 00009 thru 00015 are un-accounted for.... the pictured Z's could be any one of those I suppose.. Kind regards, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA http://ZHome.com 69, 70, 71, 72, 72 & 73 BRE Z (yes it was actually titled and sold as a 1969 Datsun Cpe).

Hi Gang: I'm joining this discussion a bit late... so I'm trying to catch up. I've coped Kats entire Post - so I can intersperse comments/questions. Great info Kats - can you tell us who or what section at the factory supplied it? I assume you are talking to Nissan HQ - not the actual factory (yes/no?). Kats> Hello everyone, Kats> I would like to show a data which I got from the factory. I Kats> hope this will help someone's knowlege and questions Kats> clear. Kats> Unfortunatly it does not mention about HLS and HS Kats> seperatetly, it says Kats> only"E" for export model Kats> means HLS and HS. I would not assume that it means "either" - No "Production" (meaning cars sold to the public) HS30 240-Z's were produced until very late Jan or Feb of 1970. I have never seen any pictures of "prototype" Right Hand Drive 240-Z's in any of the books written on the subject either. (has anyone got a reference to one?). I have seen Prototype "Fairlady Z's" in RHD of course... but no 240-Z's. Kats> Also "D" for domestic model (JAPANESE)S30,PS30... Kats> Here they are, Kats> 1969 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Kats> "D" 1 1 2 6 9 48 214 688 Kats> "E" 1 0 2 1 2 52 388 97 Kats> Some notes: Kats> On 10th Oct 1969, 2 silver 240z(HLS) arrived at NMC Kats> gardena california,for 3 months /16000miles road test. Kats> Actualy they were in each big wooden boxes!! They are Kats> preproduction #14 and #15. Kats> This means they are 14th and 15th build in the factory, Kats> they are not HLS30-00014 or 15. Rumor has it that several were sent to Canada also for pre-production Winter Testing. No verification of that yet. Kats> I got these,so far. Factory said there is no person who Kats> knows much more details of production numbers Kats> currently. It is sad Nissan didn't keep any of the production records either. I wonder who/why they found what they did? Kats> I guess they are HLS30-00004 and 00005. Kats> Reasons are, #1 The factory said they made 3 Kats> prototypes for testing assembly line and seeing how Kats> workers build. They were not given serial numbers and Kats> they are the ones in May and Jun which you can see Kats> above. They called "KOJYOU SHISAKU" If I can transrate Kats> directly,"factory prototype" Kats> Alan, you can help me please follow up! Kats> So,HLS30-00001 and 00002 should be the ones produced Kats> in Jul. They are called "SEISAN SHISAKU" transrate Kats> directly "production prototype"? They are exactly same Kats> as 240Z, I mean everything (whole thing)same as 240Z Kats> which were sold to the public. OK - so you are saying you believe the VIN's/Chassis Numbers started at 01 with the production prototypes in July of 69... sounds reasonable to me. Kats> You can count 11 240Zs in Jul through Aug. NO - I count 3 240-Z's and 8 Fairlady Z's July through Aug. Kats> Accordingly #14 and #15 must be produced in Sep,right? No - HLS30 00004 and HLS30 00005 would have been produced in Sept. (right?). Since HLS30 00006 and HLS30 00008 had a production date of Oct. 69 - that would seem to come out right as far as Datsun 240-Z's would go. (HLS30 00006, 00007 and 00008 were used on the Show Car Circuit - first shown at the New York Auto Show - 00006 was dented and sent to Bob Sharp Racing (it's still being raced in Vintage events here - likewise 00008 went to Speckman for race prep - and is still being raced in Vintage events here - none were sold to the public). Your figures show 537 240-Z's produced in Oct. Nov. Dec. of 69. That would seem to agree with the usual "first 500 produced" claim. (we've documented the fact that cars past HLS30 00500 had 69 production dates attached). Kats> One more interesting view I was told, You can see the Kats> numbers in Dec is much less than in Nov. The factory said Kats> that happend due to found ploblems in test driving,they Kats> slow down nearly stopped production. That's very interesting. Indeed, we have only found 4 cars still in existence with Dec. Production Dates. #87, 89, 496 and 587. You will notice they are quite far out of perfect sequence. Kats> Major ploblems are big road noise,viblation from rear Kats> axle,and steering kicking back. Test crew reported that Kats> from U.S.A. and the factory in Japan tried to solve these Kats> ploblems. Interesting - my first Z was HLS30 001777. After I had it for about four months - the dealer installed a clamp with a rubber bumper on the steering rack - to reduce the steering kickback and front end shake (that what they told me at the time). Never noticed any vibration from the rear axle. The real problem they had was the L24 had been designed for sedan use - then put in the Z. The L24 originally had a six counterweighted crankshaft. When subjected to the higher RPM's used in the 240-Z's they had very bad harmonic balance problems. They cracked flywheels and blew clutch pressure plates. This was solved by going to an eight counterweighted crankshaft. The "fix" was introduced in the late Jan. 70 production cars (about the third week). (engine serial numbers L24- 03607 or newer received the newer cranks). Kats> Mid to late Dec,the factory managed to clear ploblems Kats> anyway(not perfect),they shipped corrected 240Z(with Kats> some development parts, not sure how many 240Zs) by Kats> air. Another problem we had with the very early cars were the shocks leaked every 6K miles. The Datsun Dealer rebuilt the shocks free of charge duing the first 12 months on my Z - without regard to mileage... (I put 68K miles on that Z in 18 months - so I was way over 12K miles long before the year was up). Kats> Then the factory went to full swing production,very busy. Kats> I will add some so try soon. Kats> Best regards, Kats> kats Great job Kats.. keep at it. kind regards, Carl Carl Beck Clearwater,FL USA http://ZHome.com HLS30 00020 HLS30 00042 and others..

Oops... Sorry - I was following #212 and 279 ( I think it was - a green 69). It was the green 69 that had a red front end..etc. sorry for the confusion.. Carl B.

HI Carl S. (everyone) A friend requested additional pictures of this car - Looks like it's had either a full front clip put on - or it was actually red to begin with. Rust in the frame rails under the floorboards - and in general seems to be pretty screwed up. I'd much rather pay $6,500.00 for an original, solid, rust free example to use as the basis for a full restoration. In the end, you'd save twice that much getting the car done. I understand that the "buyer" backed out on the deal after inspecting the car.

Hi Guys: Mike G. ask me to check in on this discussion. For those who do not know me. I bought my first Datsun 240-Z in March of 1970 and I've owned and driven them ever since. I've been researching the history of the Datsun 240-Z, in a fairly serious fashion for about 15 years now. I've compiled a listing of hundreds of VIN/Build Date/Original Engine Serial Numbers for both the Right Hand and Left Hand Drive models. I presently own HLS30 00020 and HLS30 00042 (among others). A close friend owns HLS30 00016 - the lowest left hand drive chassis number sold to the public. He also owns HLS30 00019 and HLS30 00052 (among many others). So I do have some knowledge related to the very early cars. Mike from Australia is correct in his statement about the "compliance tags" on Right Hand Drive models imported into Australia. In 1970 cars were accompanied by paperwork only which said in effect that they complied with all laws in force upon arrival at the Port of Entry. Compliance tags were affixed to the cars at the Port of Entry starting late in 1971 as far as we can tell. The lowest VIN imported into Australia was HS30 0004 and it was built in January or Feb. of 1970. I have communicated with the owner of this car and his research agrees with mine. Contrary to popular Myth in Australia - there are no 1969 production year Right Hand Drive models - they didn't start production until 1970. All 240-Z's imported into the US had to have their VIN affixed to the car - one tag visible through the windshield, the chassis had to have it's number stamped into the metal. The Date of Manufacture had to be affixed to the car. (required by our Federal Highway Admin for both Safety and Emissions requirements). One thing common to both Right Hand Drive (HS30) and Left Hand Drive (HLS30) models was the data tag in the engine compartment. It contained both the VIN and the Original Engine Serial Number. Nissan only had one production line for the L24 engines and they have only one series of serial numbers, so we can cross reference engine serial numbers to build dates - and arrive at a build date for the Right Hand Drive models as well - even though they didn't receive the data plates that provide that information. All that said - the VIN tags were always riveted in place on the dash. The very early cars into the US did not have the emissions evap. controls - so no vapor lines returning to the rear of the car. Many early cars into Canada did not have air pumps nor the air injection into the exhaust manifold. On the car in question - the hood stops on the firewall are incorrect for a very early car and the plastic fresh air deflectors from the radiator core support to the inner fender are not the original type found on early cars. The Throttle Damper - was standard on all US cars. But all / any of this could have been changed over the years. HLS30 000212 has been on my listing since Oct. of 1995 - it was owned by Greg Scott of Santa Claira, Calif. and had a build date of 11/69. One should request the original engine serial number for this car - it should be something close to L24- 02xxx. Carl S. is correct - inspect everything personally and very closely before you buy. Feel free to me mail me at: cbeck@becksystems.com regards, Carl B.