HS30-H

If you are talking about the Miller TNT/T4, then that would be 1920 rather than 1915. No disrespect to Harry Miller ( or more specifically Leo Goossen ), but Peugeot, ALFA, Delage, Humber, Sunbeam, Frontenac, Maxwell, Premier, FIAT and Ballot engines were using similar specs and producing comparable power some time before Miller engines were.

No offence, but why are you using an engine code to describe a transmission? If you are selling an FS5W71-C transmission ( for example ), then surely describing it as such will be less likely to cause confusion?

I've been struggling to get any shots worthy of posting here. My digital SLR turns out to be too big to fit into the 'mouth' of the car to take a decent close-up photo of the area. Instead I have dug out some photos I took in Japan a few years ago of a factory 240ZG that was part-dismantled before going away to be restored. I think these photos illustrate the mounting areas a bit better because the bonnet ( hood ) extension panel and front bumper had been removed - showing what is not normally visible. Hope they are of interest........

I've sent at least four e-mails over the space of a couple of years to the webmaster of that site, and I have conferred with two other people that have also sent e-mails requesting correction of errors. All of us got no reply or reaction. Maybe he spent so long getting it all up there that he doesn't want to change anything?

Just as long as you remember that it has plenty of mistakes, misconceptions and plain bad information sprinkled into the mix.......... Especially on the story surrounding the Z.

rags, Yes, the car is a genuine factory-built Fairlady 240ZG ( 'HS30-H' model ). Mine has the earliest type of lower front panel, without the 'air-con' ducts that you can see on the spare NOS lower panel in my pics. The bottom of the lower panel overlaps ( actually underlaps ) the radiator support crossmember, but it is not physically attached to it. There is a central stay coming up from the lower edge that attaches to the stock grille support bracket on the body ( see my third pic in previous post above ). The hood hinges bolt to the body in the stock location, but they are - of course - different to the stock short-nose type. The hinges are 'outside' of the vertical sides to the lower panel ( if I understand your question correctly ) and they do not aid in the mounting of the panels. The bumper bars are longer than stock short-nose type and sandwich the sides of the verticals on the lower panel to the body ( er - if I remember correctly that is! ). The stock short-nose torsion bars fit into the ZG hinges and are still present. It is really hard to explain all this accurately, and a decent picture would tell much more than a thousand words. I just had a flip through saved pics on my computer and could not find a decent shot of that part of the engine bay and in front of the radiator. I shall have to take my camera over to the garages ( a few miles away from home I'm afraid - so you'll have to bear with me ) and see if I can get some proper photos to illustrate this a little better. All who have seen the factory FRP G-nose panels and overfenders have commented on the high quality and excellent fit. It is all very thin, accurate, surprisingly strong and well finished. Give me a couple of days and I'll try to get some shots to illustrate the fit. I'll post them here when I have them. Cheers, Alan T.

For reference purposes, some photos of an NOS genuine factory ZG lower panel that usually hangs on the wall of my garage:

Tony, Probably best if we take the conversation about the 'Macau' car's history to PMs or direct e-mails. I have pics of the car racing in Japan, and some interesting info on the owner / driver. There's some stuff I can tell you that is probably best kept private until it can be properly verified.......... Can you PM or e-mail me with your e-mail addy? Veritech, Yes, that's the car in question. Notice just how big that front inlet is ( quite unnecessary! ) and the fact that the factory Works teams had already moved far beyond that thinking. Notice too the rather home-made look of the rear Overfenders - which are nothing like the proper Works cars were using at that point either, and nothing like the same car was using whilst it was in Japan. Cheers, Alan T.

I've never actually told anyone that I am "writing a book" - it is just something that people keep assuming. I'm still gathering information, and - to be honest - in many ways just scratching the surface. I still only know some of what I don't know........... Tony, The oval-mouth Works front panel was quite different to that 'Macau' car's extended front. Even though the 'Macau' car photos are so poor it is still easy to see that it extended outwards quite a long way from the standard outline of the car. That 'Macau' car has had an interesting life, and has some tales to tell. Unfortunately the article published on zhome.com is full of errors and assumptions, and does not stand up well to even light scrutiny. I exchanged e-mails with the current owner some years back, and he insisted that the car was built as a race car by Nissan - even though the true story of the car ( and who prepped it, and where ) is known to a few Japanese race enthusiasts and some of the people who were actually involved in the story on the Japanese side. Ironic that you should so quickly see the possible connection between 'Scuderia Nissan' and the 'Macau' car, as it was indeed 'Scuderia Nissan' that built and race prepped the car for the American owner / driver. The 'Macau' nose looks decidedly amateur to me ( and not up to the nice standard of SN's work ) so I'm guessing that it might have been something dreamed up and fabbed by the owner either just before Macau, or whilst there. It certainly wasn't the work of Nissan's own race departments at Omori or Oppama as the legend wants us to believe. In fact, we might even be talking about two cars here rather than just one ( some interesting photos I could show you about that! ). Even the name of the owner / driver on the zhome.com article doesn't match up with the documented Japanese side of the story. All very contradictory - but that's old race cars for ya! Cheers, Alan T. ps - if you are interested in American family genealogy there's a research project in the offing on the 'Macau' car owner / driver. I have two names for him and don't know which of these was his pseudonym yet......

olderthanme, No offence, but random images found on the internet are not really what I had in mind for this thread...... I was attempting to start a conversation / discussion about early Japanese attempts to improve the aerodynamics on S30-series Z race cars, and factory 'Works' backed efforts in particular ( as they had some fairly good resources, and threw a fair bit of time and effort at the cars ). It seems to me that there are things to be learned there, as the cars DID get faster and the mods were NOT being planned with one eye on winning a beauty contest. The other important fact is that parts that were JAF/FIA homologated in-period for these cars can be of great use to people that want to race in categories and races sanctioned by those bodies today. Here in Europe there are several cars in build at the moment that are going to be utilising the full Works Group 4 aero packages, and that will be competing with other 'period' modified race cars under FIA rules. Proof of use 'in-period' can help these teams pass scrutineering, and allow them to get nearer to their competition, and yet some of them have never seen what the factory teams were using in Japan - which seems a pity to say the least. Some of the cars you pictured are using Works-derived body parts or copies of them; the yellow City Auto car uses the 1973-spec full Works aero package - as shown in one of the pit scenes I posted - so nothing new under the sun there in a way, although the huge diamtere wheels and tyres would be a no-no in a period-correct race series. The yellow Fujitsubo car uses the slightly earlier Works front spoiler, but again the modern wheels and rubber. The roof-chopped Challenge car was an Eighties creation, and an ( illegal ) road racer / hashiriya car - so it hardly qualifies under the criteria. The Spirit Garage car is great - but again a much later creation and not conforming to FIA/JAF rules either. See where I'm coming from? And most importantly when discussing this kind of thing, I think you need CONTEXT. Unless you know something about the photos you are posting ( date, situation, specs, race category etc ) then it is hard to gain any really meaningful insight from them. That's why I try to post pics that I know something about. Cheers, Alan T.

During the 1972 season, some teams experimented with fins on the rear deck. Here's Yanagida again, this time in his much-photographed red/white/blue Hitachi / Checkman-sponsored car: And another SCCN team driver in the same event - Seiichi Suzuki in the Maruzen Technica-sponsored Tomei car. Suzuki was sadly destined to perish in a race accident within just a couple of years:

Here's a car that shows some interesting modifications. Driver Haruhito Yanagida ( boss of well-known Z specialist garage and race team 'CENTRAL 20' ) was a sometime Nissan 'Works' SCCN team driver, and had good access to some trick Works parts and cars. However, he also had some of his own ideas - as illustrated here. This cars sports the full Works Group 4 aero package G-nose kit. Note the extra-deep rear spoiler and small 'flip' strip above the rear window, and the alloy side-skirts:

During the 1971 race season, many of the 'Works' race cars began to be fitted with the newly-homologated 'ZG' aerodynamic body parts. These were updated, changed, modified and tweaked between almost every race, and by 1973 the full-blown super-wide overfender versions with super deep front spoilers were in full use. Once again, radiator inlets at the front of the car were ducted all the way up to the rad support. These were difficult to see when the bonnet ( hood ) was in place, but were sometimes revealed in the pits - or when the car was damaged:

I thought it might be worth posting some reference photos for discussion about early efforts to 'improve' the aero characteristics of S30-series Z cars. It seems to me that some of the parts-adding and mods performed over 35 years ago can still be food for thought today. At the very least, some of us might find the pictures of interest. First shot. A 1971 factory 'Works' 240ZR race car with an FRP front panel that reduces the radiator inlet size ( I believe it was also fully ducted to the rad support panel ) and gives a separate inlet duct for the carbs. This car also sports a front 'spoiler' with brake ducts and slots for the QuickJacks used in the pits. The full-length FRP engine/trans undertray appears to be slightly damaged and is hanging down at the back. Note that this car - like so many of the Japanese circuit race Z cars of that period - was built for endurance races that varied from 300 to 1000km in length: Another Works car at speed. Similar to above spec, but with outlet ducting added to the bonnet ( hood ): A slightly clearer view of the bonnet ducting in this 'pit-in' shot: Aftermarket race parts suppliers in Japan were soon on the case, and producing their own versions of the parts seen on the Works cars. Here's a period magazine ad from 'Scuderia Nissan' ( a race team / parts manufacturer not actually affiliated to Nissan Motor Co. ) that shows a similar front panel treatment - but this time for the S20-engined Z432. Note the carb inlet duct on the opposite side to that of the L-series engined versions: More to follow.......

Who's trying to "pick a fight"? Certainly not me. I'm just sticking up for some people that you are damning with what I consider a fairly cheap and unjustified shot. As I mentioned before, some of the people that you are saying "..........don't know what the inside of a RB motor looks like." do actually build them for a living! And a quote is - by its very nature - a snip. I'm just trying to clarify what it is in particular that I'm commenting on, that's all. Sorry, but have you quoted yourself correctly there? LOL. Surely the most pertinent and interesting point about that thread is that it calls to attention the possibility that both the 'Eagle' and 'Tomei' rods ( as well as other known brands ) are forged in the same factory in China? It could also be the case that the same factory also machines these forgings for the companies concerned ( but to what extent is still unclear ) and this would throw new light on the word-of-mouth bad rep that 'Eagle' rods have obviously been given, don't you think? If you actually want to stick up for 'Eagle' ( even though you personally use 'Carrillo' ) then I would have thought pointing this fact out might be a good start? Or is this actually a "look at these idiots" type of thread? All of us can learn something from threads such as the one you linked to, and I don't think casting aspersions on the thread's participants helps anybody to learn anything. You seem to have missed the whole point of the thread. Do you see where I'm coming from? I've actually visited 'Tomei' in person, and it is absolutely no surprise to me that some of their rods are manufactured in Chinese foundries - although I'm fairly sure they do a certain amount of final processing and QC in Japan. They will openly admit that they are too small a concern to have their own foundry, and that they have parts made for them by outside companies in other countries. HKS, even though they are exponentially bigger than Tomei, do the same - although possibly to a lesser extent. When I visited the HKS factories in Japan I was actually surprised at the amount of stuff they made in-house, but I was not surprised to see blank rod forgings being brought in by the crate ( presumably made outside Japan ) to be CNC milled in-house either. I think there's a whole other sub-plot that could be discussed here about the possibilities of people being fooled by inferior quality Chinese-made goods. Some of them have quite possibly been branded with trusted names like 'Eagle' - so you have to wonder what will happen to the reps of certain companies when fakes of their product are earning them a negative reputation. When I see ARP rod bolts in a Chinese-made rod, I start to worry whether they are real ARP rod bolts! I agree. But unfortunately no forums or websites are immune to bad information, are they? Alan T.

Well, the guy who received the rods in question was obviously not an "Eagle hater" ( that's you I'm quoting there ) as he thought he was actually going to get 'Eagle' rods when he ordered 'Eagle' rods. I don't think it is wise to damn all the people participating in that thread as "...... mostly bench builders who don't know what the inside of a RB motor looks like" when one of the major contributors to the thread actually builds RB engines for a living ( and has customers all over the world ). I think there's more hands-on experience in that thread than you realise.............

This is quite clearly untrue.

"Back in the day"? That race was only a few years ago, and I was there. The GT40 was not getting "passed on the outside" - it was moving out of the way to let the GT40 take the racing line. The GT40 was being driven well within its capabilities, whilst the Z was on the ragged edge. And there was a Morgan in the same race that put half a lap of the Silverstone club circuit on both of them..........

So fenderbender02, this steering rack is part of an LHD to RHD conversion then? I didn't realise that. As AKWIKZ has pointed out, you'll need a lot more than a steering rack to do that properly......... We do quite a lot of LHD to RHD conversions here in the UK, and very best way to do it is to have a complete RHD organ donor on hand. You can however do a good enough job with just the right components. Have you got all the data you need? The factory RHD parts lists are going to be a useful reference for you. Let me know if I can help. I beg to differ. Maybe it can be made to work, but the result will still be an upside-down LHD rack. The pinion gear wil be on top of the actual rack instead of its original orientation, and the adjuster will be 180 degrees away from where it is supposed to be. The angle of the pinion will also be wrong - which will put undue strain on the lower steering uj. I don't think it is wise to cut corners where steering and braking components are concerned. Why use an inverted LHD rack when the correct RHD item is readily available?

I probably have what you need, but you might not like the cost of shipping from UK to USA....... What exactly do you need? If it was as simple as that, Nissan would have made the racks the same for RHD and LHD layouts ( they didn't miss a trick when it came to saving money ). But the racks are handed, and for good reason; the geometry is quite different.

No, I don't need to try any harder. I think it is clearly untrue. From what I can see ( with very little digging ) a combined total of something less than four thousand Elises were registered in the USA in the period from USA market launch in 2004 through to the end of 2006 model year sales. If you really believe that Lotus has sold less than ( let's round it up a little here ) 5000 cars in a history spanning more than 55 years, then you are living in LaLa land.

Would you mind quoting the source of this 'fact'? Having visited Hethel several times, I'm having trouble believing that in one year Lotus Cars Ltd. could actually manage to produce a fraction of the cars that they have "sold world wide in their history".

I thought you were actually going to compare an S20 with an L-series. Oh well......... Tell me though, why are you describing the normal L-series six head as a "siamese" design? I don't see that it can qualify as a 'siamese' design head, as all of the twelve ports are seperate and do not share any duties. The S20 on the other hand ( ironically, given your choice to use it for comparison ) does have what we could call a 'siamese' port design, as each port serves two valves and has a dividing wall half way down it. The heads that I believe to be a true 'siamese' design would be the ones that have common ports serving different cylinders - like the BMC 'A' series for example.