Jump to content
dat2kman

Sumitomo MK 63 Calipers, brake pads and caliper rebuild kits now avail.

Recommended Posts

No more Barry Mac videos for you lot, they are being taken far too literally lol.

 

Meanwhile, it seems to be unrealistic to expect that all the parts in the Sports Option cattledog would be available to use in Sc, it would give the S30's a huge advantage and dramatically upset the present status quo. The best realistic bet, which I keep carrying on about, is to find a dealer fitted set of wide wheels or similar performance part and seeing that the US was the big market logically it makes sense to seriously and thoroughly check there. But, going on past inaction, that is not going to happen.

 

The biggest problem for S30's in Sc is an apparent lack of determination to do what it takes to field the best possible car and driver combination. For example in Q there is a bloke who has raced his Sc P car for years, he now rules Sc in this State and must be a pretty decent steerer because he recently did a sub 60 second lap at Lakeside which from memory is about a whole five seconds faster that Jason was able to do in his Sc Zed. A 60 second lap around Lakeside in my experience is fast but a super car is not needed, it just takes an ability to maintain momentum. So, much as I hate to say it, this P car and driver combo deserve their success. Determination, dedication and a willingness to pay up for the best specialists available all count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,,,

The above comes from a bloke that has never quite grasped what a Gp S Datsun is.

Has never raced, and thinks that single lap sprints are the ultimate.

 

By making correct approaches to CAMS and Elegibility, certain items do get accepted, just like other manufacturers have had certain items accepted.

I got Webers for Datsun Roadsters, helped the Group N Datsun 1600's get the FSC71A five speed gearbox, assisted in getting 15" diameter wheels for Datsun Z.

It can be done, it needs the correct aporoach, and guidance from the Historic Elegibity Committee.

When cockheads like 260detrimental come wading in with all their "experience",,,,, no one wants to know about it.

 

As I have said, in past, we only need evidence of manufacture, or dealer fitment, to a new car, and then that car is used on public roads.

 

I have never said that these cars have to had been sold! And certainly not sold to the general public.

We do not need to show that these cars were sold, just made for use on roads.

( they cannot be Group 4 - Competition Variants, for race use only, as per FIA Homologation papers)

 

These road registered Datsun Z's were assembled by Nissan Japan, with certain items from the options parts lists, then they were registered for public road use, by the factory.

The factory also sent brand new cars to a dealer in Woking, England, and the dealer DT Dobie in Africa.

These dealers then also fitted items to these new cars, with only delivery miles on the odos.

Also registered for public roads.

 

The Chairman of the Australuan Historic Elegibility committee is fully aware of these particular cars, has been introduced, by me, to a number of websites, documents, photos etc, and would like to help us.

But, and this is the major BUT, we need evidence, on Nissan letterhead, or, from those two dealers, on their letterhead, a statement outlining what they did, what they fitted,to these new cars, and the registration numbers.

This then backs up the other information supplied and acknowledged.

 

260det contributes jackshit to this sort of stuff, then delights in berating people.

just stick to your Ferguson Tractor driven cast iron framed 270kphfastest eva at Bathurst, Sports Sedan, and leave the important stuff to those that know what they are doing, and who are attempting to do things correctly and work with and understand the processes required at these levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the banter between you 2 is not new, but can we keep it constructive? It seems like this thread is being split onto parts eligibility for SC racing and MK63 calipers in general.

 

Perhaps a new topic on SC racing and parts eligibility in the racing your zed section of the forum would be a better way to go and we can discuss more than just brakes, thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was up to you Jason you'd turn the Sc S30 into a race car but what you can't grasp is that is not going to happen, people who continually make excuses and complain about the advantages other cars have give me the shits when they are not maximumising the performance of the equipment  that they already have.

 

You have complained in the past about Porsche being allowed wider wheels because they were fitted by a dealer in Australia. I make a perfectly sensible suggestion about locating something similar in the US for the S30 which you can't handle, apparently because it's outside your small world. It's clear what is required, anything else is just blowing smoke.

 

Just noticed your post Gavin, agree, sorry, I just get frustrated when self interest and ego get in the way of real progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You have complained in the past about Porsche being allowed wider wheels because they were fitted by a dealer in Australia.

 

This is INCORRECT, the CAMS spec sheet for the Porsche Carrera 2.7 and Carrera 3 state that they are allowed to be run with 7" front and 8" rears. Because these are not only options but most cars were delivered with it. It never was just an Australia dealer fitted items.

 

I've had the Carrera 3 specifications pocket book and it stated so.

 

Not that you can believe the internet ;) http://carreramfi.com/specs.shtml

Edited by hmd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hung,

Alan Hamilton Porsche, in South Yarra, fitted the 7/8's to new cars, in place of the factory 6's and 6/7''s

I have the FIA Homologation papers as to what was factory fitted

 

Have gone over all this, seen the letters, on that dealers letterhead, stating he was fitting the wider rims to customer new vehicles.

Have had talks with the then Chair of Elegibility.

Also have letters ( copies) from other car makers, that got them what they were asking for.

Nothing new here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the banter between you 2 is not new, but can we keep it constructive? It seems like this thread is being split onto parts eligibility for SC racing and MK63 calipers in general.

 

Perhaps a new topic on SC racing and parts eligibility in the racing your zed section of the forum would be a better way to go and we can discuss more than just brakes, thoughts?

Gav, I'm happy to let this run, after all, I started this topic!!,, some years back, when I was getting supply of seals, pistons, and pads for the MK63's

And, along with 7" wide rims, triple Solex carbs, and the vented rotors, that were fitted to around 30 new cars, and then used on roads, around the world, there aren't too many out there trying to get somewhere with this.

 

The other stuff, also in the Option lists, that we want/have, has all been previously allowed, ie LSD, various diff ratios, close ratio gearboxes, modifications to suspension perch heights, 3 deg of Neg camber, engine modifications, plastic windows, and others.

They certainly weren't produced standard, like this!

 

If some of the current Historic Production Sports car racers, or enthusiasts, wish to kick off a new thread on that, go for it!

 

 

Most organisations have those rare certain "special" people, that many within the organisation have to put up with, dont say anything about them, but realuse full well, that, yes, some are rather "unique"

It's not until it is raised in actual conversation, that there are a great many, that are in 100% full agreeance

 

Funnily enough, there's another general car type forum, where these "interesting" folk seem to not be able to sustain their little charades, have a big girly tanty, and retire, the rest could'nt give a flying rats arse about the departure!

Hilarious!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, along with 7" wide rims, triple Solex carbs, and the vented rotors, that were fitted to around 30 new cars, and then used on roads, around the world, there aren't too many out there trying to get somewhere with this.

 

Are these "...around 30 new cars..." the Works rally cars, perchance? If so, then I refer you to my previously made point about them not being sold to the general public as new cars - which is, surely, the crux of the matter?

 

Those Works rally cars were FIA Groups 3 and 4 homologated. If your local 'Historic Production Sports' (key word: *Production*) class was run to FIA Groups 3 and/or 4 of Appendix J you'd be well away, but my guess is it isn't, and for good reason...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those 30 odd cars, Alan, are the rally cars, and, as they were registered for road use, from new, fitted with particular parts, will be accepted as "production" cars.

Our Elegibility Chair is quite aware of them, and the issue of stickers/signwriting, has no bearing, they just had to be made, from new, and then registered for road use, the fact that quite a number were assembled by Nissan, at a Nissan owned and managed preparation facility ( does not need to be a regular production lune)

 

Cars that were assembled, by either a factory, or a dealer, for purposes of circuit racing competition, ie FIA Group 4, ( Sports Prototype) and not registered for road use, will not be considered, these are deemed as "Specials" . Group 2 was quite standard, Group 3 was for mild modifications, as produced by manufacturers.

 

In our CAMS Homologation papers, CAMS has, in fact, ruled out certain items as " Not Allowed, Group 4 only", for things like fibreglass hanging panels, e CAMS has further altered the the FIA/JAF papers, for Australian use.

It is this document, that we can prepare the Group S cars to.

 

Our "special" friend, does not quite grasp much of this, and thinks that the USA will provide all the answers, we both know that is not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those interested in such things, here are some of the relevant documents for CAMS historics in general, Group S, and CAMS Spec sheets for zeds.

 

http://docs.cams.com.au/Manual/Historic/HI03-3.1-Gen-Requirements-2017-1.pdf

 

http://docs.cams.com.au/Manual/Historic/HI07-3.5-Production-Sports-2017-1.pdf

 

http://docs.cams.com.au/Motorsport/Historic/Group%20S/Datsun%20240Z%20-%20Sc.pdf

 

http://docs.cams.com.au/Motorsport/Historic/Group%20S/Datsun%20260Z%20-%20Sc.pdf

 

http://docs.cams.com.au/Motorsport/Historic/Group%20S/Datsun%20280Z%20%20-%20Sc.pdf

 

And a quick question about zeds and group S that Jason may be able to answer (sorry Gav !!) - why is it that the spec sheet says 240Z production was from Oct 69, yet they are still classed as Sc ? I would have thought that would make them Sb ?

Edited by 1600dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know the part numbers for the shims that go behind the brake pads on the MK63 calipers?

 

 

I tried these part numbers:
41079-68200 early type (inner and outer are the same)
41084-F2000 and 41085-F2000 (inner and outer)
and then
41084-F2001 and 41085-F2001
but all were NLA

any insight would be fantastic !

 

Thanks

 

 

also if anyone is interested there is a seal kit on Ebay for $65 delivered from Japan

 

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/PITWORK-NISSAN-SEAL-KIT-SEAL-GASKET-KIT-AY600NS053-GENUINE-/262493450467

Edited by CraigZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And a quick question about zeds and group S that Jason may be able to answer (sorry Gav !!) - why is it that the spec sheet says 240Z production was from Oct 69, yet they are still classed as Sc ? I would have thought that would make them Sb ?

 

David, that was due them first being available for sale to the public, by dealers around the World.

If they were being sold, in 1969, in Japan, and there was evidence of that, then that case can be put to CAMS, yet once again.

It all comes down to documentary evidence.

Prior to Group Sc, it was just Group S, which was originally for cars manufactured prior to Dec 31. 1969

 

They then introduced Sc and, once again, ( a bit of a habit,) changed the rules, to "made and sold" Jan 1 1970 to Dec 31 1976

Initially it was for Australian sold cars only, but, ,,,, the rules got changed, to world cars

 

Prior to Sc introduction, the Datsun Sports 2000's ruled Group S, and there is a bit of contention about the rule re-writes, as there were some non Datsun fans, that knew the 240Z may come under Sb

As the S30 shell and its mechanicals remained basically unchanged, the 260Z, and potentially 280Z could have all been admitted as Sb, due to then then rules written for what was known as "model run on"

Classic case in point, Group N Touring cars finish in 1972, yet cars made in 1973-4, that are badically same spec, are permitted under the "model run on" provisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7" and 8" are options to all Carrera, may be they went overboard to prove that the option were fitted to Australian cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those 30 odd cars, Alan, are the rally cars, and, as they were registered for road use, from new, fitted with particular parts, will be accepted as "production" cars.

Our Elegibility Chair is quite aware of them, and the issue of stickers/signwriting, has no bearing, they just had to be made, from new, and then registered for road use, the fact that quite a number were assembled by Nissan, at a Nissan owned and managed preparation facility ( does not need to be a regular production lune)

 

All of the *works* rally 240Zs (and 260Zs...) were built by Nissan in Japan, first registered for road use in Japan (with 'carnet' temporary export plates and paperwork) by Nissan, and first used by Nissan (as opposed to private individuals). They were all built to FIA Appendix J Group 3 and/or Group 4 homologation specs depending on first event entered. 

 

If your local Eligibility Chair - as you say - knows about these cars and accepts them as providing the proof needed, then what's the problem? Surely you're home free? What am I missing...? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know the part numbers for the shims that go behind the brake pads on the MK63 calipers?

 

Craig, I'm sorry I can't provide any other numbers than those you have quoted. Pretty sure they are NLA through the normal Nissan parts system.

 

But do you really need them? Only the very earliest sets of MK63s I bought many, many years ago (25+ years) had them and subsequently they were never supplied in the NISMO-sourced versions or the ones that were supplied aftermarket when NISMO stopped listing them. 

 

I never use them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aah, interesting.. I figured I would just use them without but would investigate all avenues whilst waiting for parts & rebuilding them.

Cost wise the shims were anywhere from $4 up to $22 depending on part numbers so not expensive but looks like impossible to obtain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the *works* rally 240Zs (and 260Zs...) were built by Nissan in Japan, first registered for road use in Japan (with 'carnet' temporary export plates and paperwork) by Nissan, and first used by Nissan (as opposed to private individuals). They were all built to FIA Appendix J Group 3 and/or Group 4 homologation specs depending on first event entered. 

 

If your local Eligibility Chair - as you say - knows about these cars and accepts them as providing the proof needed, then what's the problem? Surely you're home free? What am I missing...? 

 

Factory-built, competition variants of standard production vehicles are not eligible for this group, but could be eligible for Groups M, O or T, subject to specific application.
 
 
That statement is from the CAMS manual
 
This is the same reason why the Carrera 3.0 RS were not allowed even though they built 100+ road registered cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the *works* rally 240Zs (and 260Zs...) were built by Nissan in Japan, first registered for road use in Japan (with 'carnet' temporary export plates and paperwork) by Nissan, and first used by Nissan (as opposed to private individuals). They were all built to FIA Appendix J Group 3 and/or Group 4 homologation specs depending on first event entered. 

 

If your local Eligibility Chair - as you say - knows about these cars and accepts them as providing the proof needed, then what's the problem? Surely you're home free? What am I missing...?

 

What are we missing?

We are missing written on Nissan letterhead, stating what was built, with what, fitted.

Morgan, Porsche, MG, Shelby, all have provided written on letterhead stating what they did.

Thats what is missing.

 

Yes, there are plenty of magazine articles, hotographs, the dutch website, on the works cars, lots.

But, nothing from the manufacturer.

 

Hung, when CAMS refers to competion variants, to be in MO or T, these are the Group 4 cars, and must be the original genuine race car, as used on circuits, with a documented history, such as my Datsun Sports 2000 Group O/T car

Note, that rule was also a recent introduction, in order to keep cars out of Group S, due to their much higher spec levels, apparently, they are extremely very highly modified, or so some in the Group S heirarchy would have all believe!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aah, interesting.. I figured I would just use them without but would investigate all avenues whilst waiting for parts & rebuilding them.

Cost wise the shims were anywhere from $4 up to $22 depending on part numbers so not expensive but looks like impossible to obtain.

Of the numbers of sets of pads I have come across, only one set, NOS asbestos based, had a set of shims in the box. These weren't Nissan branded. I have one set of modern aftermarket higher temp range set, and one set of original Ferodo DS11 compound

( asbestos), for the rally car

Other than the very slight reduction in heat transfer into piston, and that would not be very much, they dont seem to need the shims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×