4ways Zs original

[Russ]

Do you think we could get some rough dimensions for the OSGiken head, I'll draw it up in Autocad then we can have some machined out of a solid lump of billet aluminium??

 

[Rob Gaskin]

Do we have any more pictures and spec of the Blue 'race car'? That's the one I love the appearance of.

Could we get Geoff to exhibit these cars at Fourways at an Openday?

 

[zedhead260]

Explain please I thought ALL Zs were historically significant !

Works Rally cars, works and semi-works race cars, the likes of the BRE cars etc.
If I found a Z432 or Z432R maybe I'd be more sympathetic to the period.
Relatively speaking, my RS30 is pretty run of the mill - that's why I don't mind under-skin modernising.

 

[SeanDezart]

As the LY was generally only found on works cars, I think it is a historically significant head.

Personally if I fitted the LY head, I wouldn't be doing it for any kind of period effect unless it was going in a historically significant vehicle.

Works Rally cars, works and semi-works race cars, the likes of the BRE cars etc.
If I found a Z432 or Z432R maybe I'd be more sympathetic to the period.

This is where I was getting confused because the Z432 and Z432R already have a beautiful engine - why change it ? And the BRE cars had the OHCs.....

Are you saying that you'd want to make a replica of an historically significant 'works' vehicle ?

Are you allowed to say 'run of the mill' for a 260Z, especially after the E.A. Safari rallye ? Suppose that means my 240 is too....

 

[zedhead260]

This is where I was getting confused

I think I have confused the issue

If I had a Z432/R (not likely), I would keep it in period and original because of its Z relative rarity (so keeping its original engine).

If I had something historically significant (ex-works), and happened to have an LY kicking around I would use it and keep the whole project in period. If I was doing a replica then the same rules would probably apply.
I don't plan on building anything like this - I'm just hypothesising

The BRE comment was just me giving examples of historic significance - anything other than an SOHC wouldn't really be right - even if it was a replica (ish)

If I had an LY or OSG kicking around to use with my existing project, it would most definately not be in period (hence the TB's) - under-skin modernising.

Sorry, it was early in the morning - I must not have been as awake as I thought I was.

Are you allowed to say 'run of the mill' for a 260Z

Well, 899 Euro market RS30's isn't that run of the mill compared to 135,000 or so US market HLS30's - but it doesn't make them worth any more does it............so yes, I am allowed.

 

[SeanDezart]

If I had something historically significant (ex-works), and happened to have an LY kicking around I would use it and keep the whole project in period.

But then, if it was an ex-works car, you wouldn't need an LY kicking around - it'd be on there.......wouldn't it ?

Well, 899 Euro market RS30's isn't that run of the mill compared to 135,000 or so US market HLS30's - but it doesn't make them worth any more does it............so yes, I am allowed.

Doesn't make 'em worth less either ! So no, not run of the mill, not imho !!!

 

[Albrecht]

James had this engine head and he got no W factor from it - did The Z Club queue up to say 'ohh-arr'...?

99.999% of 'The Z Club' members haven't got a clue what it is have they? - so probably not.

I thought that Nissan effectively dropped all further N/A development of the L series once the cars were winning in the States on SOHC heads ?

"Dropped all further N/A development...." - Huh? What on earth are you talking about?

Are you implying that there was a link between Nissan Japan's race "development" of the L-series six and the activities of teams like BRE and BSR in the USA?

If you are, please show some cast-iron examples of the links. I could do with a laugh.

TBs would be a better use of some of your £25k but could ruin the period effect...?

Electronically controlled triple side-draught injection throttle bodies were being used on Works S30-series race cars from late 1971 onwards. Either you always forget, or you didn't know that in the first place.

But then, if it was an ex-works car, you wouldn't need an LY kicking around - it'd be on there.......wouldn't it ?

So, you think all Works cars had an LY?........

I can't understand how somebody who has been around these cars for so long, and appears to have an interest in the race and performance history of the marque to boot, can make it look like they know so little.

If you could be kept in quarantine I wouldn't worry about it, but you're on the interweb - and it's catching.

 

[SeanDezart]

Welcome back Count !

Yeah, I believe that Nissan started turbo development of the L series in the mid '70s and therefore further N/A development of the L-series enine was dropped (by Nissan).

No, I'm not implying that there was a link between Nissan Japan's race "development" of the L-series six and the activities of US teams? I guess news of the US racing teams' success DID get back though to Japan without any 'links' !

And didn't Nissan Japan stop developing twin-cam heads when the US teams could do so well with the SOHC ?

Electronically controlled triple side-draught injection throttle bodies were being used on Works S30-series race cars from late 1971 onwards. Either you always forget, or you didn't know that in the first place

Or I just said it to draw you out 'cos you've been ignoring my requests in order to send you something on the Le Mans Classic 240Z - might make you laugh or cry - depends ! Truthfully, I thought it appeared on works rally cars from 1972 onwards ! And I was referring to modern TBs not those used 30 years ago. Much like the comparison of my Dellortos and your Mikunis !

Question : were TBs being used with LY heads.....?

It is still a sad fact that information on works race cars in Japan is not readily disimulated.

 

[Albrecht]

Yeah, I believe that Nissan started turbo development of the L series in the mid '70s and therefore further N/A development of the L-series enine was dropped (by Nissan).

Wrong on both counts. Nissan displayed a show car running a turboed and injected L-gata at the 1970 Tokyo Auto Show. There was no "therefore" linking that with the normal aspiration race development of the L-gata. You are writing things without having a clear understanding of the full facts and timeline involved.

No, I'm not implying that there was a link between Nissan Japan's race "development" of the L-series six and the activities of US teams? I guess news of the US racing teams' success DID get back though to Japan without any 'links' !

OK, but then you write this:

And didn't Nissan Japan stop developing twin-cam heads when the US teams could do so well with the SOHC ?

As I asked before, what are you talking about? How are you linking this "stop" in development of twin-cam heads in Japan ( on what engine? ) with the the 'success' of the normal SOHC L-gata in USA-based racing? Explain please. I know for sure that you don't have the foggiest of ideas of what was going on, or the inter-departmental politics behind those goings-on.

Or I just said it to draw you out 'cos you've been ignoring my requests in order to send you something on the Le Mans Classic 240Z - might make you laugh or cry - depends !

I'm not interested in that car Sean, seriously. I'm glad I declined your requests to become involved. It bore absolutely no relation to the car that originally ran in '75 and '76 ( which was one of the main stated aims of the mission ), and therefore was a complete charade.

Truthfully, I thought it appeared on works rally cars from 1972 onwards ! And I was referring to modern TBs not those used 30 years ago. Much like the comparison of my Dellortos and your Mikunis !

Late 1971, as I have told you many times. And what is the difference between these "modern" throttle bodies and the Denso / Nissan units? I think you'll find that there is not much new under the sun. The difference of course is in the electronics, not the fundamental hardware bolted onto the engines.

And what is the difference between your Dellortos and "my" Mikunis?

Question : were TBs being used with LY heads.....?

Answer: FFS, yes! Don't you ever open those books I know you own?

It is still a sad fact that information on works race cars in Japan is not readily disimulated.

If you really have an interest in the subject, then you'll make it your business to find out as much as you can. You can't expect it to be handed to you on a plate.




You exasperate me on this type of subject. Stuff seems to go in one ear and then straight out of the other. It makes me post in reaction on the forum in a bid to try right the balance between bad information and good for the sake of others, but I don't feel like I want to bother trying to explain historical details and background to you in direct e-mails or PMs any more. It is too demoralising.

 

[SeanDezart]

Wrong on both counts. Nissan displayed a show car running a turboed and injected L-gata at the 1970 Tokyo Auto Show. There was no "therefore" linking that with the normal aspiration race development of the L-gata. You are writing things without having a clear understanding of the full facts and timeline involved.

OK, but then you write this:

As I asked before, what are you talking about? How are you linking this "stop" in development of twin-cam heads in Japan ( on what engine? ) with the the 'success' of the normal SOHC L-gata in USA-based racing? Explain please. I know for sure that you don't have the foggiest of ideas of what was going on, or the inter-departmental politics behind those goings-on.

Count, you're the one who informed me that Nissan began developing the turbo L series as early in the '70s during an exchange re. Skylines and their engines !

And I thought it was fact that after BRE had solved the vibration problems in 1971 and had improved crankshafts "the engineers in Japan, who were in constant contact with both Brock and Sharp, were quite surprised by the figures to say the least" - page 129 in one of those books I own !

Never mind, question then : when did Nissan move on from the N/A OHC to Turbo'd OHC and when did they effectively stop further development of the cross-flow heads ?

I'm not interested in that car Sean, seriously. I'm glad I declined your requests to become involved. It bore absolutely no relation to the car that originally ran in '75 and '76 ( which was one of the main stated aims of the mission ), and therefore was a complete charade.

You didn't decline Count, it was I who requested that you give me a rough quote rather than disturb your contacts as I doubted their seriousness - at least we managed to convince them not to paint the car in the colours of Hallers' unfortunate car ! That which is often stated isn't often the truth, but it did run and people saw a Datsun finish and ahead of more popular models - not all bad eh ? It might even have started more than we know. I thought you'd be interested in the follow up, my way of respecting you and showing that I considered you not to be 'just' an ignored parts supplier. The offer's still there friend.

Late 1971, as I have told you many times. And what is the difference between these "modern" throttle bodies and the Denso / Nissan units? I think you'll find that there is not much new under the sun. The difference of course is in the electronics, not the fundamental hardware bolted onto the engines.

Again, a matter of word definition, I'm quite sure that nothing much is new, it is the application of such. I should have said modern TBs and their accompanying electronics.

And what is the difference between your Dellortos and "my" Mikunis?

You stated many moons ago that you preferred the 'period feel' and look of Mikunis and the corresponding inlet manifold under your bonnet to a brand new set of triples. Honestly, for me, there is no difference, all that matters is that it all works efficiently but I respect anyones' search for period authenticity.

Answer: FFS, yes! Don't you ever open those books I know you own?

Well, I've had a quick look and on page 126 of Longs' book he quotes " in Japanese race circles, the more competitive 2.8 litre cars were sometimes equipped with the LY engine. This was basically an L28 block fitted with a twin-cam 4v cross-flow head. Usually fitted with triple two-inch Weber or Solex carburettors, around 300bhp was available."

The same book on page 104 mentions Kallstroms' 1973 rally car with a 2.5 engine, injection and a cross-flow head and Martin Holmes had a similarly equipped car in the Welsh rally. Interestingly, it is also claimed (on page 101) that "99% of the works cars had drums at the back - only the 260Z rally cars had discs all-round as standard" !

In fact, again, it was you who said don't believe all you read in these books, there are mistakes everywhere. In the lack of other information, especially that which you have taken the time and trouble to find out and also has been made available to you on frequent trips 'over-there', I piece-meal and frequently get it wrong because the truth is much more complicated and frequently left deliberately vague. Maybe I'm not the only one who does this but I appear to be the only one willing to discuss it and Count, I do learn....slowly.

You once said that most Z Club members don't care about all this, I do and I think you do too but not enough to want to write frequent history snippets to place the facts clearly in front of people - your choice but it's too easy to knock those who don't know what you know and I do set myself up for it.

If you really have an interest in the subject, then you'll make it your business to find out as much as you can. You can't expect it to be handed to you on a plate.

I can dream can't I ?

You exasperate me on this type of subject. Stuff seems to go in one ear and then straight out of the other. It makes me post in reaction on the forum in a bid to try right the balance between bad information and good for the sake of others, but I don't feel like I want to bother trying to explain historical details and background to you in direct e-mails or PMs any more. It is too demoralising.

When I read 'those books', the impression given is that the 240Zs raced in Japan were all 'R' cars; works racers but I can't belive that's true !

We could start a new one here, easily believed - " Big Sam began with an ex-works Fi cross-flowed engine but it was seriously damaged after the crash at Brands and the head was acquried by a local Z specialist and eventually fitted to a superb road car".....................

 

[Albrecht]

Oh Christ, here we go again. Another exchange where I write rebuttals that go in one ear and out the other........

Count, you're the one who informed me that Nissan began developing the turbo L series as early in the '70s during an exchange re. Skylines and their engines !

That's right, they did. So how is 1970 the same as "the mid Seventies"? The exact years are important when you are trying to link competition development activities with what was being sold to the general public. These things were far more complicated than a few pat sentences and throwaway lines can convey.

And I thought it was fact that after BRE had solved the vibration problems in 1971 and had improved crankshafts "the engineers in Japan, who were in constant contact with both Brock and Sharp, were quite surprised by the figures to say the least" - page 129 in one of those books I own !

There it is. You simply don't get it do you? BRE didn't solve the high-RPM crankshaft vibration problem on the earliest L24 engines ( and certainly NOT in 1971!!! ). They put different crank pulleys on them as a temporary fix to a fundamental crank counterweighting issue that the engineers in Japan knew about, and were addressing ( with a re-designed crank ) before BRE and BSR even received their first cars. The crank vibration problem was discovered by the Japanese engineers during testing in late 1969. This problem - and the crank re-design that it demanded - was one of the issues that delayed the first bulk deliveries of Export S30-series Z cars to the USA market. BRE and BSR had no direct input on the problem's discovery or cure.

Historically, there's always this reading-between-the-lines implication that the 'little yellow man' didn't actually know what he was doing.

Well, I've had a quick look and on page 126 of Longs' book he quotes " in Japanese race circles, the more competitive 2.8 litre cars were sometimes equipped with the LY engine. This was basically an L28 block fitted with a twin-cam 4v cross-flow head. Usually fitted with triple two-inch Weber or Solex carburettors, around 300bhp was available."

You already know ( I've told you enough times ) that the LY was a SINGLE cam, TWO valve design. Brian got it wrong. Are you basing your 'research' on a couple of paragraphs in his book? You don't seem to be able to grasp that there was a whole lot more going on ( and much more than a single scenario ) than a couple of paragraphs can hope to cover.

The same book on page 104 mentions Kallstroms' 1973 rally car with a 2.5 engine, injection and a cross-flow head and Martin Holmes had a similarly equipped car in the Welsh rally.

Yes. And your point is?
I was urging you to look at the pictures. There's an injected LY on page 103 - so why did you need to ask me if the LY was ever run on injection?

Interestingly, it is also claimed (on page 101) that "99% of the works cars had drums at the back - only the 260Z rally cars had discs all-round as standard" !

This is news to you? I think you need to go and look at the homologation papers and the rules again to refresh your understanding of what was allowed and what was not. Remember he was writing about FIA-sanctioned Group 2, 3 & 4 rallying here - not JAF-sanctioned circuit racing in Japan.

When I read 'those books', the impression given is that the 240Zs raced in Japan were all 'R' cars; works racers but I can't belive that's true !

There you go again. Why are you singling out the "240Z"? You make this mistake time and time again.

Works cars were Works cars. Their spec didn't stand still from one race to the next. You think there were no privateers or slightly grey 'semi Works' or Works-assisted entrants in Japanese circuit racing? Think again. These books you own simply skate over the subject with a few paragraphs. Surely its easy to comprehend that the truth is going to need a lot more space than that to do it justice?

 

[tch911]

You guys need to get out more, drive your cars!!

 

[SeanDezart]

Oh Christ, here we go again. Another exchange where I write rebuttals that go in one ear and out the other........

That's right, they did. So how is 1970 the same as "the mid Seventies"? The exact years are important when you are trying to link competition development activities with what was being sold to the general public. These things were far more complicated than a few pat sentences and throwaway lines can convey.

Indeed...so.......when did Nissan decide to concentrate on and implement turbo development for the continued success of the Z / ZX series ?

There it is. You simply don't get it do you? BRE didn't solve the high-RPM crankshaft vibration problem on the earliest L24 engines ..........This problem - and the crank re-design that it demanded - was one of the issues that delayed the first bulk deliveries of Export S30-series Z cars to the USA market. BRE and BSR had no direct input on the problem's discovery or cure.

Delayed ? They started arriving in the States just a few months after the November Tokyo show - are you suggesting that the aim was to be selling them there almost directly after the show ?

Historically, there's always this reading-between-the-lines implication that the 'little yellow man' didn't actually know what he was doing.

That's because all the books in English are written by Anglo-Saxons and why after all you've said, I don't trust too much what I read in them. But I take your point, I'll stick to looking at the pictures (thumb planted firmly in my mouth ;-)

Brian got it wrong.

You don't seem to be able to grasp that there was a whole lot more going on ( and much more than a single scenario ) than a couple of paragraphs can hope to cover.

I do grasp it, I'm always grasping and you feed me a line here and there, just enough to keep me from starving !

There you go again. Why are you singling out the "240Z"? You make this mistake time and time again.

Works cars were Works cars. Their spec didn't stand still from one race to the next. You think there were no privateers or slightly grey 'semi Works' or Works-assisted entrants in Japanese circuit racing? Think again. These books you own simply skate over the subject with a few paragraphs. Surely its easy to comprehend that the truth is going to need a lot more space than that to do it justice?

Sure it's easy to comprehend but there's no info. out there for the average Euro. Z fan to understand. I know that there must have been loads of Zs racing in works, semi-works, 'grey'-works and simply road cars, prepped up - I just wish we could read all about this ! T'would make the 'job' of convincing the snidy press and racist public of the greatness of these cars.....!

All in all Count, you should write that book, even at the expense of missing something out - drop the impossibility of being a perfectionist and share those castle vaults of knowledge. Or is it too satisftying to lock oneself up behind the moat and watch the peasants scratch around in the dirt with the chickens for half-worms ?

Did you get Xaviers' book in French ? Part of the parcel I wanted to send you was a copy of it !