Jump to content


Photo

Gordon Dobie


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#41 peter mc

peter mc

    The 1000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,573 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 09:46 PM

Good man good man you are a thinker that is why i like you

#42 luvemfast

luvemfast

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,143 posts
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 19 February 2011 - 07:57 AM

you are a thinker that is why i like you

Really?
I like him cos he's a sadistic, smarty pants, cynical, deeply deeply troubled man  :P

#43 peter mc

peter mc

    The 1000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,573 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 08:07 AM

hahah sounds like you are talking about lurch.... that's why i like him

#44 Sirpent

Sirpent

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,294 posts
  • Website:https://www.flickr.com/photos/134020799@N04/albums
  • Location:Sodom & Gomorrah - Melbourne
  • Tagline:John.O.

Posted 19 February 2011 - 11:06 AM

Really?
I like him cos he's a sadistic, smarty pants, cynical, deeply deeply troubled man  :P



Simon yes, yes, yes and no longer after this morning  ;)

hahah sounds like you are talking about lurch.... that's why i like him


Thanks Pete, but I dont compare to the great one !


#45 Gordon Dobie

Gordon Dobie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Website:http://www.datperform.com
  • Location:Melbourne
  • Tagline:New Member

Posted 02 June 2017 - 03:45 PM

There seems to be some confusion as to what was allowed under the group D improved production rule in place during the 1960s and 70s. The eligible cars were listed in the CAMS manual and the allowable modifications were limited. The bore could be increased by 1.5 mm providing the capacity increase did not take the car out of it's original class ie under 2000cc, under 3000cc. Increase in stroke was not allowed. A number of cars ran in NSW with oversize engines which were bored and stroked. This practice was tolerated in NSW but the cars were only legal under the rules layed down by CAMS if they ran in group A (unlimited sports car) category. The claims of 240 plus bhp out of a U20 engine refer to an engine which was bored and stroked to 2.4 litres and in any case the claim is grossly exaggerated. When I took the factory 2000 to Warwick Farm in the late 60s it was significantly faster than the illegal NSW cars in spite of having 163bhp. This figure was measured on the engine dyno used by the majority of Melbourne based engine builders. But if a bit of bullshit is repeated often enough it becomes folk law and people actually start to believe it and I am afraid that is what has happened in a lot of cases in historic racing categories.

Edited by Gordon Dobie, 02 June 2017 - 03:50 PM.

  • gav240z and 260DET like this

#46 Gordon Dobie

Gordon Dobie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Website:http://www.datperform.com
  • Location:Melbourne
  • Tagline:New Member

Posted 02 June 2017 - 03:57 PM

the current rules for Australian production Sports cars - Historics ie Group S are quite restrictive, ( very !)  when it comes to the so called mods allowed for our Zeds, however, if you have a Porsche, a MGB, a Alfa, a Austin healey, a MG Midget,  a Morgan, a DeTomaso or a Shelby Mustang, you are allowed certain freedoms in rim widths, tyre sizes, carurettors, ignition radiators, brakes etc, because, "apparently" it was able to be proven that these cars were "sold" by the dealerships somwhere in Upper Kumbucta West in Timbuctoo, with siad goodies fitted.When it comes to the current Group S  Zed fraternity, and there have been a few, and yes we have tried, it is "No dice, you have to run as stock as the factory made them" even though the dealers sold a new car, and the buyer could then trot next door into the dealers spare parts section, and walk out with everything in the Competition parts catalogue, It sucks bigtime.I am giving up racing my Group Sc 280Z, and turning it into a Standard Late Classsic tarmac rally car, at least there their is sensibility in brake freedoms, the rest of the car is to remain stock.The other side of the coin, is this, My other car is the very well known famour Mingay/Carter Datsun Sports 2000, it was then and is still now the fastes and highest horsepowered ( 245hp at 7500 and 186 ft/lb) Datsun U20 engined produstion Based Sports Car in Australai and the world, it has continous race history since May 14th 1968, and is today as it was back in the late 1960's. It was built with as much parts from the Comp Catalogues as the DRT cars were.CAMS have said, that as the car is genuine, with history, it as a production based sports car, is to race in with the non historic production sports cars  - Group S -, - the kicker is prod BASED, mine has wider rims and four piston front brakes, that is all, compared to the Datsun Race Team 2000 sports and curren spec Group S elegible  Datsun Sports 2000's, of which there are three that run from time to time.At VHRR Phillip Island Classic meeting 2010, they put me in with some 48 pre 1970 Prod Sports cars, Shelby Mustangs, Corvette Stingrays, Morgan V8's Healey 3000's,  MGB with non stock carbs and alloy panels etc, and Alfa's etc, What does muggins here do, He wins all four races, and promptly the oh so very pucka "Group British" are screaming blue bloody murder, at the fact that a genuine Historic sports car, has won all their  "Historic"races and taken their bits of tin and plastic and upset their cherished pointscores.Go figure, none of the Group S so called cars are genuine historic with a true history, but oh no, thet protest, and the race for the 'Brroklands Victorian Tourist Trophy, event 42 on the card, won by me, is not awarded the perpetual prize, the trophy and the BLOODY WONDERFULL ROLLAWAY TOOL BOX AND CABINET WITH JACK BRABHAMS PICTURE ALL OVER IT !I am a glutton for puishment, so i entered again for 2011, and what do the pucka VHRR do, they now stick me in with the later more modern post 1970 prod sports class,  ohwell now I have to contend with the 2.7/3.0 Porkers Detomasos, BMW3.0 CSL's, Alfa GTV's and yes the might Zed cars, all in a fairly stockish U20 engined little Datsun Sports 2000



#47 gav240z

gav240z

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 12,923 posts
  • Website:http://www.viczcar.com
  • Location:Sydney NSW
  • Tagline:Jack of all trades, master of none.

Posted 02 June 2017 - 04:22 PM

But if a bit of bullshit is repeated often enough it becomes folk law and people actually start to believe it and I am afraid that is what has happened in a lot of cases in historic racing categories.

 

Ain't that the truth.. as Joseph Goebbels once said "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

 

By the way looks like your book arrived at work today, I was working from home so haven't got it in hand yet, but look forward to the read.


  • 260DET likes this

#48 HS30-H

HS30-H

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 638 posts
  • Location:London, England, UK.

Posted 02 June 2017 - 06:42 PM

Ain't that the truth.. as Joseph Goebbels once said "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

 

Not so much lies, but plain old mistakes and half-truths get repeated until they are gospel. Like...

 

...so two weeks ago I am in Japan visting Nismo and get an invite to the Zama storage wharehouse, and what do I see, and get info on but these tow, along with a genuine Z432.
First is a SCCN white Z fitted with a LY28
LY??? It is a L bottom end with a crossflow Y head fited, see pics.
The other thing is what grabbed my goolies, and on asking the head of nismo, he confirmed that Nissan supplied/sold to the Japanese Highway Patrol/Police Department some 30 of these police cars, fitted with ZG nose, flares wider rims and tyres, four piston brakes and the 432 engine 9 de-tuned)
These were sold to the Jap Popo to catch all the naughty boys on the Wangan's ( expressways) late at night.

 

No such thing as a Japanese police car with ZG style body and 432 (S20) engine, let alone "de-tuned".

 

Nissan supplied just THREE (3!) PS30 Fairlady Z432s to the Kanagawa Highway Patrol. Their engines were completely stock. They were fitted with the 432's stock S12 two piston, unventilated, front disc brakes.

 

Nissan also supplied a few Fairlady 240ZGs to the Japanese police, but they too were mechanically stock - even down to the stock wheels and hubcaps. The police workshops modified them with police-related equipment (lights, radio, PA system, safety equipment etc) but they were mechanically stock. Nissan have the last survivor of these cars preserved in their Heritage Collection at Zama.

 

The various Japanese regional police forces also used L20A-engined Fairlady Z-Ls and Fairlady Z-L 2/2 as highway patrol vehicles on the Expressway network.

 

So there was no combination of a ZG-bodied and S20 or LY-engined Japanese police car, but there were ZG-bodied police cars and S20-engined police cars. It doesn't take much to get it all mixed up... 



#49 dat2kman

dat2kman

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,081 posts
  • Location:Newport Waters Qld
  • Tagline:going sailing, see ya later!

Posted 03 June 2017 - 12:13 AM

More than one Heenan & Froude engine dyno getting around?
Few in NSW, and still being used, up until a few years back.
I recall Lou being quite chuffed at 232 HP from a U20, fitted to a Prod Sports 2000 some 8 years back
My car ran rings around it when we got to play together, not long after. But, yes, its all bullshit!

#50 gav240z

gav240z

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 12,923 posts
  • Website:http://www.viczcar.com
  • Location:Sydney NSW
  • Tagline:Jack of all trades, master of none.

Posted 20 December 2017 - 08:42 AM

Great stuff Jason

I had the same frustration over eligibility with my Sc 240z 10 years ago and had numerous heated exchenges with the VHRR eligibility officer (who happened to race an Sc MGB with Webers !) over front spoilers, triple 44 Minkunis, CDi ignition and oil coolers ...............even my Datsun competion steering wheel for Cripes sake!! which I proved was in the parts catalogue !

The bazaar thing is :
Sb Roadster - oil cooler permited , electronic ignition - permited - Mikuni's permitted

Sc 240Z- Mikuni's - not permitted, electronic ignition - not permitted, oil cooler - not permitted ...........I was asked to proved that these were factory options available from the dealers so I handed over a copy of a Datsun competion parts brochure.............only to be told that it did not have a dealer stamp and a date on it so I was "out of luck" dispite a price list in Aussie dollars !!!.

In the finish they wore my down until I gave up and I sold the 240z to John Ingham who ran it in a few events (John had the red/white/blue Sb 2000 and sold that to Tom Cantwell that now languishes in Lou Mondello's shop)

keep up the fight !

cheers

Alan

Alan / Jason if all you need is date stamp from Australian dealer with date surely the Catalog I scanned here would suffice?

http://www.viczcar.c...og/#entry162568

Attached Thumbnails

  • Screenshot_20171220-094050.png
  • Screen Shot 2017-12-20 at 10.12.01 PM.jpg


#51 dat2kman

dat2kman

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,081 posts
  • Location:Newport Waters Qld
  • Tagline:going sailing, see ya later!

Posted 20 December 2017 - 06:27 PM

Gav, that wont cut it with the EO's at CAMS.
For other readons, I got Weber DCOE's approved in place of Mikuni PHH44 for the Datsun 2000's, this now appears on the Spec Sheets for Group S.
Never sold with them, never listed in any Option Parts book, either.

I wont be getting myself invlolved with the silly crap that gets bandied about by all the Hysterical Experts, leave that to the young ones to persevere with.

#52 260DET

260DET

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,306 posts
  • Location:Warwick
  • Tagline:Tribal Elder

Posted 20 December 2017 - 06:48 PM

Last I recall of the claimed requirements for getting option parts eligible for Sc was that they had to have been shown to have been sold in Australia. So the dealer stamped cattle dog Gavin has linked goes at least part way there, for anyone interested it would be worth while running this by CAMS again. Is anyone from that dealer still around?

 

I guess you are no longer interested Jason because you have sold your SC Zed so there is nothing in it for you now.


  • gav240z likes this

#53 gav240z

gav240z

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 12,923 posts
  • Website:http://www.viczcar.com
  • Location:Sydney NSW
  • Tagline:Jack of all trades, master of none.

Posted 20 December 2017 - 07:00 PM

Last I recall of the claimed requirements for getting option parts eligible for Sc was that they had to have been shown to have been sold in Australia. So the dealer stamped cattle dog Gavin has linked goes at least part way there, for anyone interested it would be worth while running this by CAMS again. Is anyone from that dealer still around?
 
I guess you are no longer interested Jason because you have sold your SC Zed so there is nothing in it for you now.


Wayne Couacaud worked at Johnny Rockerbox Nissan.

post-1-0-67687300-1500633672.jpg
 
1 of his first jobs was to clear out all the old stock, which at the time was many (now very rare) sports options parts... If only we knew the location of the landfill, we'd go ET Atari style on it.
 
So the parts did exist, they were for sale here and I'm sure someone bought them...I cry to think about what got sent to the tip though!

#54 hmd

hmd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 314 posts
  • Location:Melbourne Easts

Posted 21 December 2017 - 10:47 AM

Guys,

 

there are a lot of misinformation about Group S eligibility on this forum.

 

Car and parts sold for motorsport are not allowed so part list from the datsun motorsport catalog is useless. Stamped or not stamped.

 

Having said that it boiled down to the person (idiot at times) responsible for the category eligibility, once you can push through him and get rubber stamp by CAMS historic commission it's in.

And like any good recalcitrant organisation they never want to admit to errors etc... once it's in, it's in.

 

The biggest stuffed up they had was classified the 240z as Sc instead of Sb, because the 240z had been produced and sold in 1969. You need a lot of patient or engage legal people and threaten them to reverse this decision.

 

I know the big Porsche boys have use their own lawyers in some of these matters, same with Rusty French (who part owns Ford Performance Racing) with his Pantera.

 

Money rules in the real world.


Edited by hmd, 21 December 2017 - 03:06 PM.

  • gav240z and 260DET like this

#55 gav240z

gav240z

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 12,923 posts
  • Website:http://www.viczcar.com
  • Location:Sydney NSW
  • Tagline:Jack of all trades, master of none.

Posted 21 December 2017 - 10:53 AM

Last I recall of the claimed requirements for getting option parts eligible for Sc was that they had to have been shown to have been sold in Australia. So the dealer stamped cattle dog Gavin has linked goes at least part way there, for anyone interested it would be worth while running this by CAMS again. Is anyone from that dealer still around?
 
I guess you are no longer interested Jason because you have sold your SC Zed so there is nothing in it for you now.


Apparently the owner of DATSUNSPORT was Bruce Wilkinson which Jason has already referenced here.
http://www.viczcar.c...ralia/?p=157292

The early Z cars, would have had Bruce Wilkinson involved, he was the one that started collecting the good bits from the cars before they went back, along with retaining the large quantities of Option spare parts, that came out with the cars, at the time.
Bit of a case of, "you had to be there!" and listen in to some of the discussions back in the day!


I think this might go in circles as is, since I don't actually know what CAMS wants myself and I haven't spoken to anyone involved with CAMS and over seeing what regulations apply. Is there any documentation that states what they will and will not accept?

I feel like starting a new thread with the aim of figuring this all out might be the best approach. I'm happy to try and hunt down this information - even though I don't plan to race any of mine at this stage, but I just feel it's absurd to see S30Z's neutered by SU carbs, small brakes etc.. when alternatives designed for purpose were available if so required.

#56 andyk_79

andyk_79

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 665 posts
  • Website:http://www.viczcar.com/forum/topic/12055-andrews-1972-240/
  • Location:Sydney West
  • Tagline:Useless Pest asking clueless questions

Posted 21 December 2017 - 12:13 PM

Apparently the owner of DATSUNSPORT was Bruce Wilkinson which Jason has already referenced here.
http://www.viczcar.c...ralia/?p=157292


I think this might go in circles as is, since I don't actually know what CAMS wants myself and I haven't spoken to anyone involved with CAMS and over seeing what regulations apply. Is there any documentation that states what they will and will not accept?

I feel like starting a new thread with the aim of figuring this all out might be the best approach. I'm happy to try and hunt down this information - even though I don't plan to race any of mine at this stage, but I just feel it's absurd to see S30Z's neutered by SU carbs, small brakes etc.. when alternatives designed for purpose were available if so required.

 

No need for a new thread Gav.  There has been plenty of chat about this before:

 

http://www.viczcar.c...arts-for-s30zs/


Edited by andyk_79, 21 December 2017 - 12:14 PM.


#57 CBR Jeff

CBR Jeff

    The 1000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts
  • Location:Canberra most of the time
  • Tagline:Often lost

Posted 21 December 2017 - 01:27 PM

Gav If you are interested start by reading this.

http://docs.cams.com...FORMS/Guide.pdf
Jeff
  • gav240z likes this

#58 hmd

hmd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 314 posts
  • Location:Melbourne Easts

Posted 21 December 2017 - 01:53 PM

Gav,

 

Here are the documents for Group S (Production Sport) and 240, 260 and 280 z spec sheets.

Attached Files


  • gav240z, Lurch ™, George and 2 others like this

#59 260DET

260DET

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,306 posts
  • Location:Warwick
  • Tagline:Tribal Elder

Posted 22 December 2017 - 07:06 AM

At last some reliable info from someone directly involved in Sc, thankyou hmd. All this time us 'outsiders' have been misinformed about the status of Sports Option parts while some of us have been putting some effort into trying to help, those of us who have nothing to gain but simply would like to see the S30 be less handicapped. 

 

It looks like all this has come about through Nissan's lack of consistent support for motorsport and particularly for the Z car and the privateer drivers, something that I rant about occasionally. On the other hand Porsche consistently back their product and owners by gaining whatever advantages they can for them. That's the difference.


  • CBR Jeff likes this

#60 HS30-H

HS30-H

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 638 posts
  • Location:London, England, UK.

Posted 22 December 2017 - 08:02 PM



It looks like all this has come about through Nissan's lack of consistent support for motorsport and particularly for the Z car and the privateer drivers, something that I rant about occasionally. On the other hand Porsche consistently back their product and owners by gaining whatever advantages they can for them. That's the difference.

 

Huh? What's all this got to do with Nissan?

 

It looks like an entirely local problem to me. Typically with a national race sanctioning body, a bunch of participants who lobbied to make sure things got set up to suit them, and a healthy dose of marginalisation on top. SNAFU.

 

What jumped out at me from hmd's post:

 

Having said that it boiled down to the person (idiot at times) responsible for the category eligibility, once you can push through him and get rubber stamp by CAMS historic commission it's in.

And like any good recalcitrant organisation they never want to admit to errors etc... once it's in, it's in.

 

The biggest stuffed up they had was classified the 240z as Sc instead of Sb, because the 240z had been produced and sold in 1969. You need a lot of patient or engage legal people and threaten them to reverse this decision.

 

....and I have to say (allow me this as an outsider looking in from a long way away...) all that previous talk of "getting a letter from Nissan", the works rally cars, the Japanese Police cars etc etc was just pie in the sky nonsense and neither here nor there.  


  • Lurch ™ and smugley like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users