Jump to content


Photo

Z432 rims on YAJ


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#21 HS30-H

HS30-H

    Senior Member

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

Posted 25 June 2012 - 03:04 AM

Alan# hs30,
We may be able to put a case forward based on that Nissan factory built up a car (rally car) to be able to be registered for use on a road in the worl, that was built with the items we are trying to get through.

The elegibility guy i am in contact with at CAMS has stated that i must "show proof that a manufacturer of a car, supplied a car, new, with the items fitted, for use on public toads"

He has said, "the items cannot have been fitted after the car was made, as optional accessories or parts"


There's the rub though. As far as I am aware - and I've been studying the individual cases of the Works cars for a long time now - Nissan never "supplied" any 240Z or 260Z to a customer or team as a ready-to-use rally car. They just didn't. The cars that got into priovate hands all did so as used cars.

If the CAMS eligibility guy is interpreting this as a question of "factory fitted" parts, then you're going to be restricted to what was sold in Japan. That puts you on the back foot already.

The Morgan Motor Company in Wales England, has issued a written statement, in 1992, stating that as a manufacturer of the Morgan Plus 8, they had available as options, many performance enhancements, including bigger carburettors, brakes, alloy radiators ( ???? ) wider wheels of 15" diam. These were for a staid British Gentlemans car, built in the late 60's/ early 70's.
They state, on the letter, on company letterhead, that all these items were fitted on some new cars prior to taking delivery.
No other documentary proof, in period, was furnished, just the letter in 1992
I have a photocopy of that letter.
Consequently, all Morgan Plus 8's racing in Australia, are fully equipped!
The interesting thing, why would a maker of a Pom car, where the annual temps are quite low, make a alloy multi core radiator as optional fitment, when everything British was perfect, and all cars used brass/copper radiators??
That interesting titbit had quite a few eyebrows raised, but, it was not questioned, as it was on official company letterhead.


I've got no doubts that the Morgan letter is a statement of true fact. Morgan were - still are in fact - essentially a bespoke car maker. You could - still can - get a car built to your personal order with your own bespoken choices of non-standard equipment. That's a completely different situation to the one at Nissan in the period we are talking about.

The triple core rad question can easily be explained away by the fact that some Morgan customers were having what were - essentially - race cars built for them. Depending on their chosen power unit's state of tune, a triple core rad might very well have been necessary, especially considering the narrow Morgan grille shape. You won't beat that, as companies like Morgan, TVR, Marcos, Lotus and many others were small enough to cater for the whims of their customers, and often had staff who were themselves competitors. You can't compare that to the situation at Nissan; The Nissan customer in Japan would have had to have been buying a racing car that wasn't legal for road use, and he would have had to buy it through the Export / Diplomatic sales office and/or through Nissan Competition ( precursor to NISMO ) at Omori, or from the Competitions Department at Oppama. Proving anything like that is going to be reliant on evidence from the customer too... 

Alan T, how well are you aquainted with Kazuo Hioki san, or Minarti Iwatomo san ( 2ic at Nismo).
Could they be asked to write some letters on Nissan letterhead? Both have met myself, and are aware of my efforts with historic racing here in Australia


I've met Hioki san several times ( he's a friend of a friend ) but I don't know Iwamoto san to say hello to. None of that is going to help anyway. I just don't think you're going to be able to get anyone from Nissan or NISMO to write a letter about something that never happened, or about something that breaches company confidentiality. Nissan are notorious for sitting on this kind of thing. Their company policy is basically that "...it's none of your business..."...

Sorry, I know it's not what you want to hear, but as far as I'm aware that's the truth and I'm not going to tell lies, stretch the truth or make up stories. I think your problem is basically one of interpretation of eligibility, and if the series organisers and your fellow competitors have already blocked you and certain cars from competing with them on a level playing field then I think it is going to be all but impossible to find the silver bullet that will turn it all around. Not fair, but racing begins with the writing of the rule book...    :(

 

#22 d3c0y

d3c0y

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,905 posts
  • Website:http://garagesanmaru.com
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Tagline:Forum Jerk

Posted 25 June 2012 - 09:25 AM

was a bad joke  :) I do race with no filters though.

Why? My L34 didnt lose any measureable power from running socks on the engine dyno?

Dat2kman: Didnt you say that the 911 equipment was dealer fitted anyway? Even if the dealer fitting sports option parts before delivery then the US must have some sort of case for us? From what i have read from your posts the 911 in question doesnt sound like it was shipped from Germany with the equipment fitted?

#23 NZeder

NZeder

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,291 posts
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 25 June 2012 - 03:14 PM

So that is the rub - Nissan did not supply the car - they campaigned the car but did not supply to a team in the form Jason needs. So non Nissan works teams had to purchase a stock S30 then add on the additional/optional parts. So much like an Australian V8 Super car today - the car is built not purchased like that.

This is why so many in NZ like our T&C rules - take a car - fit any period part that was and can be proved via documentation, used on that make/model in period and you can use that part today - however over the years how people have taken the terms "free" out of context many cars are out side of these more flexible rules. So there is always going to be those that get away with more than others. I do think there is a bit of "it is Japanese" so we don't like it modified that kicks in.

There are cars here in NZ that have taken thing like a one or 2 car special that was fitted with a DOHC/16v head on stay a Ford Pinto bottom end have some document that shows a DOHC 16V head was fitted but it does not show a photo of the head or have details like port design etc. So people now fits a YB DOHC 16V to a sudo pinto bottom end and call that the same - well no that head was not used in Period - yes a DOHC 16V but not a YB head so not sure how they get away with it.

#24 rb26zed

rb26zed

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Location:brisbane

Posted 25 June 2012 - 03:46 PM

Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but I think HS30-H you have slightly misunderstood datkman's question.

I don't think he requires that a car was supplied to anyone with the options. What it appears he needs is proof that it was supplied for road use with these options, ie; rally, as a rally car must be road registered any car built for rally has been built for road use.

Supplied for road use and supplied to someone are not necessarily the same.

Now I think the question is really, did Nissan build the factory works rally cars? If so then this proof would have to help his case. If not then I am mistaken.



#25 HS30-H

HS30-H

    Senior Member

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

Posted 25 June 2012 - 09:02 PM

Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but I think HS30-H you have slightly misunderstood datkman's question.

I don't think he requires that a car was supplied to anyone with the options. What it appears he needs is proof that it was supplied for road use with these options, ie; rally, as a rally car must be road registered any car built for rally has been built for road use.

Supplied for road use and supplied to someone are not necessarily the same.

Now I think the question is really, did Nissan build the factory works rally cars? If so then this proof would have to help his case. If not then I am mistaken.


No, I don't think I misunderstood. The crux of the matter - as far as the people who decide on eligibility are concerned - is whether a car had the components in question fitted on cars that were sold to the general public. If it was all as easy as proving that the Factory made a car with the said components and it got registered for road use, then it would be easy...

Nissan did build the 'Works' 240Z and 260Z rally cars ( in their Competitions Department at the Oppama plant ), but they never sold them as products available for sale to the general public. They made some of the components available through their Sports Options lists, but never the whole cars.

This fight is a fight that's been going on for years. It should have been settled years ago and settled fairly, but it wasn't and that's almost as much of a problem as the initial problem was. Nissan could have done with homologating a few more cars and parts for race use by selling 'special' Hi-Po versions of HS30 and HLS30-prefixed models in Export territories. Instead all we got was pretty basic sliced white bread versions and a few homologated parts that were only ever useful in FIA Group 4.

A triple-carbed '240Z' with LSD, vented 4-pots and 7j wheels would have been a great showroom stock 'Motorsports' model, and would have solved all sorts of eligibility problems. We never got the choice.   

#26 dat2kman

dat2kman

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Newport Waters Qld
  • Tagline:going sailing, see ya later!

Posted 25 June 2012 - 09:26 PM

Rb26zed, you are pretty well spot on, thats all good!

Alan T, everytime you post, is a little more information and detail, and i would like to hope, that one day, i can get enough  to be able to place a case.

It would seem that the cars built up by Nissan, but not necassarily supplied to others ie public, , as "works" rally cars, (as opposed to cars prepared for pure competition, these are deemed as " competition variants" and are not accepted), and as the rally cars were prepared by the Nissan factory ( does not matter which plant or where) for use on public roads, by very well known name drivers, the elegibility guys here, and possibly now New Zealand, may reconsider the application, and re-open it.

Others in the past, for sure, have tried on many occaisons, to put forward the Options Parts Catalogue, with argument of " it was available for purchase" etc, but due to past known and accepted Group 4 use, which is not acceptable for "production Sports" racing rules here in Australia, it has never been able to get the OK.

We have all been on the circuit/racing mods bandwagon. No-one here has even thought to explore what was done by Nissan in the rally program.
How much information is available?
Car details and soecifications?
Pictures? Period date publications?

Could Kazuo Hioki san, be adked to , on letterhead, furnish details?
After all, we are wishing very much to preserve and continue with the Heritage of Nissan, and the rally cars were part of that. It would be a "loophole" but just like others have exploited others manufacturers, why not give it a crack.

I just do not have sufficient information, to put a case up.
Any and all hepl appreciated!

#27 Gordo

Gordo

    The 1000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,112 posts
  • Location:Lillydale
  • Tagline:Racing member.

Posted 25 June 2012 - 09:28 PM

Sad, but true. A hotted up zed would have been awesome .From the factory.

#28 HS30-H

HS30-H

    Senior Member

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

Posted 25 June 2012 - 11:17 PM

Rb26zed, you are pretty well spot on, thats all good!


How is he "spot on"? If this was all as simple as Nissan having built a car for their own use then it would have been solved years ago.

I think the problem you've got is the same one that has been had elsewhere, namely that it all hinges on a model with the required parts fitted having been sold to the general public as a showroom model. That's what they mean by the word "supplied".

We have all been on the circuit/racing mods bandwagon. No-one here has even thought to explore what was done by Nissan in the rally program.
How much information is available?
Car details and soecifications?
Pictures? Period date publications?


I should think that the reason the works rally car angle hasn't been pursued is because it doesn't help. I've been involved in helping to get the FIA agree to 15" wheel use for Historic Rally use ( largely necessary due to tyre supply issues ) and the route taken was the opposite of that you are proposing: ie we used period use proof of 15" wheels on works circuit racing cars to help the argument for current historic rally use. But the requirement was simply to prove 'use in period' ( by anybody... ) on the model in question ( 240Z ) and therefore it was actually quite easy. What you are trying to do is more difficult, as it hinges on much more than 'use in period', doesn't it?

There's plenty of details on the cars and their specs, and pictures ( you'll likely have to pay for them ) as well as period documentation in the form of road tests and event reports. It's all 'out there', but - like I keep saying - I don't think that's your problem... 

Could Kazuo Hioki san, be adked to, on letterhead, furnish details?
I just do not have sufficient information, to put a case up.
Any and all hepl appreciated!


I honestly don't think he will be able to help you, but there's nothing stopping you asking him.

I would suggest a more logical route would be to prepare a formal pre-representation to the appropriate officials at CAMS, and ask them exactly what you need to prove to them, and how they want you to prove it. Get that in writing. Once they give you the target, then you have something to aim for. If you go back to them with a properly prepared case that gives them exactly what they challenge you to provide, then they can't argue with it, can they? There's no point in trying to do anything without knowing exactly what they require. I'll try to help if I can, but at the moment it all sounds like it hinges on this question of "supply", which I interpret ( because it's the same as what the RAC MSA require over here... ) as being all about equipment fitted to cars as supplied to the general public.   

#29 luvemfast

luvemfast

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,136 posts
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 26 June 2012 - 09:50 AM

Is Jason's requirement-
Sold to public?
or
Used by Nissan on public roads?

They are very different!

#30 dat2kman

dat2kman

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Newport Waters Qld
  • Tagline:going sailing, see ya later!

Posted 26 June 2012 - 10:56 AM

Is Jason's requirement-
Sold to public?
or
Used by Nissan on public roads?

They are very different!

The CAMS elegibility guys here just require supporting documentation, that, a manufacturer made a car, at their factory, with the items fitted, for use on public roads.

Ie it had to be registerable, ( nowhere do they say it had to be sold to the public, or supplied)
The other "way" was for individual car dealers, of new cars, to fit the items, as "special" order for a customer of a new car.
Here in Australia, Alan Hamilton Porsche, in South Yarra, fitted many items, at customer request and order, onto a new Porsche.
In the UK, just one small new MGB dealer, fitted a Weber sidedraft onto a B.
As i advised above, the Morgan Motor Company wrote a letter stating their cars had items able to be fitted, for use on public roads.

The 240 and 260 Rally cars, with 7x14 rims, four piston calipers, vented front rotors, disc braked rear end, and triple carbs, are what is required.

The rest we already have, ie oil coolers, lighter weight, no body embellishments, ie bumpers, removal of some interior, removal of emmissions requirements, engine , gearbox internals are free, LSD diffs and various ratios.
All we want, as above is rims, 7" is good, 8" better, discs bigger/better, and carbs.
FWIW, i personally will loose out big time if we can get carbs up, as mine is a 280Z on injection, unless it can be shown Nissan supplied some sort of better/bigger injection system, for USA market, on the later Rally cars, but i am sure they did not, as that has been researched as much as i was able to.

Alan T Hs30, can you please provide what you know of in this regard, as per above, or post links to sites.
I will then get this printed off, to add to the submission to CAMS.

#31 benny

benny

    The 1000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,733 posts
  • Location:Peninsula Area - VIC

Posted 26 June 2012 - 11:16 AM

Jason,


Im sure you have come across this site but if you havent here you go-


http://www.z-point.nl/


there are multiple articles. one stating that "takashi wakabayashi and his team in nissan engineering laboratories performed the mods"


I know this isn't concrete but it will add to the case.

#32 dat2kman

dat2kman

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Newport Waters Qld
  • Tagline:going sailing, see ya later!

Posted 26 June 2012 - 02:43 PM

Benny, that llks an excellent site, but, i cant seem to find any period articles or documentation or brochures, copies of?
If there are any can you please link to them.

Right, ALL, i have just, today, recieved a short two line email, from the Chair of the Historic Production Based Elegibility Committee, which responds, recommends and reports directly  to CAMS Historic Commission,  in Australia, quote as follows,
" Cars are permitted factory fitted (not dealer fitted) options for Group S"

He requires evidence of this. Not heresay, he said she said, or I remember when, i saw a photo , he has restored a car, etc etc.

The rally cars were built at a Nissan factory, they were built for use on public roads, they were built for a number of people to use them, and as such, no matter that it did not occur, but, if Nissan had been asked, "can I buy one to try to win XXX championship or rally" i very much doubt they would have said NO.
Fact is, as Alan T says, they were built by a factory that was an arm of Nissan.

Can i please be furnished with as much documents to support this?

#33 benny

benny

    The 1000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,733 posts
  • Location:Peninsula Area - VIC

Posted 26 June 2012 - 03:25 PM

Here is the article i was talking about


http://www.z-pointt....le0001kopie.jpg


http://www.z-pointt....le0002kopie.jpg


http://www.z-pointt....le0003kopie.jpg


this is under


"The Works Rally"-->"In 1970"-->"RAC Rally"


I suggest going through all of the site as there are articles scattered throughout with heaps of photo evidence.


Ben

#34 benny

benny

    The 1000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,733 posts
  • Location:Peninsula Area - VIC

Posted 26 June 2012 - 05:13 PM

there are also plenty of photos showing mikunis and wheels though i think they are only 14x6 if the article i linked is correct

#35 dat2kman

dat2kman

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Newport Waters Qld
  • Tagline:going sailing, see ya later!

Posted 26 June 2012 - 05:42 PM

Thanks Benny.
We do need to show that, in some documentation, that those rims were at least 7 inches wide, (diam is not an ssue)
Nissan, as per HS30 , or maybe someone else??, had the special rally car mag wheels at both 6" and 7"
We need 7"
Photos showing the brakes, the brakes through the wheels, and showing a 3/4 view that has a vented rotor will help tremendously, as well as information, in writing from the period, with details, stuff that may something like,,,
"for the bitumen rally stages we fit the wider 7" magnesium wheel, with a special cut slick tyre" etc etc

#36 HS30-H

HS30-H

    Senior Member

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

Posted 26 June 2012 - 08:46 PM

Right, ALL, i have just, today, recieved a short two line email, from the Chair of the Historic Production Based Elegibility Committee, which responds, recommends and reports directly  to CAMS Historic Commission,  in Australia, quote as follows,
" Cars are permitted factory fitted (not dealer fitted) options for Group S"


Here are some quotes from the web pages of the Group S Racing Association:

Based on mildly modified production sports cars, Group S is designed to provide a forum for competitors to race cars from the '50s, '60s and '70s in a form similar to period club racing.

.....the Historic Commission has maintained that the rules for Group S remain largely within the spirit of those rules that were in use in Australian production sports car racing in the period of the mid-fifties to mid-sixties, with the modification baseline being what was sold from the showroom floor by the relevant marque dealership.

Eligible marques for Group S have been decided by the Historic Commission on the basis of production runs and production specifications. FIA homologation is not a relevant factor and plays no part in the rules for Group S – a common misunderstanding.

And from the 2012 CAMS Manual of Motor Sport, Group Sc Production Sports Cars ( 1970-1977 ) eligibility pages:

Factory-built, competitive variants of standard production vehicles are not eligible for this group, but could be eligible for Historic Groups Q or T, subject to specific application.

It seems to me that they are being quite clear on the meaning of "factory fitted", "production runs" and "standard production vehicles".

I don't think the works rally cars are going to swing it for you.


The rally cars were built at a Nissan factory, they were built for use on public roads, they were built for a number of people to use them, and as such, no matter that it did not occur, but, if Nissan had been asked, "can I buy one to try to win XXX championship or rally" i very much doubt they would have said NO.


The fact is that they were approached, they were asked, and the answer was "no".  The cars were built for Nissan's own use, and - basically - they could not build enough of them to supply their own needs let alone those of others. There were constant shortages of spare parts and complete cars, and the in-field operations ( mainly operating from ad-hoc bases in Africa, France and the UK ) were stretched by cars being damaged and even destroyed, sometimes on event recces. The whole thing - 1970 through 1973 in the main - was done on a budget that was, quite simply, inadequate. The only cars that got into privateer or private team / factory-affiliated hands were already well used. They didn't sell new, ready-to-use works 240Z rally cars....

#37 HS30-H

HS30-H

    Senior Member

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

Posted 26 June 2012 - 09:27 PM

there are also plenty of photos showing mikunis and wheels though i think they are only 14x6 if the article i linked is correct


Nissan used both 6j x 14" ( in Aluminium as well as Magnesium versions ) and 7j x 14" Magnesium wheels - manufactured for them by Kobe Seiko - on their works rally 240Zs and 260Zs. The 6j width was sometimes used just on the front of the cars ( particularly in snowy conditions ) with 7j on the rear. 99% of the time they were running on the 7j x 14" wheels, with tyres appropriate to the stage / event.   

#38 d3c0y

d3c0y

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,905 posts
  • Website:http://garagesanmaru.com
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Tagline:Forum Jerk

Posted 27 June 2012 - 09:06 AM

It's obvious that the rules are trying to limit this kind of modification. The problem is other marques have been allowed to go beyond the face value of the rules, which means we also need to try and do the same for Datsuns now.
And let's be honnest that's what racing is all about. Being able to push the limits of what is allowed, otherwise there would be stock Porsches running in this class right now...

#39 dat2kman

dat2kman

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Newport Waters Qld
  • Tagline:going sailing, see ya later!

Posted 27 June 2012 - 09:40 AM

Alan HS30 , i am aware of the regs, and your underlined bits, but, when other marques have managed to slip things in, due to nefarious past occurances which were able to be proven, well, why not the Datsuns.
I have been involved in Sus motor sport for over 30 years, i race a S, T, O, U cars, am looking at a quick  gp2b build, i have been a CAMS level 2 scrutineer, and am a CAMS Technical Machine Examiner.
The chair of the HPB is a long term mate, and has built up two Datsun S cars, i own his last one.

When i tell him about the Rally side of Datsun, which he knew zip about, his comment was along lines of, "ok, go for it, put up a case, show old period stuff"
I know what will be accepted, and can sift through the stuff that wont be.

Fascinating to note the CAMS rule does not apply to the three marques i mention above.

Are you able to provide a range of documents, pictures, brochures, specificatiobs, news repoerts, magazine articles, event reports, that have specific information on, brakes, rims, carburettors. The other car mods are superflous to what is required.

When i explained to him, the chair of the committee, that Nissan had actually made cars, brand new, for use on public roads in Africa, aeurope and the UK, with the items we need, fitted, at factory level, he said, "get whatever information you can, it cannot be heresay or second hand romours or scuttlebutt"

That sounds pretty bloody positive to me.
Do we persist with this, or just forget about Datsuns and trying to make them competitive against the others that have been granted the concessions.

Can you help us please?

#40 luvemfast

luvemfast

    The 2000+ club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,136 posts
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 27 June 2012 - 09:59 AM

The Autocar link that Benny put up, has a quote at the start of the story that is interesting.

It is a big success ther and a few examples have already run in SCCA production car racing


It also talks about-
*The modifications being done at the Datsun lab in Japan.
*Having an LSD.
*Triple Solex Carbies.
*Fibreglass doors, bonnet and rear hatch.
*Plastic side and rear windows
*Twice pipes
*Electric fuel pump
*215/70/14 tyres (no rim width)

Don't know if it tells you any real info that would help with CAMS though Jason  :-\

Good luck  ;)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users