One Former Keeper

[Alphabettispaghetti]

A 100k s30 fitted with Tokico illuminas due to refurb costs? Given the claimed quality of the refurb it could raise questions.

Hope it does make strong money though.

 

[SeanDezart]

My personal opinion is that the auction 'estimate' is ludicrously high. I don't see any recent precedent for a similar car attaining such a price in the UK market, so I don't see how the auction house could come up with it other than by comparing like with not like...

Didn't JD avertise at least one of their Sammys for +£200000 last year , This auction house is just halving that and taken a bit away because the car is basically unknown.

I'd like to know why a performance derivative 240Z can't be so valued please ,

Think of an American or European make that was prepared for competition, won or did pretty bloody well and the preparer made a few to sell on the side....they'll be worth a mint.

I'm not a Samuri fan but if they take the lead to help evolve other prices to be what they should be for these cars outside the USA (mass) market, then I can swallow that !

What is an ordinary Fairlady Z-L worth in Japan these days ? We often here what a Z432 is - but what about the 'lesser' cars ?

That wasn't a dig btw lol
Son needs taking to work, dog's need walking and I need loving lmfao
Still, 2 out of 3 ain't bad

Not bad, I had to watch football with my son so 0-3 on penalties !

It has the Tokico illuminas as the cost of refurbishing the koni struts was weighed and found wanting I think.

Koni make one and two way shockers so why use Tokicos ?

 

[jaydeescuba]

Didn't JD avertise at least one of their Sammys for +£200000 last year , This auction house is just halving that and taken a bit away because the car is basically unknown.

I'd like to know why a performance derivative 240Z can't be so valued please ,

Think of an American or European make that was prepared for competition, won or did pretty bloody well and the preparer made a few to sell on the side....they'll be worth a mint.

I'm not a Samuri fan but if they take the lead to help evolve other prices to be what they should be for these cars outside the USA (mass) market, then I can swallow that !

What is an ordinary Fairlady Z-L worth in Japan these days ? We often here what a Z432 is - but what about the 'lesser' cars ?



Not bad, I had to watch football with my son so 0-3 on penalties !



Koni make one and two way shockers so why use Tokicos ?

I believe the Tokico were chosen as they are 5 way adjustable and kinda modern market equivalent - just my belief from discussions with Paul

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

 

[SeanDezart]

I believe the Tokico were chosen as they are 5 way adjustable and kinda modern market equivalent - just my belief from discussions with Paul

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

Why not go period-modern and be FIA homologated (just in case someone wanted to take the car back racing) ? And two-way adjustable are better.

 

[jaydeescuba]

Why not go period-modern and be FIA homologated (just in case someone wanted to take the car back racing) ? And two-way adjustable are better.

I'd say it was because they were better priced option, but it'd only be my opinion not necessarily fact. We had a few discussions iirc but the deal on them was too good

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

 

[Albrecht]

Which kinda brings me back to asking which car CAN it be compared to?

Two suggestions: A stock UK market 'HS30' Datsun 240Z in similar condition, and/or another 'RHS/Samuri' converted car of similar spec and condition.

It has the Tokico illuminas as the cost of refurbishing the koni struts was weighed and found wanting I think. They might still be rebuilt yet tho.

Elsewhere (yesterday) I was given to understand that the suspension on the car was being compared to that of FFA. I pointed out that FFA did not use Tokico Illuminas (a late 1980s cartridge damper design) in period, and the story then changed. It seems to me that there's a fair amount of uncertainty about the original spec of the car when the words 'original' and 'originality' are being used.

As far as the chassis strengthening goes, paul (current chef I guess)worked for a datsun/Nissan garage in the 80's and recognised the CA......@#$/& numbers with the oem stamp. I have an image or 2 but not available atm.

I'd be grateful if you could show these when they become available, as I do not recognise the term "CA number" and I cannot imagine what is being referred to as Works rally-style chassis reinforcement (as pointed out, the Works rally 240Zs didn't have any...).

 

[MikeB]

I'm not sure there was too much 2Chassis strengthening" going on in competition cars in the early seventies. Using the ubiquitous Escort as an example, I remember in the late 70s & early 80s the rally shells used to be easily identified by the cracked A pillars. Also any such plates would have been identified in the FIA Homologation papers, if they were works items, and certainly the ones I have for a 240 don't show any.

 

[Albrecht]

Didn't JD avertise at least one of their Sammys for +£200000 last year , This auction house is just halving that and taken a bit away because the car is basically unknown.

I'd like to know why a performance derivative 240Z can't be so valued please ,

The car in question is not "a performance derivative 240Z" though, is it? It appears to be - as far as I can see - a fairly mildly modified standard UK showroom model car that was sprinted a little in period.

No disrespect to early 1970s period sprinting, but it was perhaps best described as one of the most basic forms of private motorsport and participants were not forced to comply with national (RAC) or international (FIA) competition rules. Cars could be pretty much stock, with little or no extra safety equipment. The sprinting history for the car may be interesting, but it's hardly the same as a rule-compliant period race or rally car and it is closer to stock than anything else.

Think of an American or European make that was prepared for competition, won or did pretty bloody well and the preparer made a few to sell on the side....they'll be worth a mint.

I think such cases would be best viewed on a case-by-case basis, but even then this car doesn't seem to be anything like what you describe. The car in question appears to have no (period or current) safety equipment, a stock fuel tank, a stock transmission (described in the auction blurb as "close ratio"...) and a stock 3.9 ratio diff, as far as I can make out. Am I wrong? I don't see anything different in the auction description or in the ebay ad.

What is an ordinary Fairlady Z-L worth in Japan these days ? We often here what a Z432 is - but what about the 'lesser' cars ?

You're probably looking at figures around 40k+ GBP for a nice '69~'73 S30/S30-S, around 50k+ GBP for a nice '71~'73 HS30/HS30-S and around 65k+ GBP for a nice '71~'73 HS30-H. But as said so often, case-by-case. Nice (even not so nice) PS30s are well over 170k+ GBP, with real corkers over 200k. PS30-SB are now stratospheric, with a good example changing hands for well over 300k last year and none on the open market.

But your point being?

 

[Albrecht]

I'm not sure there was too much 2Chassis strengthening" going on in competition cars in the early seventies. Using the ubiquitous Escort as an example, I remember in the late 70s & early 80s the rally shells used to be easily identified by the cracked A pillars. Also any such plates would have been identified in the FIA Homologation papers, if they were works items, and certainly the ones I have for a 240 don't show any.

Exactly Mike. This is one of the points I made before. In period, such chassis mods needed to be homologated in standard production cars before they could be used in competition. Basically they were not allowed to add any strengthening gussets, doublers or links to the bodyshells, even if they thought they might be needed.

For Nissan, it was only in the era of the A10-series of the late 1970s and onwards that they got serious about such things. That was when they started selling serious and more focused parts to privateers for race and rally use with factory part numbers on them. This didn't happen with the HS30 240Z in the UK.

 

[jaydeescuba]

Two suggestions: A stock UK market 'HS30' Datsun 240Z in similar condition, and/or another 'RHS/Samuri' converted car of similar spec and condition.



Elsewhere (yesterday) I was given to understand that the suspension on the car was being compared to that of FFA. I pointed out that FFA did not use Tokico Illuminas (a late 1980s cartridge damper design) in period, and the story then changed. It seems to me that there's a fair amount of uncertainty about the original spec of the car when the words 'original' and 'originality' are being used.



I'd be grateful if you could show these when they become available, as I do not recognise the term "CA number" and I cannot imagine what is being referred to as Works rally-style chassis reinforcement (as pointed out, the Works rally 240Zs didn't have any...).

Not the best image but. ..

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

 

[jaydeescuba]

Apologies I believe it Reads Ca 820 Nissan lozenge ca201 not z 4

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

 

[jaydeescuba]

the factory stamp has bled thru the colour - this would only happen on a factory part ,the castellated rear of the lower front member is different on ca part it is a solid panel with 3 to 1 spot welds and defo factory to the chassis rails which are mega thick the sump guard brackets are there but redundant in this case

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

 

[jaydeescuba]

It is painted over now ,but anyone in the know would recognise the Nissan spares primer in the eighties it went slightly greener and you could refinish straight on top They did but didn't key or sand this area very well so the stamp bled thru 100% proof

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

 

[jaydeescuba]

Then seam welded and stiffeners inside engine bay

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

 

[Albrecht]

Not the best image but. ..

I don't want to be breaking a butterfly on a wheel here, but that's '74820-E4201' and it's a stock Nissan factory part code for the lower front crossmember (under the radiator support panel).

See here:

 

[Albrecht]

Compare to the parts department ink stamp on the NOS front crossmember (a Japanese domestic market part) replacement on one of the cars I'm rebuilding:

 

[Albrecht]

I don't want to be breaking a butterfly on a wheel here, but that's '74820-E4102' and it's a stock Nissan factory part code for the lower front crossmember (under the radiator support panel).

See here:

Apologies for the above typo (which I'm not allowed to edit). I should have typed '74820-E4201', as you can see on the factory parts list above.

Clearly the panel in question is a stock factory part. If I saw that on a car I would conclude that it was most likely to have had an accident early in its life and been repaired accordingly.

Then seam welded and stiffeners inside engine bay

It would not be surprising if the opportunity was taken at that time (replacement of a damaged front crossmember) to beef up the surroudning structure with some additions, however I would expect these to be essentially home made as Nissan did not sell such chassis-strengthening sheetmetal parts for these cars.

the factory stamp has bled thru the colour - this would only happen on a factory part ,the castellated rear of the lower front member is different on ca part it is a solid panel with 3 to 1 spot welds and defo factory to the chassis rails which are mega thick the sump guard brackets are there but redundant in this case

I'd be interested to see the specific sections you think are sump guard brackets, as my hunch is that they are something else entirely.

Chassis strengthening using works parts with CA numbers as per competing rally works cars.

As far as the chassis strengthening goes, paul (current chef I guess)worked for a datsun/Nissan garage in the 80's and recognised the CA......@#$/& numbers with the oem stamp.

I'm going to be blunt here and say that there's no such thing as 'CA numbers' for these cars. A few posts back you described the 'CA' letters as standing for 'Competition Accessory':

The CA numbers are Competition Accessories - more than likely from Andrew Cronk garage where the car was originally purchased from in Reigate.
Jack's father, obviously caring that his son isn't likely to kill himself, and coming from a wealthy family, would have had no problem funding the best possible for Jack.

If such a group of parts existed then their 'CA' part numbers would be listed/published and be accessible and provable. If so, evidence please?


For reference, the other thread concerning this car: http://zclub.net/forum/showthread.php?t=27154

 

[MikeB]

Any updates on the age of the primer?

 

[Albrecht]

Any updates on the age of the primer?

Sorry Mike, was that question to me?


I find it interesting that threads like this one can go so quiet all of a sudden after being quite active. It's like no one has ever seen a factory part number on a factory part before, let alone recognise it...

 

[Alphabettispaghetti]

Sorry Mike, was that question to me?


I find it interesting that threads like this one can go so quiet all of a sudden after being quite active. It's like no one has ever seen a factory part number on a factory part before, let alone recognise it...

Its a good sign that any damage has been replaced with correct panels I guess.

It just questions the autcion descriptoin which could be a bit of an issue?