Can I ask a question?

[suzy]

.........seems to fall of deaf ears...

It may have taken me a few days but I have tracked down the "offending" ZGs and they have now been changed on the Z Club membership listing

 

[Albrecht]

My thanks to zedhead260 and Ian Patmore for finding the article in question.

I don't yet understand why my friend was talking about two "240ZGs" - unless I was the one getting the wrong end of the stick and he was including mine. Does the article specifically state just one "240ZG" and one "260ZG"? Can anyone quote, or better still attach a scan of the article?

I remind you that my own genuine factory built 240ZG is NOT owned by a member of The Z Club of GB.

Aha! Now we're getting somewhere . So the question now is where did the Membership Secretary get these designations from? Again maybe DVLA or is it what the member claims on his/her subscription form?

Looks most likely that the members concerned are the source of the bad information. Can somebody please explain to them that they cannot change their cars into different factory designations by attaching aftermarket parts to them?

If it's the DVLA, then there is little that can be done. If it's a member's claim then I can't see any reason why the Membership Secretary would see a reason to dispute. EG my Z is in club records designated differently to what is on my V5 - and that's because the DVLA is wrong.

So are you saying that nobody in the club will be responsible for policing issues like these? So a club member can pass his/her car off as whatever they like, with no correction or sanction from the club? Who'd want to be a member of a club like that? Scary.

And at the moment, especially since the Club valuation guru hasn't been asked to validate these cars, I can't see where any fraud would arise. OK as a Club we should be careful about facts per se but, unlike the New York Times, we do not have a highly paid team of fact checkers. That's what this forum is for! (At least in part hehe).

Gio, I remember having a fairly heated exchange on here just a few months ago with a club member who insisted that he had the right to call his car a "240ZG V8". This was a well-known UK-market 240Z with a Rover V8 conversion and some replicated panels that were vaguely based on those of the ZG. It was NOT a factory-built ZG. Calling it a "240ZG" was hugely misleading. And yet he was being supported in that by a prominent and long standing member of the club. I think the final outcome was along the lines of 'we will have to agree to disagree on that' - as though there was some justification for calling the car a "240ZG" ( bullsh*t! ). That's what I mean when I write that a change of thinking would be required within the club to solve issues like these. I'm afraid the philosophy is ( and I quote the club's Valuations Officer ) "What's the big deal anyway?"

( quote: Albrecht: "if the DVLA had registered a car as a "240ZG" or "260ZG" then that information must have come from the person filling in the V5 application." )
er, not necessarily. In fact almost definitely not. According to the DVLA and SMMT when I went through this with them at some length, new UK cars supplied by dealers have their details put onto the DVLA system by the supplying dealer and the whole thing is computerised so the dealer systems talks to the DVLA directly. There are rarely errors in model designations here for the obvious reasons.

Seeing as the "240ZG" model was never officially exported by Nissan, and never sold by Datsun UK as a new car in the UK, we should not have to worry ourselves about registrations of NEW cars. No such model as a "260ZG" was ever sold to the general public - so we should not have to worry about that either.

However, for imported s/h cars, the info on the V5 application form is completed by the importer (who may be a dealer, not very knowledgable or not give 2 hoots). It is then handed to a drone at the DVLA Local office who amble off to punch it into their system and they have to select from a list which appears when they start looking up Nissan. They model they select may not have any relation to the real thing. EG that is why we have so many apparent Z31s - the drone looks up 300ZX and is presented with a list where Z31 appears before Z32 so they just click that. Bingo - a Z32 registered as a Z31.

No, I don't agree. The importer is not always the first person to apply for a V5 on an imported s/h car. I've been through this process several times before and cars can change hands before the first V5 is applied for. The key point on a Japanese import is the original Japanese 'shakken sho' - which will have the CORRECT data on it, and it is the responsibility of the person applying for a V5 to make sure that the DVLA get it right. It can be put right retrospectively if you are persistent enough..........

But that's clearly not what we are dealing with here is it? It would appear that this is a case of club members deciding to ignore the factory designation of their vehicles, and reassign them with either another factory designation ( not legal, decent, honest or truthful ) or make up a spurious designation that sounds like a factory designation. I think the club has a duty to correct them if they are going to be listed on any club documentation that will be used as reference material, or form part of a club archive.

 

[Albrecht]

Grolls,
I think maybe Alan would help us (the club ) be more of a "font of all knowledge", about Datsun and Nissan, but if we as the club can't get the basics right about use of the standard Datsun/Nissan terminology/history ( e.g the Gnose) and other issues, which Alan has commented on. Most of the time it seems to fall of deaf ears, so I can see why Alan can't really be arsed to try and get us to get it right.

At last, somebody who can see where I'm coming from! Thank you, Ian.



Funny that some people don't seem to be able to get their heads around the fact that THREADS LIKE THIS ONE are part of the process of getting it right. Rock the boat a little, and people just tell you to sit down.

 

[Albrecht]

It may have taken me a few days but I have tracked down the "offending" ZGs and they have now been changed on the Z Club membership listing

Suzy,
Thank you for confirming the correction.

However, will you allow me to point out something - but at the same time ( possibly? ) annoy you a little more?

I would suggest that you move your quotation marks from the word offending, and put them around the letters ZG, like this:

"........I have tracked down the offending "ZGs"............."

This is because they did offend, but they are NOT "ZGs".





Pedant Central over and out.

 

[datsun dave]

So alan are you going to join the Z Club with the UK's only 240ZG ?

or can you bring it to Silverstone ?

 

[zedhead260]

I guess it is up to each individual member to decide what they want to call their own car, but this should not mean that the owners club should give this a stamp of authority and implied approval by publishing such half truths on a written list of member cars.

This is where it all starts. It’s the member that names his / her car – we have ZVR’s, 240GTR’s, 500ZX’s, some people even give their cars female names !!!
There’s nothing we can do about this, what we need to do is revise the membership form (already discussed by the committee following this thread) so we can get some much more accurate information. I’m guessing the “car section” of the membership form hasn’t changed much since day one.

In Japan it is illegal to pass off a car as a '240ZG' if it did not leave the factory as one (all sales descriptions, insurance declarations and ownership documents have to clearly state that it is a replica or modified car ). The owners clubs in Japan would never knowingly sanction such activity either.

But the “pet names” do appear in Japan too. I have seen a 240ZG (which most likely wasn’t) and a 280ZG advertised for sale on Japanese web sites.
Of course, not being able to read the text, there may have been the disclaimer – but should the buyer of the “240ZG” joined Club S30 (or whoever) and stated that it was a ZG on his membership form – who / what would be the process of confirming that ? (Especially if they chose not to be particularly active by coming to meetings etc).

Interesting that my own car should now be having questions asked of it

it is almost impossible to prove that there is NOT another one out there in UK territory lying unpublicised, unrecognised or undiscovered.

I was questioning you, not the car. But nonetheless, you have answered my question – thanks

So, like I say; "show me another"...........

I’ve made the enquiry as I hear of a white one that’s been here for 15 years or so, but unfortunately has so far lead to nothing.
So, I’ll get back to you on that one – but please don’t shoot me if it does turn out to be a load of bollocks, or indeed, doesn't turn out to be anything at all.

.....and other issues, which Alan has commented on. Most of the time it seems to fall of deaf ears, so I can see why Alan can't really be arsed to try and get us to get it right.

I disagree – I think his comments are taken on board. Have a look at the forum sub-section titles. ”One Club, All The Cars” rah rah rah !!

thanks for finding the article in question.
Can anyone quote, or better still attach a scan of the article?

“113 240Z inc 3x Samuri, 1x turbo, 1x ZG
81 260Z inc 1x turbo, 1x GTO, 1x ZG
52 280ZX inc 2x turbo
24 300ZX Z31 inc 7x turbo
94 300ZX Z32 inc 71x turbo, 1x Convertible
13 350Z inc 1x Roadster, 1 x twin turbo”

Well, as you can see, it looking pretty rubbish on all fronts – but I think it demonstrates the info is coming from the membership form.

The previous report in the autumn 2005 edition looks better (different secretary) –

“128 240Z
68 260Z
43 260Z 2+2
18 280ZX
48 280ZX 2+2
45 300ZX Z31
96 300ZX Z32
8 350Z”

But if we are getting into the detail (One Club, All The Cars) – this too needs to change. I know for a fact we have S30 Fairlady Z’s, Z31 200 & 300ZR’s and we really need to be differentiating between all those Z32 Fairlady’s and the Z32 300ZXTT’s etc.

So are you saying that nobody in the club will be responsible for policing issues like these?

I’ll keep an eye on it, and help revise the new form (but I’m NOT volunteering to be new secretary)

I think the club has a duty to correct them

I agree.

 

[zedhead260]

I would also like to point out that it has been quite clear in my mind from before I bought my 260Z what a real ZG was, and have never been under any delusion that those body-kitted cars (and there's been quite a few) were anything like the real deal.

You see I bought this thing called a "book". It's not the best book I have read regarding Z's, but for the time it served its purpose - mainly for the photo on page 45 which was the deciding factor on buying my car.

It's called "Essential Datsun Z - 240Z to 280ZX", and was written by non other than Colin Shipway (aka 260ZG on this forum).
There is a photo on page 25 showing a ZG (not a very flattering angle I might add), with a few words on the following page which quite clearly states that there are Nissan originals and copies. He even shows a photo of his own car on page 77 which clearly states it as a "G-nose" kit, flared arches and a Kaminari rear wing.

 

[Gio]

..a club member can pass his/her car off as whatever they like, with no correction or sanction from the club?

Regrettably that is the legal position even if us pedants don't think it to be right. OTOH if the Club were to "officially" confirm a wrong identity to underpin a financial transaction then there is a potential problem in becoming involved in a fraud case as accessory or witness. So even if there is no legal basis on us controlling what anyone chooses to call their car, we do need to be careful when confirming or reporting such claims. And I think there is a "moral" duty to get these things right.

Gio, I remember having a fairly heated exchange on here just a few months ago with a club member who insisted that he had the right to call his car a "240ZG V8". This was a well-known UK-market 240Z with a Rover V8 conversion and some replicated panels that were vaguely based on those of the ZG. It was NOT a factory-built ZG. Calling it a "240ZG" was hugely misleading.

Yep, sounds misleading to me (just bear in mind here I speak as a non-expert in Zs). Shame I missed that argument as I would have piled in as a pedant-in-training.

The key point on a Japanese import is the original Japanese 'shakken sho' - which will have the CORRECT data on it, and it is the responsibility of the person applying for a V5 to make sure that the DVLA get it right. It can be put right retrospectively if you are persistent enough..........

I didn't know that - in fact, I don't think my importer would have known what a shakken-sho was and I'm pretty certain the DVLA office didn't either. Clearly I wasn't persistent enough with the DVLA - I just gave up. Maybe I need more pedant training! And it is easy to see why people would just shrug and put up with whatever the drone had filled in.

But that's clearly not what we are dealing with here is it? It would appear that this is a case of club members deciding to ignore the factory designation of their vehicles, and reassign them with either another factory designation ( not legal, decent, honest or truthful ) or make up a spurious designation that sounds like a factory designation. I think the club has a duty to correct them if they are going to be listed on any club documentation that will be used as reference material, or form part of a club archive.

Now I think that may be a little harsh. Within days of you (rightly) bringing this up, club officials and members noted, investigated
and corrected. Although I know nothing of the cars or whose they are, it looks to me more like an innocent mistake easily corrected rather than anything out-of-order.

But in any case, I agree with you - and the other experts in the club that it is important to get these things right - even if it is just for the sake of the truth. Vroom vroom

 

[parmenter]

240zg Racer

Just thought i would add is there not a 240zg racing car over here? or is it a `zg` kitted car if so rally news needs to be corrected to for the last many years !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[parmenter]

Change My Car Name ?????

I suppose i better change my car name as it is not a true 280zx turbo but a janspeed conversion ! tut tut

 

[Gio]

as it is not a true 280zx turbo but a janspeed conversion !

Pete, out of interest, what does it say on your V5? And, come to that, what does it say on the V5s of those 350Z boys who get a turbo conversion?

 

[Albrecht]

So alan are you going to join the Z Club with the UK's only 240ZG ?
or can you bring it to Silverstone ?

Dave,
I do not intend to rejoin The Z Club of GB. Therefore I doubt I will be bringing any of my cars to Silverstone for the event you are talking about.

Maybe you should ask forum member 'red baron', who says he has just bought a 240zg ( sic ) which is still - at this point - in Japan. Maybe he can get it to the UK in time for Silverstone?

 

[SeanDezart]

Why won't you join Count ? Any chance of you making it over to France in one of your cars ? We've no ZGs either real or fictional but we do have genuine red wine, sunshine (although with 10cms of snow today) and great roads/scenery.

You'd always be welcome as well as our differences of opinon and my ignorance.

 

[Albrecht]

It’s the member that names his / her car – we have ZVR’s, 240GTR’s, 500ZX’s, some people even give their cars female names !!!

These 'pet' / modified names are fine by me as long as they are used in the spirit of fun. But as soon as you get somebody effectively 'upgrading' their car to a different factory model ( as in the case of this spurious "ZG" we have been discussing ) it can become - potentially - a little more dodgy. In the end, some unsuspecting party might get their fingers burned because they have been misled into believing that something is what it is being called.........

But the “pet names” do appear in Japan too. I have seen a 240ZG (which most likely wasn’t) and a 280ZG advertised for sale on Japanese web sites.
Of course, not being able to read the text, there may have been the disclaimer – but should the buyer of the “240ZG” joined Club S30 (or whoever) and stated that it was a ZG on his membership form – who / what would be the process of confirming that ? (Especially if they chose not to be particularly active by coming to meetings etc).

In the case of cars in Japan, you really need to be able to read Japanese to understand what is going on. Many times you will see a car advertised for sale, and the word ( and I romanise for clarity ) "Shiyo" follows the model type. For example, a description that says "240ZG Shiyo" means that the car is NOT an original factory-built 240ZG. The word "Shiyo" is probably best translated as 'look' or 'image', in the sense of a lookalike or replica - however loose. When selling a car in Japan, the seller would fall foul of the law if they were declaring a car to be a factory-built '240ZG' if it in fact was not. The truth is easy to see, as the extra length and width of the factory '240ZG' takes it up into a higher taxation bracket and the dimensions and taxation class are stated on the 'Shakken Sho' papers that effectively form the car's passport.

Lots of people over here ( and in the USA / Canada / Australia / NZ etc etc ) look at Japanese websites, auctions and magazines, and misunderstand what they are looking at - in particular when it comes to the S30-series Z and the C10 and C110 series Skylines. There are lots of ZG and GT-R 'replicas' or lookalikes that people mistake for The Real Thing. In almost all cases, The Real Thing is a lot more expensive and rare than they realise.

Did you hear about the young lady from Swindon who thought she had bought a KPGC10 Skyline GT-R from the Japanese auctions ( through an importer ) around four or five years ago? She had actually bought a KGC10 Skyline GT ( notice the lack of the letter 'P' in the VIN prefix? ) that was modified to GT-R 'Shiyo'. It also turned out to be an absolute shed. Poor girl did not deserve it really ( she was badly advised ) but she learned a hard lesson. That's the kind of thing that could happen to a Z Club member if The Z Club does not stickle, and allows factory designations to be used casually and inappropriately.

You asked about the Japanese club situation, and I can tell you that the club constitution of the Japan-based club that I was invited to join ( 'Club S30' ) has a written constitution that lays these matters out very clearly. Usually, members have to PROVE that their cars are what they say they are before joining ( they must produce the papers for their car, and other club members will appraise them ). Replicas are clearly identified as such, and any proven fakery would result in dismissal from the club.

I’ve made the enquiry as I hear of a white one that’s been here for 15 years or so, but unfortunately has so far lead to nothing.
So, I’ll get back to you on that one – but please don’t shoot me if it does turn out to be a load of bollocks, or indeed, doesn't turn out to be anything at all.

I'm almost certain I already know the particular car you are talking about. Suffice to say that if it is the car I am thinking of, you will soon see how the story might have germinated - even though the car was not even built in the period that the factory ZG model was being produced. Ask me more about this in private and I'll tell you all about it.

I know for a fact we have S30 Fairlady Z’s, Z31 200 & 300ZR’s and we really need to be differentiating between all those Z32 Fairlady’s and the Z32 300ZXTT’s etc.

I was going to bring this up too. I too know for a fact that there are S30-series 'Fairlady Z-Ls' that are being called "240Zs" by The Z Club. There are at least two 'Fairlady 240Z-Ls' that are being called "240Zs" ( which is partly correct - but does not tell the whole story ) and in at least one case the owner has no idea of the difference.

Which is one of the reasons that I started to talk about club insurance valuations........... It might be worth discussing the issue of insurance valuations on non UK-market first generation cars that are in the UK. There are UK-market cars here of course, but also Japanese-market cars over varying types, as well as Australian/NZ-market RHD cars that have been privately imported. There are also USA/Canada-market cars here that are still in their original LHD layout, as well as a fair few that have been converted to RHD layout. That points to a BIG potential variation in insurance valuation in my opinion. Are such things being taken into account?

If The Z Club of GB as an entity does not know the difference ( or in some obvious cases has prominent members who profess not to care about the difference ) then you'd have to say it is a pretty poor show all round. People look to owner and enthusiasts clubs to lead the way in these matters ( whether the clubs like it or not ) and any club that offers insurance valuations that will be taken seriously by insurance companies - and thereby affecting the values of even non-member cars - really need to mind their Ps and Qs.

 

[Russ]

So to solve all this (and I agree maybe misleading names aren't in anyones best interest) would calling something with a Gnose a ZG Rep be ok? Or does a rep have to have EVERYTHING the same as if it were the same car, but 'spritually' isn't?

 

[datsun dave]

So to solve all this (and I agree maybe misleading names aren't in anyones best interest) would calling something with a Gnose a ZG Rep be ok? Or does a rep have to have EVERYTHING the same as if it were the same car, but 'spritually' isn't?

Thats a mine field Russ

 

[Gio]

I have absolutely NO problem with accurate, tasteful and well-intentioned replicas, as long as nobody is claiming or implying that they are The Real Thing.

So perhaps not quite such a minefield? Seems reasonable enough to me.

 

[Albrecht]

It's called "Essential Datsun Z - 240Z to 280ZX", and was written by non other than Colin Shipway (aka 260ZG on this forum).
There is a photo on page 25 showing a ZG (not a very flattering angle I might add), with a few words on the following page which quite clearly states that there are Nissan originals and copies. He even shows a photo of his own car on page 77 which clearly states it as a "G-nose" kit, flared arches and a Kaminari rear wing.

To be brutally honest, I think that is a very poor book. It is chock full of mistakes and has a LOT of omissions. Much of it seems to have been copied almost verbatim from other books and magazine articles.

The only time the HS30-H 'Fairlady 240ZG' model is mentioned is - as you say - on page 25, and it is simply a picture caption that calls the car "The 'G-nose' version" - which is not the correct name or model designation. The following page contains a paragraph under the heading 'Modifications' ( ) which says; "The 'G-nose', both the original Nissan version and copies, was also to be seen on some cars." That is either badly written and/or the author misunderstands the difference between an original factory-built car and its component parts, or copies thereof. Maybe that is not quite surprising when you look at the picture caption on page 24 that describes "....the standard plastic wheel trims...".

The parts on the car pictured on page 77 have very little real connection ( physically or spiritually ) to the shape of the factory components, so I'd say that calling those components a "G-nose" is something along the lines of calling Barbara Windsor a good stand-in for Greta Garbo.

 

[Albrecht]

And I think there is a "moral" duty to get these things right.

I'm glad you have written this, Gio. I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think where cars are quite clearly NOT what they are being called - and the 'club' knows about it - then there is a duty to make that clear in any written form that falls within the club's responsibility.

I didn't know that - in fact, I don't think my importer would have known what a shakken-sho was and I'm pretty certain the DVLA office didn't either. Clearly I wasn't persistent enough with the DVLA - I just gave up.

Have you tried to get copies of the original Japanese documentation that your car arrived with at the UK port? The DVLA will make copies of them for you if you are the current registered keeper on the V5, and you pay them a fee. I believe you still have to apply in writing. I have done this for two of my cars ( although I didn't need to do this for the GT-R as I imported myself, and I got a big sheaf of documents from the previous owner - so I have a good slice of its history ) which allowed me to track them back to Japanese ownership. In the case of my Fairlady 240ZG, I even managed to track down some previous Japanese owners than the last one - which was very interesting. If you can get a copy of the Japanese regsitration document from the DVLA, I will help you to translate some parts of it that are not usually translated at the time of import. It might even have the name and address of the last Japanese owner.

 

[Albrecht]

Just thought i would add is there not a 240zg racing car over here? or is it a `zg` kitted car if so rally news needs to be corrected to for the last many years !!!!!!!!!!!!

You make my point for me ( thank you ). The car I believe you are referring to is not a factory-built 'Fairlady 240ZG', and does not look like one either. Even calling it a "ZG replica" would - to my mind - be way wide of the mark. It does not look anything like the Nissan factory Group 4 & Group 5 circuit race cars either. I think it bears a closer resemblance to the old IMSA race cars in the USA, so ( may I suggest ) it could arguably be referred to as an 'IMSA-style' car.

But leaving all conjecture to one side, surely the most accurate and pertinent thing to call our cars is what the factory called them when they made them. Much like Cary Grant could not escape the fact that he was born Archibald Leach...........

I suppose i better change my car name as it is not a true 280zx turbo but a janspeed conversion ! tut tut

Again, surely the safest ( most accurate ) thing to call it is what it left the factory as. Just list the full factory VIN prefixes and suffixes that surround its body number. Anything that happened to it after that ( like its visit to Janspeed ) is a different matter altogether.

I hope the club's Insurance Valuations Officer takes all this seriously (?). I'm not so sure after reading the "tut tut" comment.............