JK240
Club Member
Thanks Duncan!
-
The Z Club relies on the support of it's paid members - join the club or renew your membership here.
Southern UK 240Z needed for Classic & Sports Car Photo Shoot SOON please!!
- Thread starter Motornoter
- Start date
Thanks Duncan!
rallymanDP
Well-Known Forum User
Got it wrong, again, Jonathan - apologies - the Mag is due out Thursday 7th October.
Shoulda gone to SpecSavers.....thought the 7 was a 2 !
Shoulda gone to SpecSavers.....thought the 7 was a 2 !
JK240
Club Member
Must be an age thing, Duncan....
Thanks though, I did look in the local newsagent's this morning and couldn't see it, this will be why.
SeanDezart
Well-Known Forum User
...life's full of them my dear Count - but are you SO sure that this one'll be no different ?
Albrecht
Well-Known Forum User
I was worried that this would be another one of those 'Buyer's Guide' type articles that give out dud historical data and help to set it in stone. The seeming urgency of the request made me feel uneasy ( rushed articles are always at risk of getting things wrong ) and sure enough....
Classic & Sports Car magazine said:
Oh dear.
Classic & Sports Car magazine said:
Says who? Yutaka Katayama, that's who.....
Classic & Sports Car magazine said:
Groan. Really, just how hard can all of this be?
Anybody want to volunteer to point out the mistakes to C&SC magazine, and get a shot at being their "Pedant of the month"?
samuri-240
Well-Known Forum User
Picked up a copy today, not had chance to have a look at it yet.
mattbibbey
Well-Known Forum User
I thought the article was OK in my ignorance. The pictures, I thought, did the car justice.
Albrecht
Well-Known Forum User
Matt,
You might very think the article was OK, and that's fine up to a point. My quibble is that even these 'OK' articles plant seeds that grow up into great big lies. We end up with a forest of misinformation that gets used as reference for the next rushed article, and so it goes on....
To 'motornoter':
Did anybody proof-read / fact check this article before it went to press?
In a previous post in this thread ( #23, conicidentally... ) I made a few points of caution, including caveats about Goertz and the true role of Yutaka Katayama. But in the article we get - once again - the implied influence of a so-called Goertz design ( even if it is painted as "stillborn" ), and Katayama is named as having come up with the "concept", despite the fact that he came into the story after it had already started and the "concept" of a 2-seater sports coupe / GT based on shared running gear was always going to be in Nissan's model range before the end of the 1960s. So who came up with those "concepts" of small pickups, assorted family cars and 'executive' saloons? "Gentlemen, I've got a great new 'concept'! It's a big long thing with a wheel on each corner and lots of seats inside. I call it a 'Bus!'......".
Such matters of historical nitpicking are arguably beside the point in a 'Buyer's Guide' type article, but plain bad facts and figures should not be excused. Saying that the Japanese market had a "...2-litre for tax reasons, initially single cam but later with the option of twin-cam..." is bizarre. The DOHC S20-equipped models ( the 'PS30' Fairlady Z432 and 'PS30-SB' Fairlady Z432-R ) were designed, built and launched at the same time as the SOHC L20A-equipped Fairlady Z and Fairlady Z-L models. The way this is written also makes it sound like the DOHC and SOHC engines just amounted to different cylider heads, which is a mile from the truth and misses the whole story behind their origins too.
The article also claims that the Z432 "..had 160bhp.." when in fact it was rated at 160PS ( an automotive journalist will know the difference, unless of course he's simply repeating the mistakes of another automotive journalist... ) and goes on to claim that the Z432-R "racer" had "250bhp". Not only does this make it sound as though the standard production model Z432-R had "250bhp"( it was rated at 160PS just like the Z432, as the engine was exactly the same internally, and externally simply had no airbox or filter housing.... ) but it confuses factory race cars with standard production models. Doesn't seem like a good idea in a 'Buyer's Guide'.
It goes on to say that "362" Z432-Rs were built. I don't know where that figure came from ( I'm dying to know... ), but more learned sources will tell you that something between 420 and 450 'PS30' Fairlady Z432s were sold to the general public, along with somewhere between 17 and 25 super lightweight 'PS30-SB' Fairlady Z432-R models ( depending on what cars you count, and whose figures you believe... ). Factory and privateer / semi-works race cars are not usually included in these figures. So whatever way you look at it, that "362" figure seems to make no sense whatsoever.
I could go on ( you know I could go on, don't you!? ) but maybe I need to let a few other people have a chance to see the article before going further? After all, it was only published last week.....
You might very think the article was OK, and that's fine up to a point. My quibble is that even these 'OK' articles plant seeds that grow up into great big lies. We end up with a forest of misinformation that gets used as reference for the next rushed article, and so it goes on....
To 'motornoter':
Did anybody proof-read / fact check this article before it went to press?
In a previous post in this thread ( #23, conicidentally... ) I made a few points of caution, including caveats about Goertz and the true role of Yutaka Katayama. But in the article we get - once again - the implied influence of a so-called Goertz design ( even if it is painted as "stillborn" ), and Katayama is named as having come up with the "concept", despite the fact that he came into the story after it had already started and the "concept" of a 2-seater sports coupe / GT based on shared running gear was always going to be in Nissan's model range before the end of the 1960s. So who came up with those "concepts" of small pickups, assorted family cars and 'executive' saloons? "Gentlemen, I've got a great new 'concept'! It's a big long thing with a wheel on each corner and lots of seats inside. I call it a 'Bus!'......".
Such matters of historical nitpicking are arguably beside the point in a 'Buyer's Guide' type article, but plain bad facts and figures should not be excused. Saying that the Japanese market had a "...2-litre for tax reasons, initially single cam but later with the option of twin-cam..." is bizarre. The DOHC S20-equipped models ( the 'PS30' Fairlady Z432 and 'PS30-SB' Fairlady Z432-R ) were designed, built and launched at the same time as the SOHC L20A-equipped Fairlady Z and Fairlady Z-L models. The way this is written also makes it sound like the DOHC and SOHC engines just amounted to different cylider heads, which is a mile from the truth and misses the whole story behind their origins too.
The article also claims that the Z432 "..had 160bhp.." when in fact it was rated at 160PS ( an automotive journalist will know the difference, unless of course he's simply repeating the mistakes of another automotive journalist...
) and goes on to claim that the Z432-R "racer" had "250bhp". Not only does this make it sound as though the standard production model Z432-R had "250bhp"( it was rated at 160PS just like the Z432, as the engine was exactly the same internally, and externally simply had no airbox or filter housing.... ) but it confuses factory race cars with standard production models. Doesn't seem like a good idea in a 'Buyer's Guide'.It goes on to say that "362" Z432-Rs were built. I don't know where that figure came from ( I'm dying to know... ), but more learned sources will tell you that something between 420 and 450 'PS30' Fairlady Z432s were sold to the general public, along with somewhere between 17 and 25 super lightweight 'PS30-SB' Fairlady Z432-R models ( depending on what cars you count, and whose figures you believe... ). Factory and privateer / semi-works race cars are not usually included in these figures. So whatever way you look at it, that "362" figure seems to make no sense whatsoever.
I could go on ( you know I could go on, don't you!? ) but maybe I need to let a few other people have a chance to see the article before going further? After all, it was only published last week.....
SeanDezart
Well-Known Forum User
Plus point = more public focus upon Zs.
Minus point = diffusion of same mis-beliefs and this despite club contact.
Minus point = diffusion of same mis-beliefs and this despite club contact.
mattbibbey
Well-Known Forum User
Alan,
I do see your point, but like I said, it seemed OK to me. That's exactly the problem you're talking about. Most of my knowledge up until I joined this club and saw your posts about the history, had come from articles such as this! I suppose it'd be like growing up on an Island where the only history book says that the germans won the war and the dinosaurs never died out!
lol. I joke but it's sort of the same thing. Perhaps you should guest edit a proper article in one of the popular mags
, I mean the 240Z deserves it, after all it was only the best selling sports car of all until overtaken by the MX5*
Matt
*perhaps I've been missinformed here too?
I do see your point, but like I said, it seemed OK to me. That's exactly the problem you're talking about. Most of my knowledge up until I joined this club and saw your posts about the history, had come from articles such as this! I suppose it'd be like growing up on an Island where the only history book says that the germans won the war and the dinosaurs never died out!
lol. I joke but it's sort of the same thing. Perhaps you should guest edit a proper article in one of the popular mags, I mean the 240Z deserves it, after all it was only the best selling sports car of all until overtaken by the MX5* Matt
*perhaps I've been missinformed here too?
rallymanDP
Well-Known Forum User
I thought that it was a pretty decent read, all in all, notwithstanding our learned friend's comments....
The pertinant points about the 'Verdict' and the Price Values were spot on, which makes a refreshing change.
The pertinant points about the 'Verdict' and the Price Values were spot on, which makes a refreshing change.
I live in Australia so have only just bought the mag, does anyone know what Rob means by "the rear end had been custom painted with newsprint" ?
I sold the car to Rob just before I moved back to Oz and have no idea what he is referring to, car was all 110 red at the point of sale!
Also, a question for Mike, (as this car was previously owned by Mike Feaney) Did this car have it's original engine whilst in your ownership, I bought it from the guy who bought it from you (who had owned it 10 years) and he did nothing to the engine, me either, so was surprised to see the comment about it having a Laurel engine.
Great to see my old car in the mag and looking so good, just perplexed by a couple of the comments.
Cheers
Lee
I sold the car to Rob just before I moved back to Oz and have no idea what he is referring to, car was all 110 red at the point of sale!
Also, a question for Mike, (as this car was previously owned by Mike Feaney) Did this car have it's original engine whilst in your ownership, I bought it from the guy who bought it from you (who had owned it 10 years) and he did nothing to the engine, me either, so was surprised to see the comment about it having a Laurel engine.
Great to see my old car in the mag and looking so good, just perplexed by a couple of the comments.
Cheers
Lee
Mr.F
Inactive
I owned DPN back in 1976 / 1977. Engine was certainly original then. Changes at that time were Wolfrace wheels and Webasto sunroof. Even at that early age, the seats were trashed and I replaced them with Corbeaus of the period and also re-carpeted.
The original specification was the cream / ivory interior which has now gone. At only four years old, the sill returns had already been repaired for the first time!
When I looked, I was shocked at how few pictures I have of the car from that period! Two slightly fuzzy images below...
The original specification was the cream / ivory interior which has now gone. At only four years old, the sill returns had already been repaired for the first time!
When I looked, I was shocked at how few pictures I have of the car from that period! Two slightly fuzzy images below...
Attachments
Hi Lee, the referance to the "custom painted with newsprint" it was a referal to the paint around the hatch window, it contained print ink from the news papers used to mask off the glass when it was resprayed which bled into the paint when the thinners got into it.
With reference to the engine being from a Laurel, this was indeed the case as the dipstick was at the front of the block and had been cut down so it cleared the shallow section of the sump, how did you know how much oil was in it ?. Interesting that nobody knows/admits to an engine change prior to us purchasing the car as it appeared to be a fairly recently reconditioned unit, fresh core plugs, bearings etc.
With reference to the engine being from a Laurel, this was indeed the case as the dipstick was at the front of the block and had been cut down so it cleared the shallow section of the sump, how did you know how much oil was in it ?. Interesting that nobody knows/admits to an engine change prior to us purchasing the car as it appeared to be a fairly recently reconditioned unit, fresh core plugs, bearings etc.
SeanDezart
Well-Known Forum User
SeanDezart
Well-Known Forum User
Not exactly much standard on mine.........;-)